Media Trumpets Biased and Problematic Abortion-Mental Health Study (w/ UPDATED info)
Several media outlets are trumpeting a recent study out of Denmark that asserts that having an abortion does not increase the risk of mental health problems for women. Yet there are serious problems with the study that major media are not reporting:
1. The Danish study flies in the face of over 30 professional studies just in the past five years that conclude that there is a serious negative mental health impact on women who have abortions. The list of those studies is at the site of the Elliot Institute, TheUnChoice.com. Not one major media outlet reported this.
2. The study was funded in part by the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation, which as the Associated Press reported, "supports abortion rights organizations and projects." The Los Angeles Times conveniently omitted this fact in its article.
3. Matthew Cullinan Hoffman at LifeSiteNews.com has reported (see important UPDATE below) that the study has been found to have "major problems."
Dr. Priscilla Coleman, Professor of Human Development and Family Studies at Bowling Green State University and an expert in the link between abortion and mental illness, studied the report and concluded that the study's own data "indicate that rates of mental health problems are significantly higher after abortion compared to after childbirth (15.2% vs. 6.7%) and compared to not having been pregnant (8.2%)."
In other words, as Hoffman reports, "The authors [of the Danish study] found that women who underwent abortions were almost three times more likely to seek psychiatric help for the first time in their lives during the nine months before and twelve months after the procedure, than women who gave birth. However, the authors did not regard the results as suggesting a causal relationship between abortion and mental illness" (emphasis added).
After 200,000+ people showed up in Washington D.C. earlier this week for the 37th annual March for Life, the Boston Globe did not devote a single syllable to the story. And while ignoring so many studies that do connect adverse mental health and abortion (like this one), the Globe blares this bleary study from Denmark.
One-sided journalism? Yup.
[UPDATE, 1/28/11, 6pm EST: It turns out that LifeNews.com was the first to exclusively report Dr. Coleman's findings about the faulty Danish study - even the day before the study was publicly released. LifeNews.com published Dr. Coleman's article on Wednesday, 1/26/11: "New Study Denying Abortion-Mental Health Link Contains Flaws." There is also Dr. Coleman's article about the 30+ studies. In addition, LifeNews.com published another article earlier today (1/28/11), "Women Who Had Abortions: Latest Mental Health Study Bogus," which further slams the wobbly study.]
-- Dave Pierre is the author of the book, Double Standard: Abuse Scandals and the Attack on the Catholic Church. Dave is also the creator of TheMediaReport.com and is a contributing writer to NewsBusters.
- Dave Pierre's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Thank you Mr Pierre*
Submitted by cajun2 on Thu, 01/27/2011 - 11:04pm.
It isnt just the media that hides information. A search of these kind of studies are listed with "Google" and anything contradictory are very difficult to find. You have provided me with numerous links and it is appreciated. The media is hyping abortion rights "en masse" due to the recent revelations at the Philly abortion clinic exposing a clear prejudice by the media.
Cajun has no problem trusting information from a guy named Pierre...;-)
Cajun2: You may have been
Submitted by stratman on Thu, 01/27/2011 - 11:54pm.
Cajun2:
You may have been the first to post on this study in another thread, at least to my knowledge. Hat tip to you!
Before seeing this thread, I had responded to the Danish study and the an AP report in your links found on another thread beginning here. My response was and still is throwing down the BS Card on these folks. This current thread by Dave Pierre adds more weight to my assumptions.
Thanks Strat*
Submitted by cajun2 on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 12:19am.
Let's admit that I am just a commenter at NB but Dave Pierre has done a great job of putting the pieces together. This is one of the best journalistic articles I have seen at NB in some time. I have been following the debacle of failed Health Inspections at abortion clinics in La since Sept 2010. It is obvious that the abortionists have control over the flow of information and aide the msm to spin their intended agenda of eugenics. I also noted that "Google" does filter sources of information that do not reflect that abortionist agenda.
Your posts are informative and also enlightening. Thank you for your contributions as well.
As I replied to Rusty, if we allow the murder of unborn children by deflecting to "rights" and costs then we are indeed a dying society. When agenda becomes more value than the life of a child then we are indeed lost.
We May Have A Disagreement
Submitted by stratman on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 4:22pm.
You are a valued contributor on NewsBusters who has shared a wealth of experience and knowledge with all of us. I consider you authoritative if not expert in your field. How many others on NB's qualify in your life's work? (Edit -- It appears NB member DaMama may be a colleague of your in this area! See below.)
Mr. Pierre is good. So are you.
Disagreement over! ;-)
thank you stratman*
Submitted by cajun2 on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 9:05pm.
