Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Justice Samuel Alito

Yesterday’s cloture vote to end debate on the nomination of Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court and to allow a confirmation vote today signaled the end to the major media’s dominance of national affairs and its ability to shape public opinion.

It also marked the end of the political careers of Massachusetts Senators Edward Kennedy and John Kerry. Of course, they don’t know it and neither do their blinded by hate supporters, but the failure of these extreme left wing Democrats to convince their fellow senators to drink the kool-aid only confirms this conclusion.

From the beginning, this author stated that there would not be a filibuster. Sam Alito was examined by the American people and found normal. His mother told the nation what her son thought about the most controversial issue of our time, and the public concluded that this was good. Judge Alito explained to the Senate his views on a host of issues and deferred as was appropriate on any future subjects that would be likely to come before the court.
Finally, the people saw him as a family guy who likes the Phillies and coaches Little League. What is not to like? 15 years on the bench, prior to that a U.S. attorney, prior to that the Reagan White House, ABA well qualified rating, NLA well qualified rating; all of this resonated well with the American people.

However, the left and the liberal Democrats are not in touch with the common man. They think everything is about “protecting a woman’s right to abortion.” And if the country were made up of liberal college professors and lifetime government employees and Hollywood types, they would be right. The Alito nomination has always been about abortion. As stupid as it sounds, Democrats like Kennedy and Kerry, Durbin and Biden, Leahy and the rest are all about abortion. They are in the hip pocket of the abortion lobby, which incidentally, includes the radical homosexual lobby as well. And while it makes no sense politically, the Democratic Party has been on this abortion “binge” for almost 30 years since 1976. I remember, because it was at the 1976 Democratic Convention in New York City that the convention added a pro-abortion plank to the party platform. I was there in New York City protesting the plank with over 10,000 fellow pro-life intercessors.

Shortly thereafter, I left the Democratic Party and became a Republican because a candidate for president in 1976 publicly supported the right to life, explained how he had made a mistake when he was governor of California and wanted to correct the problem. Ronald Reagan had no problem understanding the humanity of the unborn. And while he would make two major errors in 1) nominating Sandra Day O’Connor, and 2) failing to have his staff push the pro-life agenda in 1981. But that was then and this is now.

For now we can celebrate the return to sanity. Now I am not saying that the White House wants to have an open debate on Roe. The folks in Washington still fear the press. But we see the changing tide. The momentum as I said in other comments is on our side. For we are on the side of life; and that is the only place to be.

Saturday, January 28, 2006


I spoke with a friend from California yesterday who informed me of the great success of the march for life in San Francisco. Over 15,000 people marched for life in the streets of San Francisco on Saturday January 21, 2006. Of course it did not make the major media and the stories did not talk about the abuse that the pro-lifers suffered from some of the rather strange people who inhabit "the city by the bay." Then again the local newspaper in Phoenix, correctly referred to as the "RAG" (at one time there were two dailies owned by the same company the Republic And the Gazette, hence the RAG -the afternoon paper has since met its timely end), did not cover the March and Rally for Life on January 22, 2006 at Steele Park in Phoenix sponsored by the Arizona Life Coalition, nor did it cover the March and Rally in Tucson on January 21, 2006. The paper gave scant coverage to the National March for Life in Washington,D.C. However it covered extensively the 100 people who came out to demonstrate on behalf of a suicide bill at the Arizona Capitol. Tim over at ProlifeBlogs.com nailed it with a comparison of the two articles.

Now the story about 100 pro-assisted suicide protester is news. But so is the fact that for the last 33 years the pro-life movement has reminded this state and this nation that Roe v. Wade is not settled law, that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decide, and that our state and federal laws must protect all human life, from conception to natural death. Ignoring the voice of the people shows the bias and prejudice for the major media, both print and electronic. Only in the blogosphere is there a voice for the people and a record of what is truly happening in the streets.

It was not just in D.C. or in San Francisco or Arizona that the people made known their voice. Throughout the heartland of America, men and women and especially young America - the high school and college age students - cried out for and end to the killing. The Natural Choice is Life. Choose Life. Women DO regret their abortions. Women deserve better than abortion. Love Them Both. Abortion kills children. These were some of the slogans on the tens of thousands of signs being carried throughout the nation.

If the cause were to be embraced by the media, there would be no end to the discussion until the killing ended. But the leadership in the media, the producers, the assignment chiefs, the editors, the reporters, are all complicit in the conspiracy of silence. They have bought into the notion that abortion is necessary. They are blind to the fact that abortion kills women, maims women, sterilizes women, damages women emotionally, mentally, spiritually and in so many other ways. They do not know, they do not want to know and they do not care. So just as in the early 1900s, these editors think that if they do not report on it, the event did not happen.

