Does
Abortion Impact the Mental Health of Women
By Warren Throckmorton, PhD
Grove City College
US
A
new study from New Zealand, published in the Journal
of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, raises important
questions about the impact of abortion on the
mental health of women. Researchers found that
those reporting abortion prior to age 21 had rates
of mental disorders from age 21 to 25 that were
over 1.5 times higher than the rates for women
who did not become pregnant and those who became
pregnant and did not seek an abortion. The relationship
between abortion and mental health problems persisted
even when the researchers took into account the
mental health status of the women prior to the
abortion. The researchers concluded that “abortion
in young women may be associated with increased
risks of mental health problems.”
Although virtually ignored in the United States,
the study is provoking intense political debate
over abortion in the lands down under. Predictably,
pro-choice groups have criticized the study and
New Zealand pro-life supporters have petitioned
their government to review abortion laws and procedures.
Does the New Zealand study provide support for
policies aimed at restricting access to abortion
in the United States?
No, according to Nancy Felipe Russo, Regents Professor
of Psychology and Women’s Studies at Arizona
State University. The American Psychological Association
referred me to Dr. Russo when I contacted them
for comment on the New Zealand study. Dr. Russo
pointed out that in 1969 the APA adopted the position
that abortion should be considered a civil right.
She added, “To pro-choice advocates, (mental
health) effects are not relevant to the legal
context of arguing for policies to restrict access
to abortion.”
According to Dr. Russo, pro-choice researchers
have a different agenda. “To someone who
believes that the decision to have a child is
a personal decision, protected by a right of privacy,
evidence about negative effects of abortion is
important, but for a different policy goal—to
provide women accurate information so they can
make informed choices in their pregnancy decision-making
process.”
Thus, Dr. Russo considers the more interesting
scientific question to be, “Why do women
vary in their responses to abortion?” She
believes for U.S. women, pre-existing mental health
problems, partner relationship quality, whether
the pregnancy was wanted or unwanted, and social
support for the women’s decision are the
key factors determining post-abortion mental distress,
not the abortion itself.
also believes that those who tell women they are
wrong for having an abortion may create guilt
and shame in some, but the cause of those feelings
is rooted in social disapproval and not abortion
per se.
Commenting on the Fergusson study, she said, “The
study was not designed to separate the effects
of abortion from simply having an unplanned pregnancy.
It does show that women who have unplanned pregnancies
terminating in abortion have a poorer mental health
profile than other women. But this is not a new
finding. My own work has found abortion to be
correlated with depression risk, but only when
confounding variables are uncontrolled.”
Dr. Russo asserts that studies linking abortion
and mental distress have been poorly designed.
She concludes, “There has yet to be a well
designed study that finds that abortion itself
contributes to increased risk for mental health
problems.”
On the other hand, Professor David Fergusson,
lead author of the New Zealand report, said the
results cannot be so easily dismissed. He explained,
"We took into account social background,
education, ethnicity, previous mental health,
exposure to sexual abuse, and a series of other
factors. It is true that we did not take into
account specifically whether a pregnancy was wanted
or not. However, this limitation is not sufficient
grounds for dismissing the results."
In his report, Professor Fergusson singled out
the APA for criticism over the way that association
has handled the entire body of research regarding
post-abortion psychological adjustment in women.
He pointed out that the APA’s briefing paper
on abortion says, “Well-designed studies
of psychological responses following abortion
have consistently shown that risk of psychological
harm is low. Some women experience psychological
dysfunction following abortion, but post-abortion
rates of distress and dysfunction are lower than
pre-abortion rates.”
In an interview, Professor Fergusson said he believes
the APA’s conclusions are inconsistent with
his research and imply greater certainty than
is warranted by existing studies. Given the inadequate
state of the research on the question of how abortion
impacts mental health, he says the APA should
take a much more tentative approach. In fact,
Professor Fergusson is generally critical of the
entire body of research on post-abortion distress
saying, “It borders on scandalous that one
of the most common surgical procedures performed
on young women is so poorly researched and evaluated.
If this were Prozac or Vioxx, reports of associated
harm would be taken much more seriously with more
careful research and monitoring procedures.”
Why is there such poor research on the impact
of abortion on women?
According to Professor Fergusson, the political
issues surrounding abortion crowd out scientific
objectivity. In his view, “The abortion
debate and its implications drive out the science.”
In her own way, Dr. Russo agrees, “There
is a pro-life political agenda to prove abortion
is harmful to women in order to overturn Roe v.
Wade. The research that specifically aims to causally
link mental health problems and abortion has been
conducted by those opposed to abortion.”
So was Professor Fergusson out to link mental
health problems with abortion?
“I’m immune from that charge because
I’m pro-choice,” he says. In a remarkably
candid statement, Professor Fergusson reveals
that he was warned by fellow pro-choice researchers
not to publish his work to avoid getting caught
up in the debate. However, he believes that would
not have been ethical. “I might rather not
have found what we did, but we did find it and
you can’t be intellectually honest and only
publish results you like.”
Although Professor Fergusson agrees with Dr. Russo
that abortion should be a civil right, he is critical
of the APA’s rejection of the possibility
that abortion per se might lead to adverse reactions
for an undefined number of women. About his views,
the researcher says, “It’s one thing
to have a civil right to do something and quite
another thing is the consequences of doing it.
It may well turn out that the procedure has risks
we did not foresee.”
It is the possibility of those “risks that
we did not foresee” that should inspire
less certainty and more research regarding abortion
risks. In the mean time, health professionals
might consider this: when women come forward,
unprovoked, saying that their abortion decision
continues to impact them, they might just be right.
Warren Throckmorton, PhD is an Associate Professor
of Psychology and Fellow for Public Policy and
Psychology at Grove City College and the Center
for Vision and Values. Dr. Throckmorton is the
producer of the documentary, I Do Exist regarding
sexual orientation. His columns have been published
in over 100 newspapers. He can be reached through
his website at http://www.drthrockmorton.com/.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
