The Elliot Institute’s Role in Uncovering the Bobbitt Mystery

By David C. Reardon, Ph.D.

On December 12, 1993, I read a report stating that John Bobbitt had pressured Lorena into undergoing an unwanted abortion. Given the substantial number of cases in our files where women and men reported the onset of domestic violence post-abortion, I did not find this news at all surprising. The fact that many women feel sexually mutilated by their abortions, however, seemed especially relevant.

On December 28, two weeks before the trial was to begin, I contacted a member of Lorena’s defense team. I suggested that her abortion might be the key to understanding the psychological trauma underlying the mutilation. As a first step in investigating this hypothesis, I asked him to compare the date of the attack to the date of the abortion. The attorney immediately recognized that the attack had occurred almost three years to the day, after the abortion. In addition, he told me, Lorena had gone to see her doctor complaining of anxiety attacks and psychosomatic stomach cramps just a few days before the assault.

At his request, I sent additional background materials and an outline of my analysis, much of which has been incorporated into this issue of The Post-Abortion Review. Also, at his request, I arranged for one of the nation’s leading experts on post-abortion trauma to examine Lorena. During the two weeks remaining before the trial, this therapist interviewed and counseled Lorena for twenty hours and provided an additional eighty hours of work in helping to prepare the defense. All of this was done with the understanding that the defense team would allow the PAS expert to testify at the trial. Unfortunately, this never happened. (See “Why the truth was buried.”) The defense attorney subsequently told me, however, that this expert played an important role in helping to show the psychiatrists who did testify, for both the prosecution and defense, that Lorena was suffering from PTSD.

In addition, the post-abortion therapist helped to stabilize Lorena’s emotional state before the trial. We subsequently expected that Lorena would continue to receive treatment from this PAS expert after the trial. (It was my personal hope that after receiving good post-abortion counseling, Lorena would one day choose to tell her story in full.) Unfortunately, the court ordered Lorena to receive treatment from another therapist, one who probably does not have any familiarity or expertise in post-abortion issues.

At the last report, Lorena was still receiving court ordered therapy. Obviously, I have no way of knowing whether or not the therapy has been productive. If Lorena remains trapped by the shame and trauma associated with her abortion, she may never be able to give her testimony to the public.

Based on the known facts, it is my professional opinion that Lorena’s abortion lies at the root of the violence which occurred in the Bobbitt household. To support this analysis I have drawn upon the public record and typical patterns reported by post-abortion couples. I have not had access to any confidential disclosures which Lorena or John made to their therapists or attorneys.

Originally published in The Post-Abortion Review 4(2-3) Spring & Summer 1996. Copyright 1996 Elliot Institute