Appreciate the pat on the back. My particular professional field of experience could be described as me being the one who brought the clients to DaMama..sometimes they were kickin n screaming but they did arrive into her care...LOL
Even though I also
Submitted by Rusty Shackleford on Thu, 01/27/2011 - 11:12pm.
Even though I also acknowledge when biology shows life begins, I do not think the Right should push legislation restricting abortion. One of the big reasons the Tea Party movement is such a success is that it avoided this devisive issue. I think abortion is like the slavery issue in that it can only be resolved when society has grown, and our society is not quite there yet. Back during the creation of the Constitution numerous delegates were against slavery, but they did not engage in a knock-down winner-take-all fight over the issue because they all agreed that the survival of their nation was an even bigger issue. I cringe when I hear abortion mentioned because this nation needs drastic cuts in spending, the elimination of Federal Agencies, and a return to core Constitutional principles. Yes, I agree it should be illegal for someone to kill another just because they haven't been born, but this nation is dying and we need to focus on the major lacerations. I wish everything involving abortion would just go away for a few years.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Matthews: The Joy Behar of MSNBC.
Bill Maher: The Joy Behar of HBO.
Paul Krugman: The Joy Behar of The New York Times.
1/3 is a Major Laceration
Submitted by Fordham on Thu, 01/27/2011 - 11:49pm.
Rusty,
1/3 of my generation is dead because of abortion... 1/3.
Making all discussion of abortion dissappear for a few years is not going to change the fact that in the next year more than 1,000,000 of our nation's children will be murdered and their mother's scarred forever.
Yeah, we forget abortion and we may be able to financially save the country, but at the cost of our souls.
Rusty*
Submitted by cajun2 on Thu, 01/27/2011 - 11:20pm.
If we do indeed ignore the murder of innocent children as an insignificant issue ,then I totally agree with you, our society is dying. Not to mention our humanity.
That's right; it's all in the
Submitted by motherbelt on Thu, 01/27/2011 - 11:23pm.
That's right; it's all in the interpreation or non-interpretation of the data, and they get to decide.
They always play this game in playing a story a certain way. They've proven it just in the past few weeks, and The Anchoress nailed them on it.
Yesterday on Twitter, a journalist wrote: “This abortion doctor story is gruesome. Anti-choicers will seize on it, but it’s about criminal behavior, not abortion.”
Its funny how framing works. A massacre perpetrated by a deranged man is not about the deranged man; it’s about “rhetoric.” But a massacre perpetrated by an abortion provider whose violations against laws of the nation and of humanity were overlooked for years is “not about abortion.” It’s about criminal behavior, and that’s all. But some of our most prominent politicians have voted against the very bill — the “born alive” bill — that defines such behavior as criminal. Meaning, I guess, that if only enough politicians had voted with Sen. Barack Obama, Gosnell’s behavior would not be “criminal” at all, and therefore we wouldn’t even be talking about it?
(emphasis mine)
It's incredible the length abortionists will go in order to...
Submitted by Dave. on Thu, 01/27/2011 - 11:27pm.
...justify the wanton murder of the unborn.
Somehow I don't think it's going to work for them when that certain day comes along.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
The plural of "anecdote" is not "evidence".
Submitted by drsamherman on Thu, 01/27/2011 - 11:49pm.
Yeah...I've said it before too many times.
The rule for computer science and health care research is the same: garbage in-garbage out. If you start with an agenda, you will only try to prove that agenda or explaining (with nerve-numbing diatribe and excuses) why you did not.
DUH!
Submitted by DaMama on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 12:16am.
Of course women have problems after an abortion. Post Traumatic Stress after an abortion is a reality. I've been counseling women for 3 decades.
It can hit immediately, or take a few weeks, months, even years. Usually, when a woman marries and has a baby with her husband, the PTS hits when she has her first ultrasound. When she sees the little arms, legs and hears the heartbeat, it triggers the emotions of what she did years ago, and most women struggle with varying degrees of depression.
It also hits when a woman tries to get pregnant and she can't. The realization that the abortion she had years before may have made her infertile causes huge swells of guilt, grief, regret and depression. It also puts strain on a marriage, because the husband feels anger towards his wife for possibly causing them to never have children because of a previous abortion.
It is most evident when a woman holds her first child after birth. Hearing the cry, seeing the perfect little toes, fingers, eyes, etc., brings waves of guilt and depression, knowing that she killed her first baby years before.
Any doctor who ignores this reality is a fool. Idiots from NOW, ACLU, Planned Parenthood and any other pro-abortion group lies to the faces of women when they tell them that having an abortion will never have any affect on a woman. These people are abominable.
Doc Sam,
Submitted by Dave. on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 12:17am.
