Annual Abortion Access Bowl-a-Thon Raises $468,000 in Another Strike Against Women and Children

The National Network of Abortion Funds — representing over 100 grassroots groups — once again took aim at bowling pins, babies and mothers in yet another misguided attempt to “help” women.

Advocates of legal abortion are once again “helping” women by tuning out a growing body of evidence about unwanted abortions and other exploitation, the abuse and scars that legal abortion has inflicted on women, and the lives of unborn babies and mothers lost as a result of abortion.

This includes evidence that most abortions involve coercion, plus further evidence of negligent, unsafe and profit-driven medical practices, followed by a long list of heartbreaking emotional and physical risks, including infertility, trauma and maternal death. In light of this growing body of evidence that is now challenging presumptions in medical, legal, judicial and other arenas, the word “help” is ironic at best.

And, disturbing as they are, these statistics do not include “pre-abortion” trauma or deaths from pregnancy-related violence, “botched abortions” or situations in which under-regulated, inappropriately staffed or publicity-shy abortion clinics may be slow to call for an ambulance when “complications” arise.

In some cases, the fund will help pay for travel and lodging expenses as well as the abortion. In addition to paving the way for untold risks and heartbreak, the fundraiser coins “clever” team names that only add to the mockery of what really happens before, during and after abortion.

The event uses slogans like “Strike Hyde Nationwide” to motivate participants. The tagline references the embattled Hyde Amendment to federal spending legislation. The rider limits, but does not eliminate, taxpayer funding for abortion through Medicaid and related programs.

Team names reflect the abortion industry’s well-marketed, but deceptive, and often callous and ironic spin. They include, the “Coat Hangers,” “Pelvic Politics,” “Slip Me a Mife,” “Back-Alley Bowlers,” “Reptilian Rollers,” “Champions for Choice,” “Justice for All,” “Sin City Sirens,” “Diaper Pins,” and “Operation Not Mothers.”

The Good News: Truth Trumps Gimmicks

The event has proven to be a heart-breakingly lucrative fundraising tactic, but exposing the truth about unwanted abortions, negligent or coercive medical practices, and under-reported but still highly significant maternal death rates will expose legal abortion’s tragic toll on the fundamental rights and lives of BOTH babies and mothers.

By steadfastly adhering to these fundamental truths we — not “Pelvic Politics” — will prevail.

Evidence-based, user-friendly educational resources:
Share these materials, based on research from the Elliot Institute et. al., to educate others about abortion’s danger to the rights and lives of women and children:

• About unwanted abortions in America and beyond, plus ways to help:
  theunchoice.com/forcedabortion.htm
• About other risks and aftereffects, including maternal deaths: 
  theunchoice.com/unsafe.htm  (includes downloadable fact sheets)
• Special report: the real “war on women”
  theunchoice.com/EINews/2012Vol11/Vol11No6.htm
• Educational radio spots to use free of charge:
  theunchoice.com/radio.htm
• Support pro-woman/pro-life research, education and outreach
  donate

This information is an important step to help inform, motivate and inspire our pastors, church leaders and others in our churches and faith communities.

Many have taken this opportunity to encourage individuals and families already hurt by abortion. Others, including those who have found healing and reconciliation after a past abortion, are reaching out to help others who might be facing abortion or prevent them for pushing or coercing someone else to abort.

Educating our leaders and opening doors to healing are key to offering a compassionate and proactive pro-woman/pro-life response to this crisis that is endangering or has already affected so many individuals and families in our own circles.

Remember, you can do this outreach anytime of year.

Keep this outreach going year-round! This is also a good time to start planning for next April’s event and to incorporate a church outreach into your existing pro-life plans.

Participants such as the one mentioned here are enhancing existing education and outreach efforts:

Our church and local pregnancy center are expounding on current offerings by beginning a broader version of our current post abortion outreach. We are looking forward to seeing what the Elliot Institute has to offer for us.

Here are other comments we received about the project. Please join the conversation and write about your experiences and ideas on our blog.

I so very much appreciate the reading of this excerpt. Yes, but what about the women? I am post abortive and have received the grace, forgiveness and healing from our Lord Jesus Christ. I have been a group leader/team leader for [an abortion recovery ministry] for about seven years now.

The burden of my heart continues to be the many women who don’t feel ‘safe’ enough to approach their church fellowship or even leadership with the tremendous spiritual and emotional needs they have as a result of their abortion.