Ah, but that was then. This is now. I can report to you what happened and so can the 200,000 people who marched at the nation's Capitol. They will return and get on their blogs and chat rooms and tell everyone about their Washington experience. These young people are not owned by the liberal press and they are hungry for the truth. Our job at AZRTL is to answer their questions and give them "the rest of the story."

This will be a very important year. Actually every day is important because every day we have a chance to save lives.

Realize that this is just the beginning of another wave. Catch the wave of life.

Watch out Planned Parenthood

Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics' efforts to foil a legitimate search for the truth were dealt a severe body blow when the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a federal court's injunction and sent the case back to the lower court for trial. Read more below.

Court sides with Kline on reporting juvenile sex

Associated PressDENVER - The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday lifted a court order that prohibited Kansas from enforcing a law that requires health care providers to report consensual underage sex to authorities.
The three-judge panel, in a 2-1 decision, reversed the finding of a lower court, ruling that Kansas has a legitimate interest in information about the voluntary sexual conduct of children that overrides the minor's right to privacy.
Under Kansas law, sexual contact with or between children under 16 is a crime.
The majority ruled that although minors have a right to informational privacy, it doesn't exist for illegal sexual conduct. They ruled the state has a greater interest in enforcing its criminal laws, protecting the best interest of minors and promoting public health.
The ruling lifts a preliminary injunction, and the case goes back to federal court for trial.
In July 2003, Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline issued an opinion on the state's 1982 law requiring doctors, nurses, psychiatrists, social workers and others who work with minors to report suspected instances of underage sex, even if it involves willing partners of similar ages. Kline said that even consensual sex is inherently harmful to children.
The New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights filed a lawsuit on behalf of health care providers at the Kansas City-based clinic Aid For Women, who argued they were being forced to choose between violating the law and violating their patients' trust.
Neither Aid for Women nor Whitney Watson, spokesman for Kline, returned after-hours phone messages left by the Associated Press.
Health care providers argued they shouldn't have to report minors' consensual sexual activity -- even if it is illegal -- because Kansas' official interest in such behavior isn't strong enough to overcome the right to privacy. They argued privacy is crucial in reproductive decisions and that the law prevents minors from confidentially obtaining an abortion.
Judge Judith Herrera dissented from the majority's ruling, saying Kansas does not have a legitimate and proper purpose for obtaining or disclosing information about consensual sex among minors. The minor's interest in maintaining privacy concerning voluntary sexual activity is stronger, she wrote.

Abortion clinics have long avoided the public scrutiny required to prevent child abuse and other coercive activities against minor teen age girls. History is replete with under-age girls being made pregnant by adult men and then coerced into abortions by the threats of these men and fear of disclosure. Here in Arizona there have been a number of public cases about the terrible events involving teen age girls being forced into abortions by their adult male partners. Perhaps the public will realize that the abortion industry is interested in profit and perpetrating this evil upon the American people. Perhaps then the American people will rid themselves of the politicians who cover for these cowards and elect men and women of integrity.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Washington D.C. - January 23, 2006

I just returned from Washington DC after attending the annual March for Life and assorted pro-life events on Sunday and Monday.
While I may be a little tired and mention only the highlights of the trip, the same cannot be said for the grass roots pro-life movement as evidenced by the over 200,000 people who came from all over the country and the world to march on the nation's capitol.
While the rain came down the crowd gathered on the Washington mall where they heard music, prayers and reminders of why they were there. Thankfully the rain let up just before the march began. Led by the banners and the hundreds of women carrying the "Silent No More" and "Women do regret their abortions" banners, the marchers began their assent to Capitol Hill.
Before the march, earlier in the morning I had an opportunity to stop by and visit the first Blogs4life conference at the Family Research Council Building. Check out www.prolifeblogs.com for some great commentary and some fabulous pictures.

I met up with some of the heroes of the pro-life movement, people like Joe Scheidler, Jack Wilke, Janet Morana, and Fr. Frank Pavone. I spoke with Nellie Gray the organizer of the March for Life and she expressed her optimism and spoke hopefully because of all the young people who continue to get involved in right to life. The energy level from the people was amazing and they all conveyed their intention to continue the work when they returned home.

On Sunday I had a chance to speak briefly to about 100 students from South Florida at Gonzaga High school in DC. They represented four different Catholic schools from the area. Two priests and about ten adults with their families made the trip.