Job security has become a huge influence in a lot of research areas today. Aside from the ones you mention there is also climate research, which as we all know, has been severely tainted.
After all, people have a tendency to want to tell their client (employer) what they want to hear.
Any time a new research report comes out, the first thing I do is look to see who funded it.
As such, I have a major mistrust of drug research that was funded by the drug makers themselves, as that condition seems to have become rather prevalent over the last 20 years or so.
I think all research funding should be blind.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Pharma has always been a huge sponsor.
Submitted by drsamherman on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 8:53pm.
The newest and best in class, research pipeline, etc. is the lifeblood of the pharmaceutical industry. Much of it has become so copycat that it makes choosing the right therapy for any given patient difficult. Into that mess, toss a good measure of sweetheart deals for prescription insurance carriers who enjoy large rebates for advantaged formulary positions for their products and another heaping help of confusion on prescriber selection of the appropriate medication. Often the best in the class is either not covered on the patient's insurance (causing larger co-pays) or the prescriber has to go through the nonsense to get prior authorization. Prior authorization can mean appeals, more letters, more frustration and time wasted for the patient, prescriber and dispensing pharmacy. Having been on many, many advisory panels and other groups for hospitals and patient advocacy groups during the years, I can attest to the anger that is felt over the endless supply of pre-school dropouts in cubicle farms who are told to deny each and every claim because their health insurer employer is disconnected from the patients.
Publicly funded research is no cure-all for better patient care, and certainly not for the innovation that we have seen in the last 60+ years in medicine. I don't support purely blinded research because agencies such as NIH are so inefficient and too prone to whatever political agenda might be in power at the time. Similarly, I am not in favor of completely private research due to the problems you mention.
There will always be a critical need for new research, particularly in such under-represented areas of emergency need like infectious diseases. Problem is, by the time NIH would get around to making decisions, the threat only increases.
Several years ago, there was a proposal floating around the medical community for a hybridized research model. Some of the facets of this plan were fantastic, while others were purely agenda-driven. I don't presume to have any answers, but I certainly am more eager to participate in the discussion to find a better solution.
Excellant summary drsam*
Submitted by cajun2 on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 9:19pm.
Your prediction is spot on. It is already in place.
http://912communique.ning.com/forum/topics/first-obamacare-now?commentId=3397719%3AComment%3A73751&xg_source=activity
You expect something
Submitted by Cowboy on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 12:32am.
You expect something different from a media still trumpeting global warming... From a huge snow drift?
Tell the Contessa*
Submitted by cajun2 on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 12:51am.
Contessa Brewer spews her liberal elitist propaganda daily and here we have Stratman, DocSam and DaMama who all could easily put her in her proper place (sandbox). This is why I so enjoy NB..;-)
Exposing Bad Journalism
Submitted by Boil It Down on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 2:16am.
As always, NewsBusters and The MRC do a great service in exposing bad and even damaging "journalism". The only way this story could better is if the names of the news outlets were here so as to be properly pilloried.
cajun---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 2:43am.
Please do not forget the posts by the poster "cajun2".
The things I have learned from her are both valuable and important, and the smiles she has given me are countless.
MD
Coincidence?
Submitted by iveseenitall on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 11:05am.
Is it just coincidence that our society has lost so much "civility" since abortion became a way of life in America? I don't think so. The "right" to life also connotes "respect" for life in all its aspects. This is hard for me to say--- but a nation which murders its innocent, sans conscience, deserves what it is getting. Sad.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal" (progressive)
Good morning iveseenitall
Submitted by cocodrie on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 11:30am.
I agree 100% and it ain't no coincidence.
Jesus Loves You so much He died for you
Bad Math All Around
Submitted by TJoseph on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 12:05pm.
Another important point: the "rate" may be greater, but the actual percentage of those seeking help before and after an abortion is much larger: almost 4 times more before and more than double after (15/1000 as opposed to 7/1000).
What a spin.
Well, as we all know..
Submitted by yutsnark on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 12:39pm.
... you can't prove the null hypothesis. And so, the absence of a statistically significant difference does not mean that no difference exists.
That being said, the Denmark study is probably better designed than the Coleman study, which failed to control for pre-abortion psychiatric diagnosis. A strong possibility is that mental health problems increase the likelihood that a woman will elect an abortion, rather than (or in addition to) the other way 'round.
As a pro-life person, I'm concerned that this whole line of research might be leading us astray. Whatever the effect of abortion on the parents' mental health, in no circumstances does it justify killing a child.
update*
Submitted by cajun2 on Mon, 01/31/2011 - 4:54pm.
This is how to rid the country of butchers, de-fund.
http://www.lifenews.com/2011/01/31/abortion-industry-forced-to-suspend-centers-employing-gosnell/