We as ‘the body of Christ’ can and should be doing a better job of demonstrating the compassion and love of Christ toward post-abortive women who continue to suffer in silent grief, guilt, and shame often for decades.

Here is another response to someone who knew of misguided pastors who advised or even pressured women to abort. Sadly, coercion can happen anywhere — even in the helping professions. The influence of trusted family advisers or experts, especially in church ministries, can become a tipping point for individuals, couples or families already in crisis:

…when pastors learn of the after-effects of abortion, post-abortion stress syndrome, they will be much more reluctant to see it as a solution.

[A Bible study] provided great healing for me. My abortion was 25+ years ago. Don’t wait as long as I did to seek healing. If nothing else, do it for your niece so you can having a wonderful relationship with her as she grows up. God bless.

You can see the light of truth, hope and compassion on the rise as individuals, families, organizations and communities reach out in their own circles in whatever way each feels called.

Keep the flame burning in your church. Here are some resources and ideas to help:

Pro-Woman/Pro-Life Prayer Intentions (Use one, two or a few in church, prayer groups or as bulletin/newsletter items, etc. Share with leaders!)
Scripture Verses — to encourage those facing challenging pregnancies or post-abortion issues.
List of Church Awareness Project Resources
List of Outreach and Project Ideas

This “pre-abortion” coercion — coerced abortion is internationally recognized as a human rights abuse — adds an important new dimension to existing evidence about abortion itself and about post-abortion exploitation, abuse of women and maternal deaths.

When looking at the larger perspective, we can see the synergistic, multidimensional aspects of coercion. Evidence indicates that coercion can include not only pressure from a woman’s partner or family, but also deceptive, false or highly conflicted counseling (often from agenda- or profit-driven businesses); and abuse of power, authority and influence from authorities in various sectors of society, including trusted experts, guides and gatekeepers in the helping professions.

Coercion can and does escalate, often during times of vulnerability where pregnant women or girls, couples or families are seeking answers, guidance, referrals or a helping hand.

Tools to Educate Leaders, Policymakers and the General Public
Show the “Big Picture” of Legal Abortion: From Unwanted Abortions to Unsafe Medical Practices to Post-Abortion Harm, Heartbreak and Maternal Death Rates … A Human Rights Abuse that Endangers the Fundamental Rights and Lives of both Women and Their Children

To help educate leaders and advocates on all sides about “the rest of the story,” the Elliot Institute offers several Special Reports and supporting resources that focus on various aspects of pre-abortion, abortion and post-abortion issues. This includes evidence about unwanted abortions, which helps expose and frame the “big picture” of abortion as a fundamental human rights abuse endangering women and their unborn children.

These reports include a closer look at coerced and forced abortion — a human rights abuse that is happening even in America and other free nations — and serious, even deadly aftereffects among women who have had abortions.

A growing body of evidence continues to point to widespread and abusive coercion and other risks, including serious emotional and physical effects and higher maternal death rates. This evidence is becoming increasingly difficult for experts, leaders, policymakers and the general public to ignore.

Supporting Resources

The list below directs you to user-friendly, evidence-based resources regarding pre-abortion, abortion and post-abortion issues. Read them for yourself, then share with them with educators, advocates and others you need to help them learn more about these issues.

This evidence is also helpful in deterring those who would consider or coerce abortion.

• Coercion and the Abortion Industry — Special Report.
• Forced Abortion in America Page — Links to flyers, booklets, fact sheets, and legislative and other outreach initiatives
• What Every American Needs to Know (summary of “big picture” evidence available as versioned flyer(s) or postcards)
• Special Edition — Sexual Assault Pregnancies and Abortion
• Hard Cases: New Facts. New Answers. Summary of key facts and stories from the book Victims and Victors
• Response to Expert “Deniers” Who Insist Legal Abortion Is “Safe”
  See also:
  The Truth About “Back Alley” Abortions
  Dr. Coleman’s Response to Experts Who Still Dismiss Peer-Reviewed Evidence
• Over 30 Studies in Recent Years Show Abortion’s Negative Impact
• Special Edition — Teens and Abortion
• Special Edition — Men and Abortion
• Maternal Death Rates Page
• Physical Risks Page
• Psychological Risks Page
• Help, Hope and Healing — links, information and downloadable booklets, including how to find or offer help before or after abortion, plus legal resources for those being coerced

Since the mid-1960s, abortion has been a major national issue, the subject of state and Congressional investigations, thousands of articles, and hundreds of books. But most of this attention has been focused on the ideological aspects of abortion: “freedom of choice” versus the “right to life.” While those on either side of the issue have published reams of material investigating whether or not the aborted fetus is a person, comparatively little has been done to identify and understand the women who have abortions.