I have a lot more to say about the visit but for now I will close by saying that our victory is assured, but we must all strive to bring its happening soon.

Thursday, January 19, 2006

New Poll supports Right to Life

New Poll Reveals Overwhelming Majority of Americans Want Greater Abortion Restrictions
By Terry Vanderheyden

VANCOUVER, January 17, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A new poll conducted by Angus Reid for CBS News has revealed that the overwhelming majority of Americans would like to see greater restrictions placed on abortion.

Thirty-three percent of respondents said that abortion should be permitted only in cases such as rape, incest and to save the woman’s life; 17% said abortion should be allowed to save a woman’s life; 5% said abortion should not be permitted at all, while 15% said abortion should be permitted, but subject to greater restrictions than it is now. In total, 70% of respondents favour greater restrictions. Only 27% said that abortion’s availability should remain unchanged – permitted in all cases.

Angus-Reid interviewed 1,151 American adults by telephone, between January 4 and January 8.

(c) Copyright: LifeSiteNews.com is a production of Interim Publishing. Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*)

so let's look at the numbers.
According to this poll
5% Abortion should NEVER be allowed.
17% Abortion should NEVER be allowed EXCEPT to save the LIFE of the mother.
33% Abortion should NEVER be allowed EXCEPT to save the LIFE of the mother AND in such cases as rape and incest.

15% Abortion should be allowed BUT there should be more restrictions.

27% Abortion should permitted in all cases.

55% anti-abortion - want abortion made illegal
15% want more restrictions to limit abortions
70% want a change in the current status of the law.

27% - living in denial, living in confusion, living in ignorance, living in hate, living for the money, the power, the control, living in bondage, living with guilt, or simply do not care.

We need to remind people abortion kills a baby and exploits a woman. Abortion is not good for women or any body else.

Addressing the Latest Supreme Court Cases

The Oregon Assisted Suicide Case

This week the U.S. Supreme Court came out with two court decisions of significant importance to the Pro-Life community. The Oregon case addressed the efforts by the attorney general to utilize the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) to keep doctors from prescribing lethal narcotic medications to assist in the patient's suicide. Oregon passed a law in 1994 allowing such actions by doctors and the U.S. Attorney General's office issued regulations to stop such action. The federal court and later the court of appeals ruled against the regulation and the U.S. Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision upheld the lower court ruling. The opinion, penned by Justice Kennedy, attempts to reduce the question to that of proper jurisdictional authority to set regulations and guidelines for dispensing medication. To the extent that the ruling is deemed limited, Congress could act to plug the hole. But what troubled me in reading the opinion was the focus on the means and a total disregard for the end. The purpose of the CSA is not to assist doctors in providing medication that will allow a person to take his own life. The whole notion of the Oregon law insults the dignity of the human person. Kennedy's opinion does not adequately address that part of the equation. Justice Scalia wrote the opinion for the dissenters, and Justice Thomas also had an additional dissenting opinion.

Congress can address the problem if it has the courage. However I am not optimistic given the flak the media and the Washington press Corp gave Congress for its efforts in the Terri Schiavo matter. In the meantime, we need to remain vigilant especially in states like Arizona where there is a large elderly population.

Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of New England

In this New Hampshire parental notification case, the supreme Court did something rarely seen in abortion cases. The justices ruled unanimously and sent the case back to the lower court to see if the law could be salvaged. Apparently the court decided that the notice idea is reasonable, but they were concerned if the statute allowed for those rare cases where (they claim) the health of the underage minor girl would be in danger (as opposed to life which was covered).

The good news is that the court did not wholesale throw out the New Hampshire law. The bad news is that the lower court gets to dictate its sense of things. The other bit of good news is that this idea that the courts at the lower level can simply enjoin laws on a facial challenge may be coming to an end. More analysis is required but one could make the argument that simply because planned parenthood argues a facial challenge against a regulations law does not give the lower court the carte blanche to enjoin the statute.

Justice John Roberts

With Roberts in the dissent on the assisted suicide case and joining the upholding of the statute in NH, Roberts has proven himself thus far to be what we pro-life advocates wanted on the bench - someone who respects the right to life of the human person.

Tuesday, January 17, 2006

More on Shadegg

It seems that more people are recognizing that Arizona has been fortunate to have John Shadegg as one of its leading congressional representatives. Hugh Hewitt and National Revieware just two of the many who are seeing John as a viable candidate for majority leader. Check out Hugh's website for the telephone numbers to call to register your support for John.

