"Abortion does not cause mental illness, panel says," according to a headline in The New York Times. "APA report: Abortion is not a threat to women's mental health," said Salon.com.
The Salon story went on to describe the report as "a comprehensive analysis of published English-language, peer-reviewed studies on the topic since 1989."
Sounds scientifically unimpeachable. Until you look a little closer. The APA "researchers" threw out study after study involving data from hundreds of thousands of women around the world that did not agree with their conclusion. What do they end up with? Their conclusions rest on 19 studies involving fewer than 250 women total.
The APA even threw out a well-regarded 2006 report by a pro-choice scientist from New Zealand, David Fergusson, who studied 630 women from birth to age 25. He found that women who had abortions had significantly higher rates of concurrent depression, suicidal thoughts, illicit drug dependence and total number of mental health problems.
Fergusson was part of the APA's review team on the report, but was very critical of it. He said it draws "a very strong and dogmatic conclusion that cannot be supported by evidence."
"In science, drawing strong conclusions on the basis of weak evidence is bad practice," he said.
Fergusson drew a parallel to the tobacco industry's insistence that there's no evidence that cigarettes are unsafe. "A better logic is that used by the critics of the industry: Since there is suggestive evidence of harmful effects it behooves us to err on the side of caution and commission more and better research before drawing strong conclusions. History showed which side had the better arguments," he said.
In some ways, the APA's abortion advocacy should come as no surprise. Since 1969, four years before Roe v. Wade, the organization adopted a resolution that "termination of pregnancy [should] be considered a civil right."
But advocacy under the guise of science discredits the 148,000-member organization and its "researchers."
Worse, it is a form of medical abuse. By ignoring study after study that indicates abortion's mental health risks, the APA undercuts its claim that women's health is its primary concern.
For years, pro-lifers have been concerned not only about saving unborn lives but also caring for women with crisis pregnancies or who have had abortions. Unlike the ideologues at the APA, pro-lifers like Vicki Thorne and her organization Project Rachel have seen the need among women and responded. More recently, there has been outreach to men who have lost their children to abortion.
The recent APA report is one more example that the rights and needs of women as well as of unborn are being sacrificed on the altar of expediency and ideology. The abortion industry, like the tobacco industry, is willing to sacrifice the well-being of its customers for the sake of its product.
The inescapable conclusion is that American women would be crazy to think that the American Psychological Association has their best interests at heart.
Draping itself with the mantle of science, the American Psychological Association has issued a report that is instead a blatant piece of abortion advocacy (see Page 4). Equally disturbing, the mainstream media published the report without asking the basic questions that would have exposed its ideologically driven flaws.