To provide a complete picture of the abortion experience, this book provides both quantitative data, which is helpful in drawing general conclusions, and personal testimonies reflecting the individual experiences and lending more depth and perspective.

In the profile sections of this book, 20 women share their personal journeys from the tragedy of abortion to restored wholeness. They describe their abortion experiences in their own words. While quantitative data about coercion and other issues are helpful in understanding the “big picture,” the stories of women and families with front-line experience are very personal and real. Their value lies not in numbers and percentages, but in their human dimension.

The testimonies only scratch the surface of what aborted women face. Just as all persons are unique, so too are the stories and insights of these women. Obviously, not all women experience the same external circumstances, complications and coercion so often associated with abortion. Conditions and reactions vary. But most women do face the same internal doubts and dilemmas. The internal feelings often go beyond what words can convey. But it helps to put oneself into their “shoes” to gain a greater understanding of and sympathy for their experience and how we can best respond.

The stories in Aborted Women, Silent No More [as well as others in Forbidden Grief and Giving Sorrow Words], tell a more complete story about the abortion experience. Most other researchers interview women only a short time after their abortions. In these cases, the women are often confused and still uncertain about their feelings, and they are often anxious to preserve their anonymity. The stories collected here, on the other hand, were all written from a long-range point of view by women who have a matured and reflective perspective on what they have experienced. They have gone beyond the sad ambivalence many aborted women feel. They have reconciled themselves to the realities of their abortion and they have come to a better understanding of both themselves and abortion.

This book also includes stories of women who were pressured by others to abort and stories about abortions in cases of rape and incest, or other cases, such those involving a challenging medical diagnosis.

Because of their unique importance to the abortion debate, stories involving rape or incest were sought throughout the survey period. Because the goal was to let each woman describe her experience in her own words, very little editing was done to their stories, except to remove redundant passages.

The 20 testimonies in this book were divided into several categories, although most could have been placed in more than one category. These categories were used for the selected testimonies:

1. Those women who felt pressured or coerced by others
2. Those who were of a strong, feminist, “pro-choice” ideology and aborted with a firm belief that it was their legitimate right to do so
3. Those who uncertainly underwent an abortion because it seemed the easiest solution for all the people involved
4. Those who, in contrast to the previous group, made a clear and determined choice for abortion to satisfy their own needs
5. Those who aborted because of “health” reasons, either to preserve their own health or to prevent the birth of an unhealthy baby
6. Those who aborted because the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest
7. Those whose abortions involved deception and/or coercion by abortion counselors or social workers
8. Those who underwent illegal abortions before 1973 when abortion was legalized in America

The 20 stories in these categories all include common elements. Each describes the situation leading up to the abortion, how the decision was made, what feelings were experienced afterwards, and how feelings of guilt and remorse were finally resolved. This last point, the self-reconciliation of aborted women, is unique to this collection of abortion testimonies.

For most of these women, the discovery or renewal of their religious faith became the cornerstone around which they rebuilt their lives.

Many have publicly testified about their abortions. Others have shared their written testimony under an anonymous identity. For those who preferred to remain anonymous, it is evident that the anonymity was most often retained to preserve the privacy of others, often their parents or children, rather than to protect themselves. Whether they have gone public or remained anonymous, all of these women deserve our utmost respect and admiration for bravely sharing their stories.

Coerced Abortion

It will become increasingly clear throughout this book that women faced with problem pregnancies often face coercion from loved ones or authorities who insist that abortion is “the best solution” to their problems. This pressure to abort may be done from a belief that such paternalistic care will be appreciated later on. In other cases, loved ones will push abortion not out of concern for her so much as out of concern for themselves. In either case, the woman who aborts suffers because it is not her own free choice. Those who feel compelled to compromise their own values to accommodate the demands of others may also suffer a loss of self-respect.

Perhaps the most powerful form of coercion which women face is the threat that their family or partner will withdraw love and support. For example, Sandra Morean was forced to choose between her husband and her unborn child:

The more I thought about being pregnant, I realized there was a life in me, and I wanted to give birth to it. But my husband told me, “Either you have an abortion, or I’ll leave you. You can raise it by yourself, because I don’t want any more children.” Not being strong enough to do what was right, and too afraid to go it alone, I gave in.

Another survey respondent describes the pressures she faced as coming from all directions. Sandra’s family said they would not support her decision to keep the baby. The baby’s father said he would give her no emotional or financial help whatsoever.

