catallaxy files

catallaxy in technical exile

Abortion causes Cancer

leave a comment »

Women who consult federally-funded pregnancy centres are routinely provided with misleading and inaccurate medical advice, according to a report released by the Democrats on the House Government Reform Committee. Since 2001, pregnancy resource centers have received more than USD$30 million in Federal funding – mainly through the funding of “abstinence-only” sexual education. Additional funding has been provided to 25 centres (there are over 4,000 throughout the United States) for “capacity-building” as part of the USD$150 million Compassion Capital Fund.

Investigators (congressional aides), posing as pregnant 17-year-olds, contacted 23 of the 25 centres which received special funding. In a perhaps unsurprising finding, they found that 20 of the 23 (87%) provided false or misleading medical advice. For example, callers were advised that they could develop breast cancer, that they would be made sterile, that they would be more likely to commit suicide and that they would develop “post-adoption stress disorder”.

These findings should surprise no-one. So-called “pregnancy resource centres” are essentially fronts for pro-life groups. They themselves do not perform abortions or refer patients to abortion clinics. Instead, they are often affiliated with a national pro-life umbrella group, such as Heartbeat International or Care Net. Care Net describes itself as “a Christian ministry assisting and promoting the evangelistic, pro-life work of pregnancy centers in North America.” All centres which were contacted by the Congressional Report were part of an umbrella organisation. Such centres often mask their pro-life stance in order to attract “abortion-vulnerable clients”, by for example, advertising under “abortion” in the Yellow Pages. Even the name “pregnancy resource centre” disguises the political intent of these organisations. One centre described the changing terminology in this manner:

“God’s truth never varies, but new methods of communicating it continue to emerge, including a departure from the term ‘crisis pregnancy’ itself. Many centers now favor a more neutral, solution-oriented name, such as ‘pregnancy resource center’.

A number of State actions and court cases have challenged the misleading practices engaged in by these centres. The organisation of the centres is most concerning as they both receive taxpayer funding while also providing misleading and politically motivated medical advice.

Specifically, the report made three key findings with respect to innaccurate advice:

The centers provided false and misleading information about a link between abortion and breast cancer. There is a medical consensus that induced abortion does not cause an increased risk of breast cancer. Despite this consensus, eight centers told the caller that having an abortion would in fact increase her risk. One center said that “all abortion causes an increased risk of breast cancer in later years.” Another claimed that research shows a “far greater risk” of breast cancer after an abortion, telling the caller that an abortion would “affect the milk developing in her breasts” and that the risk of breast cancer increased by as much as 80% following an abortion.

The centers provided false and misleading information about the effect of abortion on future fertility. Abortions in the first trimester, using the most common abortion procedure, do not pose an increased risk for future fertility. However, seven centers told the caller that having an abortion could hurt her chances of having children in the future. One center said that damage from abortion could lead to “many miscarriages” or to “permanent damage” so “you wouldn’t be able to carry,” telling the caller that this is “common” and happens “a lot.” Another center said, “In the future you could have trouble conceiving another baby” because of scar tissue, a side effect of abortion that happens to “a lot of women.”

The centers provided false and misleading information about the mental health effects of abortion. Research shows that significant psychological stress after an abortion is no more common than after birth. However, thirteen centers told the caller that the psychological effects of abortion are severe, long-lasting, and common. One center said that the suicide rate in the year after an abortion “goes up by seven times.” Another center said that post-abortion stress suffered by women having abortions is “much like” that seen in soldiers returning from Vietnam and “is something that anyone who’s had an abortion is sure to suffer from.” Other centers said that abortion can cause “guilt, … sexual problems, … suicidal ideas, … drug use, eating disorders,” and “a downward spiral where they lose friends and family members.”

The report concludes that ‘the individuals who contact federally funded pregnancy resource centers are often vulnerable teenagers, who are susceptible to being misled and need medically accurate information to help them make a fully informed decision’. The provision of inaccurate information may ‘advance the mission of the pregnancy resource centers, which are typically pro-life organizations dedicated to preventing abortion, but it is an inappropriate public health practice’.

The report can be found here.

Advertisements

Written by Admin

July 18, 2006 at 9:55 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: