For those of you who support a woman's right to choose

[porkbutt 897]

What were the feelings of the babies killed ?

[TimmySmith 2,783]

I thought it was 88% like you repeated twice.

I guess neither of us read your link. Until I did.

[NewbieJr 541]

Raise your hand if you are either pro-choice or pro-life and this thread made you change your mind.

[MDC 7,887]

I guess neither of us read your link. Until I did.

I'd actually read it before so I didn't bother to revisit it. I refer you back to my post about the difference between momentary sorrow / regret and lifelong depression / mental illness.

[jerryskids 7,085]

According to the research there is evidence that the vast majority of women experience no lasting psychological effects after an abortion, and that their mental health post abortion is in line with their mental health pre abortion. Sometimes reality isn't what we want it to be, what can I say?

Why do you keep saying this? Your APA link said no such thing. If you go back and read it objectively I think you'll agree.

[TimmySmith 2,783]

I'd actually read it before so I didn't bother to revisit it. I refer you back to my post about the difference between momentary sorrow / regret and lifelong depression / mental illness.

Right, Mr. Science's opine. Hurry up on the publishing, 64% of woman are waiting to know how they are supposed to feel.

[penultimatestraw 473]

LOL. Something tells me they had their conclusion long before they contoured their analysis to suit it.

And you approached the topic with an open mind?

[penultimatestraw 473]

#science

 

 

It just doesn't make sense, you see military PTSD proliferating as we become more attune to mental health, and it just makes no sense that there is zero stress disorders from voluntarily going through something like this...

 

Sounds like more denialism.

That's why they do the studies - your "common sense" might be incorrect.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Why do you keep saying this? Your APA link said no such thing. If you go back and read it objectively I think you'll agree.

His assessment is exactly the APA's conclusion. Their admission that more high quality studies need to be done does not invalidate the best data we have.

 

The one point you might argue is the association between mental health and those with > 1 abortion is less clear.

[MDC 7,887]

Why do you keep saying this? Your APA link said no such thing. If you go back and read it objectively I think you'll agree.

 

I did.

 

"None of the literature reviewed adequately addressed the prevalence of mental health problems among women in the United States who have had an abortion. In general, however, the prevalence of mental health problems observed among women in the United States who had a single, legal, first-trimester abortion for nontherapeutic reasons was consistent with normative rates of comparable mental health problems in the general population of women in the United States.

 

Nonetheless, it is clear that some women do experience sadness, grief, and feelings of loss following termination of a pregnancy, and some experience clinically significant disorders, including depression and anxiety. However, the TFMHA reviewed no evidence sufficient to support the claim that an observed association between abortion history and mental health was caused by the abortion per se, as opposed to other factors."

 

[KSB2424 3,173]

That's why they do the studies - your "common sense" might be incorrect.

 

Of course, but you know as good as I do on a lot of different topics (forget this one as its so divisive), that different studies have different results and those results can be construed in a way that the folks doing it want them too. That the results change and evolve as more is known and more studies conducted. So on and so forth. It's a process if you will and you have to sift through it all and sometimes its not black and white.

 

I think what some are saying is that in those situations, where the one study says one thing and another says something different that the tie-breaker is common sense.

 

At least that's how I approach it. Lets take a made up debate on nutrition as an example (I'm just making it up). One study says 6 cups of coffee a day is good for you, another says its bad for you. So there is conflict. The tie breaker for me is to think that maybe six cups is a bit excessive and that much caffine is probably to much, but since there are "some" studies saying otherwise that a cup joe a day aint all that bad.

 

Thats us using our common sense to make a judgement since there is no definitive answer, but differing studies on the subject.

[Googballz 39]

 

TFMHA reviewed no evidence sufficient to support the claim that an observed association between abortion history and mental health was caused by the abortion per se, as opposed to other factors."

 

 

 

 

Guess they didn't get around to reviewing the studies I linnked.

[penultimatestraw 473]

 

Of course, but you know as good as I do on a lot of different topics (forget this one as its so divisive), that different studies have different results and those results can be construed in a way that the folks doing it want them too. That the results change and evolve as more is known and more studies conducted. So on and so forth. It's a process if you will and you have to sift through it all and sometimes its not black and white.

 

I think what some are saying is that in those situations, where the one study says one thing and another says something different that the tie-breaker is common sense.

 

At least that's how I approach it. Lets take a made up debate on nutrition as an example (I'm just making it up). One study says 6 cups of coffee a day is good for you, another says its bad for you. So there is conflict. The tie breaker for me is to think that maybe six cups is a bit excessive and that much caffine is probably to much, but since there are "some" studies saying otherwise that a cup joe a day aint all that bad.

 

Thats us using our common sense to make a judgement since there is no definitive answer, but differing studies on the subject.