All the people that mattered told me to abort. When I said I didn’t want to, they started listing reasons why I should. They said it would be detrimental to my career, and my health and that I would have no social life and no future with men. Could I actually do it alone? I started feeling like maybe I was crazy to keep it.

I finally told everyone that I would have the abortion just to get them off my back. But inside I still didn’t want to have the abortion. Unfortunately, when the abortion day came I shut off my inside feelings. I was scared to not do it because of how everyone felt. I’m so angry at myself for giving in to the pressure of others. I just felt so alone in my feelings to have my baby.

Two days later this same woman attempted suicide. … These examples and the two profiles the follow demonstrate some of the forces that pressure women into having unwanted abortions. Coercion may come from the woman’s family, the baby’s father, physicians, welfare workers, or some other person with a measure of power and authority over their lives. Whatever the source of the pressure, these women feel that abortion was not really their choice. Whether it was out of misplaced trust, fear, a desire to please others or even because they were made to feel that they “owed” it to others who pressured them to “do the right thing,” they were unable to find a way to defend their own desires.

~~~

Excerpted from Aborted Women, Silent No More by David C. Reardon. Copyright 1987, 2002 David C. Reardon. Reprinted with permission.

Learn more: Read more personal stories from women who have had abortions here and  here.

25th Anniversary Sale!

In honor of the 25th anniversary of the publication of Aborted Women, Silent No More, we are currently offering 25% off copies of this book. See our book page for information on how to order.

Over the past few days there has been a great deal of press concerning a peer-reviewed article I published in 2009 with co-authors Dr. Catherine Coyle, Dr. Vincent Rue, and Dr. Martha Shuping in the Journal of Psychiatric Research.

The analyses in this paper employed data from the National Comorbidity Survey with a large number of significant associations detected between abortion and various mood, anxiety, and substance abuse disorders.

A problem with the sampling weight applied to conduct the original analyses was detected in 2011. When this issue was brought to our attention, we promptly re-analyzed the data with the correct weight applied and the overall pattern of results did not change remarkably.  We wrote a corrigendum that was subsequently published by the Journal of Psychiatric Research, and corrected values were incorporated into the meta-analysis on abortion and mental health published by the British Journal of Psychiatry in September 2011. The 2009 paper was one of 22 studies included in the meta-analysis.

Continue reading … (off-site link)

After several months’ delay, a leading medical journal has published a letter by Elliot Institute director Dr. David Reardon in response to recent ad hominem attacks by abortion advocates attempting to deny a link between abortion and mental health problems in women.

The criticism began last fall after the British Journal of Psychiatry (BJP) published a meta-analysis review by Dr. Priscilla Coleman on mental health and abortion. To the dismay of abortion rights advocates, the review showed that women who had abortions were 81 percent more likely to experience mental health problems afterward compared to women who gave birth.

Abortion rights advocates responded by criticizing Coleman and her study, and attempting to accuse her of bias by linking her to Reardon. Three different letters published in the BJP used quotes from an article previously written by Reardon, in an attempt to undermine Coleman’s integrity.

In a response published by BJP, Reardon refuted the charges of bias and provided context for the article that was used to criticize Coleman, pointing out the critics had taken quotes out of context and offered a distorted picture of his views.

The article “reflected my sincere belief that abortion involves substantial dangers to specific subgroups of women,” he wrote. “Unfortunately critics have distorted this into the charge that I seek to scare women with exaggerated risks. That is untrue. There are real risks, especially for certain higher risk groups. Women should be told of the truth, with neither exaggeration nor dismissal and minimization.”

The letter is available online under the heading, “Abortion, Mental Health and Charges of Guilt by Association,” and will be published in the journal’s print edition in March.

For more information on this controversy, see this article by Reardon describing and refuting the “attack and distract” strategy employed by those seeking to discredit this research. In it, he explains why its time to stop attacking the messenger and start putting concern for the lives and well-being of women ahead of promoting abortion.

The new study repeats the same discredited practice of simply comparing nationally reported maternal mortality rates with Center for Disease Control (CDC) reported deaths associated with abortion.  Sounds reasonable, until you learn that there is no accurate or formal mechanism for reporting abortion-related deaths. Indeed, the rules regarding completion of death certificates specifically exclude identifying abortion as a cause of death.

At least in part, this is why CDC officials have admitted that maternal mortality rates and abortion mortality rates “are conceptually different and are used by the CDC for different public health purposes.”

In other words, the CDC numbers on abortion-related deaths cannot be meaningfully compared to maternal mortality rates.  CDC methods simply do not rely on a uniform method of collecting data on abortion related deaths.

In short, Grimes used a very incomplete record of abortion-associated deaths and compared it to a complete record of deaths associated with non-aborted pregnancies, and found that the death rate is lower. Therefore, he concludes, abortion is safer than childbirth.

As they say: junk in, junk out.

But fortunately we are not stuck with only the CDC’s haphazard yardstick for measuring abortion-related deaths.  In the last 15 years, a number of record-based studies have been conducted that do provide an objective, identical standard for comparing abortion-associated deaths with natural pregnancy-associated deaths.

The article below is excerpted from the classic book Aborted Women, Silent No More, by David C. Reardon. This excerpt describes how, in the 1970s, the abortion industry’s approach to “counseling”  was developed.

Like most other commercial businesses, the abortion industry has a specialized sales force and a carefully defined marketing strategy. The sale force is composed of abortion counselors who “help” women decide about abortion. Their marketing strategy is to tell their clients as little as possible  ‑‑ and never anything negative ‑‑ about their product.

[As far back as the 1970s,] the sales and marketing divisions of the abortion industry were described in lurid detail in [a] Chicago Sun‑Times abortion expose.  In that series, undercover reporters charged that at “Michigan Ave. abortion mills, women who are hired to counsel don’t ‑‑ they’re paid to sell.”  And the selling of abortion, they observed, included “sophisticated pitches and deceptive promises.”¹

At one of the clinics investigated, slick brochures assured women that: “From admission to recovery, patient ease and comfort are first considerations.  She is encouraged to ask questions, share feelings or misgivings.”  But in actual practice, the same clinic instructed its counselors with these three guidelines:

(1) “Don’t tell [the] patient the abortion will hurt.”
(2) “Don’t discuss [the abortion] procedure or the instruments to be used in any detail.”
(3) “Don’t answer too many questions.”²

The Sun‑Times reporters criticized this type of “counseling” as being superficial and deceptive.  On both counts, the reporters were right.  But this type of counseling is not only common throughout the country, it is the accepted and recommended philosophy of the abortion industry. According to that counseling philosophy, the patient is to be “protected” from information which might discourage [abortion] or make her situation more difficult.  …

“Few Women Really Want Abortion”

This philosophy was developed at a 1971 conference for abortion providers held in Los Angeles. Some of the statements made during a special symposium devoted to the “proper” role of abortion counseling are particularly revealing.

For example, one nurse told her colleagues that “whether rich or poor, few women really wanted an abortion.”³ Therefore, she suggested, it was important for counselors to avoid conveying any attitudes that might reinforce negative feelings. Counselors were advised to be particularly careful about their choice of words. They were told never to refer to the procedure as “abortion,” but instead to use euphemistic expressions.

Another speaker, nurse Henrietta Blackmon, advised that counselors and nurses should be able and willing to describe the procedure, but should never describe the abortion instruments, since this might upset the client. Above all, she warned, counselors should be on guard to keep their own true feelings in check:

 If you say “Suck out the baby,” you may easily generate or increase trauma; say instead, “Empty the uterus,” or “We will scrape the lining of the uterus,” but never “We will scrape away the baby.” These may seem very, very insignificant to us, but to the patient it can really imply that you are using a judgment, and quite often we are not aware of what we are saying. We have to be very, very sensitive, and very, very aware of what words we are using to describe the procedures used. Use the word “fetus”: This is a fetus; this is not a “baby.”⁴

According to these experts, who were establishing the counseling standards to be used across the nation, an abortion counselor’s only purpose is to act as “facilitator and participant” in the abortion process ‑‑ a compassionate friend to help the aborting woman face the unknown and overcome her doubts.

Counselors, they warned, were not to urge reevaluation of either the client’s needs or the decision to abort; they were only to make it as easy as possible for the woman to get the abortion. Any other form of counseling that challenged her “decision,” provided new information about risks or fetal development, or dwelt on options, would only increase [feelings of] doubt, anxiety and guilt.  …

Therefore, the role of the counselor was to provide emotional support, explain the clinic’s routine, describe the procedure in a neutral manner, and “[only] if the doctor approved ‑‑ warn the patient of the possibility of future sterility.” Finally, the counselor should reassure the patient that the decision to abort was good, ethical, and acceptable.⁵ …

Taking Advantage of Women in Crisis

One factor which allows abortion counselors to get away with telling so little is that many women seeking abortions are in a vulnerable, frightened or insecure position. In one case, for example, a woman who was counseled in a group situation had several questions she wanted to ask, but she did not, saying: “I was afraid to ask them with all those people around.”⁶ … Feeling frightened and dependent on others [who are often insisting on abortion], women seeking abortion are generally not in a position to insist on complete answers.

Second, many women do not know what questions they should ask, especially when it comes to complications.  In general, the most that they are told is that: “There are only slight risks to this procedure, like in any operation.  It’s nothing to worry about.” The vagueness of this reassurance prevents even the slightest possibility for women to ask questions like: “Will dilation damage my cervix? Will a ‘slight infection’ reduce my ability to conceive in the future?”