I can appreciate your opinion, but the scientific approach involves scrutinizing the methodology of conflicting studies, erring on the side of the study(ies) which are better designed with less potential bias. MDC's APA link attempts to do this.

 

"Common sense" isn't very common, unfortunately.

[penultimatestraw 473]

 

 

Guess they didn't get around to reviewing the studies I linnked.

Association <> causality.

[Googballz 39]

Association <> causality.

That's cute. Did you have a point?

[jerryskids 7,085]

His assessment is exactly the APA's conclusion. Their admission that more high quality studies need to be done does not invalidate the best data we have.

 

The one point you might argue is the association between mental health and those with > 1 abortion is less clear.

That's one point. Another is "none of the literature adequately addressed...", which means "we don't know.". They apparently were able to conclude through inadequate studies that early trimester single abortions are fine, which seems hard to do but I included it in my initial summary nonetheless.

 

There is a big difference between "no evidence, " especially when they say there are no good studies, and conclusive evidence, and you know it.

[Mike Honcho 5,435]

I can appreciate your opinion, but the scientific approach involves scrutinizing the methodology of conflicting studies, erring on the side of the study(ies) which are better designed with less potential bias. MDC's APA link attempts to do this.

 

"Common sense" isn't very common, unfortunately.

 

 

NIH link I posted also finds numerous faults in the work of one the authors that Goog's been peddling. You would think that "common sense" would lead you to discount studies that are found to be flawed...

[drobeski 3,061]

So liberals we believing in science or not today ?

[TimmySmith 2,783]

 

I did.

 

"None of the literature reviewed adequately addressed the prevalence of mental health problems among women in the United States who have had an abortion. In general, however, the prevalence of mental health problems observed among women in the United States who had a single, legal, first-trimester abortion for nontherapeutic reasons was consistent with normative rates of comparable mental health problems in the general population of women in the United States.

 

Nonetheless, it is clear that some women do experience sadness, grief, and feelings of loss following termination of a pregnancy, and some experience clinically significant disorders, including depression and anxiety. However, the TFMHA reviewed no evidence sufficient to support the claim that an observed association between abortion history and mental health was caused by the abortion per se, as opposed to other factors."

 

is the perfect emoticon for that mumbo jumbo.

[MDC 7,887]

is the perfect emoticon for that mumbo jumbo.

Science make MDC mad too. Like gut feeling better.

[DankNuggs 305]

His assessment is exactly the APA's conclusion. Their admission that more high quality studies need to be done does not invalidate the best data we have.

 

The one point you might argue is the association between mental health and those with > 1 abortion is less clear.

Does it make logical sense that doing something that causes no issues more than once causes issues?

[Googballz 39]

Does it make logical sense that doing something that causes no issues more than once causes issues?

I have been thinking the same thing. It would seem the first abortion would cause the most anxiety. Why would that one cause no ill affects, but the next one would.

 

Makes no sense.

[OldMaid 2,135]

God, some of you people are dense.

[KSB2424 3,173]

God, some of you people are dense.

 

Association <> causality.

 

[drobeski 3,061]

God, some of you people are dense.

how did you feel after your abortions?

[naomi 360]

Without saying one way or the other what women on whole feel after having an abortion, if I imagine having a mindset that thinks progressive thinking is enlightened, if I feel a responsibility as a western woman in the 21st century to be part of the change (ie., the person who would always like the serious articles about women's issues on buzzfeed), then I would probably have a problem with myself for being hung up on having an abortion. That wouldn't set right with me. Why would I want to give that feeling any leverage.

 

Anecdotal experience:

 

A stripper I met in a community college sewing class and hung out with for a few weeks. I was with her while she encouraged a friend over the phone to get an abortion. She had had multiple herself. She was crazy in a creepy way though (basically told me she killed her younger brother). If you want to caricaturize 'the other side' for being heartless sounding and cavalier...'these are the kind of people who support abortion' the rational in her advice would nail it. It would sound like I was making it up, painting an unbelievable, too one dimensional picture. It wound up being the thing with her brother that made me cut ties with her.

 

A 20 year old co-worker. We were cleaning party rooms one morning and talking about the situation facing another co-worker who might be pregnant. She started getting into her experience with that bind and how she had an abortion. She wound up needing to be comforted a little bit. It wasn't recent (got the impression it was a couple years ago), but she talked about how she thinks about him, and it came through that she regards him as presently existing. Statements she made directly speak to the lasting impact assumption pro-lifers talk about. It was partially a heads-up.

[penultimatestraw 473]

That's one point. Another is "none of the literature adequately addressed...", which means "we don't know.". They apparently were able to conclude through inadequate studies that early trimester single abortions are fine, which seems hard to do but I included it in my initial summary nonetheless.