Lying About Fetal Development

But worst of all is the lack of counseling about fetal development; it never occurs. Information about the stage of development of the fetus to be aborted is available at any local library, but never at the local abortion clinic.

To abortion counselors, discussion of fetal development is absolutely taboo. It will only upset their patients, they argue, and increase the feelings of guilt women may face. Counselors are so concerned with “protecting” women from these facts that distortions and lies are an accepted method of easing the patient’s concerns.

An example of such “reassuring” counseling is described by Julie Engel, who received an abortion when she was three months pregnant.

Then I asked, “Is abortion a threat to future pregnancies?” “Women often have D & C’s [dilation and curettage] to help them get pregnant,” was the perfunctory answer. “Are there psychological problems?” I continued. “Hardly ever.  Don’t worry,” I was told. … “What does a three‑month‑old fetus look like?” “Just a clump of cells,” she answered matter‑of‑factly.⁷

In the years that followed, Julie discovered that she was no longer able to conceive. And then one day she saw some of the pictures of fetal development:

 When I saw that a three‑month‑old “clump of cells” had fingers and toes and was a tiny, perfectly formed baby, I became really hysterical. I’d been lied to and misled and I’m sure thousands of other women are being just as poorly informed and badly served. To prove it, John [her husband] and I visited most every clinic in Cleveland.  I pretended I was pregnant and asked for guidance. What we heard was incredible. One counselor told us the fetus did not begin to resemble a human being until seven months; another said five months and so it went.⁸

Deciding What’s Best for Women

The desire to “protect” women from the biological facts … is all part of the paternalistic attitude of abortion providers, which automatically presumes that abortion is the “best” solution for women in trouble, especially if the women they serve are young and destitute. Instead of giving women all the available information and alternatives so that women can decide for themselves, counselors screen the information given so as to “guide” their clients to the “best” (and most profitable) solution, which they, the counselors, have already picked out for them. …

Once counselors decide what is “best” on behalf of their clients, it is an easy matter to influence the clients’ final decisions toward the predetermined outcome. Counseling, in such cases, downplays or even denies the availability of support resources, and instead concentrates on the “tremendous burdens” involved in raising a child.

Such counseling sessions encourage the women to believe that abortion … is in fact “the only practical thing to do.” Explaining how she handles such cases, abortion counselor Betty Orr of Preterm in Cleveland says, “I ask them who is going to take care of the baby while they’re in school.  Where are they going to get money for clothes?”⁹ Faced with such antagonism rather than offers of confirmation and support, frightened and vulnerable young women are easily convinced that abortion is their only option ‑‑ even when it is contrary to their real desires.

When counseling teenage girls, many family planning and abortion counselors are so confident that they are the ones with the “best” solutions, that they envision themselves as being “better” parents than the girl’s own natural parents.  Seeing themselves as being “substitute parents,” they jealously guard their “right” to decide what is “best” for their troubled girls. Wanting no interference from the “outside”, many clinics will go to great lengths to “protect” a young girl from family members who might encourage birth rather than abortion,¹⁰ [even if it means covering up sexual abuse].

Has Anything Changed Today?

Unfortunately, as many former abortion facility workers can testify, failing to help women who don’t really want to abort, withholding information, lying about fetal development and deciding “what’s best” for women hasn’t changed today.

Indeed, a survey of American and Russian women who had abortions, published in the Medical Science Monitor, found that:

• 64 percent of American respondents reported they were pressured by others to abort;
• More than 50 percent said they were uncertain or needed more time to make a decision;
• 79 percent said they were not given any information about abortion alternatives;
• 84 percent said they did not receive adequate counseling before abortion; and
• 67 percent said they received no counseling before abortion.

This research suggests that women and girls are not being given even the minimum of counseling that they need and deserve. A survey of women seeking medical services found that, when it comes to elective medical procedures, 95 percent of respondents wanted to be informed of all the risks of the procedure and 69 percent wanted to be informed of all possible alternative treatments, not just those preferred by their doctor.

Further, when asked about elective gynecological or obstetric procedures such as abortion or sterilization, the results indicated that, on average, women wanted to be given more information than they did with other elective procedures.⁸

One way to protect the rights of women is through legislation that would hold abortion facilities accountable for failing to screen women for coercion and risk factors that could increase their chances of psychological problems after abortion. Laws based on the Elliot Institute’s model screening bill have been passed in South Dakota and Nebraska. This would help ensure that women and girls are given accurate information and access to viable resources, not false information and high-pressure sales tactics disguised as support.

~~~

A previous version of this article was published in the book Aborted Women, Silent No More by David C. Reardon (Springfield, IL: Acorn Books, 1987, 2002).

Learn More:
“This Wasn’t Really Counseling At All:” Raising Questions About “Choice” and Pre-Abortion Counseling
Disclosure and Coercion: Concealing Relevant Information Is “An Act of Coercion”

Resources to Download and Share:
Forced Abortion in America Special Report
Other Resources on Coerced Abortion
Help and Healing Guide: Pregnancy and Post-Abortion Help

Citations

1. Pamela Zekman and Pamela Warrick, “The Abortion Profiteers,” Chicago Sun‑Times Special Reprint, December 3, 1978 (original publication November 12, 1978) 2‑3 and 33.

2. Ibid., 33.

3. Paul Marx, The Death Peddlers: War on the Unborn (Collegeville, MN, St. John’s University Press, 1971) 19.

4. Ibid., 21.

5. Ibid., 18‑19.

6. Zekman and Warrick, “The Abortion Profiteers,” 33.

7. Milton Rockmore, “Are You Sorry You Had An Abortion?”, Good Housekeeping, July 1977, Volume 185, 120.

8. Ibid.

9. Linda Bird Francke, Ambivalence of Abortion (New York: Random House, 1978) 179.

10. Donald DeMarco, “The Family at Bay,” The Human Life Review, Volume VIII, No. 4, Fall 1982 44‑54; Thomas and Catherine Yassu, “The Abortionists Betray a Family,” brochure printed by Sun Life, Thaxton, Virginia; and “Court OKs Abortion for Suicidal Minor,” Illinois Right to Life Committee News, Sept/Dec 1986, 1.

“Planned Parenthood’s mission is to pressure as many women into having an abortion as it can,” a former abortion facility worker has revealed. From Catherine Anthony Adair’s op-ed piece in The Washington Examiner:

In 1997, I began working at a Boston Planned Parenthood clinic as a young, idealistic college student who strongly believed in what I had been told about the organization, that I would be helping other young women access safe and affordable health care.

My time there was not spent providing prenatal care to pregnant women, providing counseling or basic health care services or educating women about reproductive health.

Instead, I spent my days urging women to terminate their pregnancies. My superiors constantly reminded me of our abortion-centered business model: abortions first, everything else came second.

I began to recognize their emphasis on performing abortions each time a woman would express concern or have second thoughts about having an abortion. When I notified management, though, they told me not to worry and encourage her decision to move ahead with the procedure. …

Planned Parenthood’s mission is to pressure as many women into having an abortion as it can.

The misinformation, lack of counseling and coercion extended to facility workers purposely obscuring information on fetal development, Anthony Adair wrote.

In fact, clinic workers would purposefully avoid providing information on fetal development, what the child looked like, the child’s anatomical development and the pain he or she could feel. I was continuously reminded that when referring to the baby, the appropriate terminology was “clump of cells” or “contents of the uterus.”

Then women would know what was really growing inside them: a little person with a beating heart, functioning nervous system, tiny hands and feet. The child is entirely disregarded. There is no counseling, no care, no waiting and no discussion. Once a pregnancy is confirmed, it is off to termination.

Planned Parenthood takes specific advantage of women who are too young or misinformed to know better than to trust them with their well-being. Those who know the truth have a duty to speak out.

Other Former Workers Speak About Coercion, Lack of Help

Other former abortion facility employees have echoed Anthony Adair’s observations about the industry. Jewels Green, who underwent a coerced abortion at 17 and later became a counselor at Planned Parenthood, related that the “counselors” weren’t trained to help women thoroughly explore other options, even when the woman was truly ambivalent about abortion or felt she had no other choice:

Sure, we had a little notebook with the names and numbers of two local adoption agencies, but we were never trained or taught how the adoption process works so we could explain it to women. We had the phone number of the local WIC office, public assistance, etc., but again, knew nothing about the process should anyone ever ask for details. If a pregnant woman wanted to learn more about these other choices, the best the ‘options counselor’ could offer was a post-it note with a phone number hastily scribbled on it.