 

There is a big difference between "no evidence, " especially when they say there are no good studies, and conclusive evidence, and you know it.

It is obvious you are trained as an engineer, because you are uncomfortable with data which doesn't yield exact, immutable results. Unfortunately, much of medical and behavioral health data has limitations, including numerous confounding variables, which any good study should mention.

 

The APA is admitting the data are less than perfect, but using the best information we have they conclude mental health problems are not increased in women following their first abortion. If you disagree, you should do so based on better data, or accept that we just don't know one way or the other. Your personal opinion has no bearing on what the actual relationship may be.

[penultimatestraw 473]

That's cute. Did you have a point?

None of your studies show abortion causes mental health problems, which is exactly what TFMHA concluded.

[drobeski 3,061]

None of your studies show abortion causes mental health problems, which is exactly what TFMHA concluded.

wait didn't you just proclaim there was not enough data to find a conclusion?

So basically you're doing the same as jerry except opposite.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Does it make logical sense that doing something that causes no issues more than once causes issues?

But they aren't saying abortion causes no "issues," just no long term psychologic consequences. The temporary regret/grief, etc. after a first abortion might dissuade many women from seeking another abortion, or alter their behavior to lesson the chance of a another unintended pregnancy, or both.

 

On the other hand, a second, third, etc. "mistake" might take a cumulative toll on the woman. Or might reflect other underlying problems, including the possibility of psychiatric illness, which contributes to their multiple unintended pregnancies.

[Googballz 39]

None of your studies show abortion causes mental health problems, which is exactly what TFMHA concluded.

Nope.

 

They just show a much higher incidence of suicide, depression, alcohol and drug abuse, etc among women who have had an abortion.

 

Must just be a coincidence.

[penultimatestraw 473]

wait didn't you just proclaim there was not enough data to find a conclusion?

So basically you're doing the same as jerry except opposite.

No. The distinction is association versus causation. The best data we have supports no association between long term mental health problems and women who undergo a single abortion.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Nope.

 

They just show a much higher incidence of suicide, depression, alcohol and drug abuse, etc among women who have had an abortion.

 

Must just be a coincidence.

Giving your data the benefit of the doubt, which admittedly is quite generous, perhaps the correct conclusion is women with mental health problems, including substance abuse, might be more likely to experience unintended pregnancy? In other words, multiple abortions are the product of their behavior/mental illness, not vice versa.

[MDC 7,887]

wait didn't you just proclaim there was not enough data to find a conclusion?

So basically you're doing the same as jerry except opposite.

[Googballz 39]

Giving your data the benefit of the doubt, which admittedly is quite generous, perhaps the correct conclusion is women with mental health problems, including substance abuse, might be more likely to experience unintended pregnancy? In other words, multiple abortions are the product of their behavior/mental illness, not vice versa.

Your assumptions don't take into account the problems were documented after the abortion, not before. Sometimes a decade or more after the fact.

 

Keep spinning.

[KSB2424 3,173]

But they aren't saying abortion causes no "issues," just no long term psychologic consequences. The temporary regret/grief, etc. after a first abortion might dissuade many women from seeking another abortion, or alter their behavior to lesson the chance of a another unintended pregnancy, or both.

 

On the other hand, a second, third, etc. "mistake" might take a cumulative toll on the woman. Or might reflect other underlying problems, including the possibility of psychiatric illness, which contributes to their multiple unintended pregnancies.

 

I thought we were not supposed to make our own common sense determinations based on flawed and incomplete data?

[penultimatestraw 473]

Your assumptions don't take into account the problems were documented after the abortion, not before. Sometimes a decade or more after the fact.

 

Keep spinning.

Make it easy for me - link the specific study(ies) which looked at mental health before, during and after an unintended pregnancy which was aborted. And the comparator group, which was matched for other confounders, such as socioeconomic status, education, support network, etc. I need the primary data, not a link to a blog.

[penultimatestraw 473]

 

I thought we were not supposed to make our own common sense determinations based on flawed and incomplete data?

I am not making any conclusions; just trying to open their minds to possibilities which they may not have considered.

[Googballz 39]

Make it easy for me - link the specific study(ies) which looked at mental health before, during and after an unintended pregnancy which was aborted. And the comparator group, which was matched for other confounders, such as socioeconomic status, education, support network, etc. I need the primary data, not a link to a blog.

My links have all kinds of citations to the information they used. Feel free to look for whatever floats your boat.

[KSB2424 3,173]

I am not making any conclusions; just trying to open their minds to possibilities which they may not have considered.

 

Neither was I, I to was using my common sense to discuss what all this flawed and inconsistent data meant before you intervened. You simply didn't like my "possibilities" as it didn't meet your worldview, so you disparaged it and made your own.

 

 

 

Goose meet Gander.