Others have described more blatant pressure and coercion. In Giving Sorrow Words: Women’s Stories of Grief After Abortion, Melinda Tankard Reist quotes Laurel Guymer, a former abortion clinic nurse in Australia who left her job after seeing women pressured to abort:

Women who were poor, unemployed, too young, too old, working in the sex industry, nor married, had no steady partner, or suffered any mental instability were reassured by the clinic staff and and society that it was best they have an abortion. It is clear that society fears a certain type of woman having a baby and I found that many of the doctors and nurses I met in the abortion clinic were not any different despite their proposed commitment to feminist principles. (p. 31)

Selling Abortions

Carol Everett, who once directed an abortion clinic in Texas, described abortion counselors as being trained to sell abortions:

I’m sure you’ve seen those numbers advertised that say “Problem Pregnancy,” “Abortion Information,” or “Pregnant?”. When a young girl finds out she is pregnant, she may not want an abortion, she may just want information.

But when she calls that number that’s paid for by abortion money, what kind of information do you think she is going to get? Remember, they sell abortions. They don’t sell keeping the baby. They don’t sell giving the baby up. They don’t sell delivering the baby in any form. They only sell abortions.

The counselor that the girl speaks to on the telephone is paid to be her friend. She is supposed to seduce her into a friendship of sorts to sell her the abortion. …

When the girl goes in for the abortion she pays up front, then goes into a room for counseling. They give her a 6 to 12 page form. This form is written by an abortion attorney to confuse the girl to death. It works and she doesn’t ask any questions. …

I cannot tell you one thing that happens in an abortion clinic that is not a lie.

Laurel Guymer, the former abortion clinic nurse quoted above, was reminded by co-workers that “this is a business” when she tried to help women who didn’t want to abort:

What if they said “no” when entering the operating room? In this instance I felt compelled to reassure them that they didn’t have to go through with it with it and walked them back to the change room. This was not welcomed by my colleagues at the clinic. I was reminded that this is a business and that any slowing in the production line costs money. … Their patronizing remarks that some women will never be 100 percent sure and that I should encourage them to go on and get the abortion over quickly, were not comforting. I could no longer participate. (Giving Sorrow Words, p. 170-171)

As Abby Johnson, who wrote the book Unplanned about her experiences as a Planned Parenthood clinic director and her exit from the abortion industry, writes:

So many women today think of Planned Parenthood as a safe place to turn to … [but it is] a place where they will NOT hear all of their options.  A place where women will be coerced into thinking abortion is the best and only option for them.

Research Finds Coercion

Research suggests that that observations about women being coerced into abortions are accurate. A survey of American and Russian women who had abortions, published in the Medical Science Monitor, found that:

• 64 percent of American respondents reported they were pressured by others to abort;
• More than 50 percent said they were uncertain or needed more time to make a decision;
• 79 percent said they were not given any information about abortion alternatives;
• 84 percent said they did not receive adequate counseling before abortion; and
• 67 percent said they received no counseling before abortion.

As Green points out, the solution is to provide real support to pregnant girls and women:

“We need to do better. We need to provide real resources to pregnant mothers facing an unplanned pregnancy. The women and babies of our country deserve better.”

You can find a list of resources and support for pregnant women and for women, men and families hurting after abortion in our Help & Healing Guide. The Center Against Forced Abortion also provides legal resources to women and girls being coerced or forced to abort.

~~~

Update: Former Planned Parenthood manager Sue Thayer writes in the Washington Times about “the big lie” that the organization is about protecting women’s health, and how she lost her job after expressing concern about putting profits before safety:

Planned Parenthood is not about helping women access health care. Instead, it is about making money. And abortion is its moneymaker. Telemed abortion is its mega moneymaker.

Read more from Giving Sorrow Words:
“This Wasn’t Really Counseling At All:” Raising Questions About “Choice” and Pre-Abortion Counseling
Disclosure and Coercion: Concealing Relevant Information Is “An Act of Coercion”

Resources to Download and Share:
Forced Abortion in America Special Report
Other Resources on Coerced Abortion
Help and Healing Guide: Pregnancy and Post-Abortion Help