Along with his fiscal conservatism, John Shadegg brings a fresh look to the tired politics as usual of the DC beltway. Indeed he will be the first to say that government needs to tighten its belt and stop the wasteful spending that threatens to bust this economy.

Arizona has long had a tradition of sending men and women to Washington to serve the people and get things done. Electing John Shadegg would be a way for Republicans to strengthen their position for the 2006 elections, but more than that, serve their country by selecting a leader who will focus on doing the people's business and not the power brokers of K Street.

Sunday, January 15, 2006

Shadegg for majority leader

The entry of John Shadegg into the race for House majority leader is an exciting turn of events in what is fast becoming a very embarrassing event for Republicans (though Democrats who have any concern about this country will be worried not only how it affects their party, but the country as well. John went to congress a reformer and as many of his colleagues will attest has been frustrated that many in the House and Senate are more interested in 'bringing home the bacon' as opposed to slimming down government. Shadegg would really care abhor shrinking the size of government.

Now the fact that he hails from Arizona only makes him more believable. Out West, there is a code by which men live. Seems that the code needs to be spoken of and followed in the halls of Congress. John Shadegg lives by that code. He has been a fine congressman for Arizona and would follow in the great tradition of John Rhodes who was the republican minority leader during those difficult times. Shadegg would bring to the Congressional leadership a reminder of why they are there in the first place - to do the people's business - not to pocket the leavings and then go to work for some lobbying firm.

The American people would support the selection of a John Shadegg. The Republicans, and especially those in denial or avoidance, should seriously consider John Shadegg for this position.

Finally John is a friend to children, both those born and those growing in the womb of their mothers. He is a friend of Arizona Right to Life and I think all of Arizona would support him for this post.

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

The end of Roe

I have been reading a number of conservative blogs about the Alito hearings and every time the subject of Roe comes up there would be some comment about returning the decision making process to the people. The person will comment that prior to Roe the power to regulate abortion was left to the states. True statement. Then the person will explain that the abortion decision was a power grab by the Supreme Court. Also true. Then the writer will end by stating that overturning Roe will return it to the states. Here is where I get off the bus.

Prior to the 1973 decision, the laws concerning abortion rested with the state's police power, that is, the power of the state to regulate conduct that would harm another. Our criminal laws are considered reflections of the state's police powers. But does anyone reasonably believe that the state has the power to allow one group of people the power to kill another group of people. In discussing the issue of abortion, some people forget what an abortion does. For those who are unclear, let me remind you. An abortion kills an unborn child. The constitution, if it recognizes the right to life of the human person, cannot allow the states to permit the killing of another human being. Such an allowance would violate the 14th Amendment, both in the due process and equal protection clauses. Unlike the elusive right of privacy that seems to float in and out of the constitution depending on what day of the week it is, the right to life is specifically found in the 5th and 14th Amendments to the constitution.

Perhaps it is the weakness or fear of the people that prompt these writers to hedge their comments. Perhaps they have bought into the cannard that the people are all pro-choice. But I submit to you that if the American people got a steady dose of the truth about the life of the unborn child as well as the harm abortion does to women, they would abandon their apathetic attitudes and run the abortionists and their supporters out of town on a rail. Why am I so confident? Because deep down the American people really do care about their fellow human beings. Sure we can all get a little crusty and we are all selfish. We want to spend our time doing what we want to do. But when the chips are down, the American is there to lend a hand. Who had the generous heart when the Tsunami hit? Who has been helping the victims of Katrina? Who ached when the 12 miners were found to have died? Time and time again, when there is a need, Americans come to the aid of other countries. So why the lax attitude on abortion? Two factors - the media has never to told the truth about abortion. From the beginning, it has been a part of the big lie. The second factor is the disfunctional attitude that many in the country have about sex, children, and family. Call it a lack of formation. Call it a rebellion borne of a reaction to hypocrisy. The last 40 years have been a disaster for the American family. And we all know it. We know about the divorce rates, the out-of-wedlock pregnancies, the child abuse, the abandonment, and failure of men to be dads and fathers, and moms to put their children first, and therefore we do not want to judge anyone else.

We will laugh at the sitcoms, play the video games and go to the casinos to avoid dealing with out failures as a society.

Yet - when the crisis happens, the people will rally.

I see it in the young people. They are hungry for the truth. It is up to us to show them the way and allow them to take the lead. They are after all the survivors - the ones our generation did not kill.

So the next time you hear anyone suggest that the abortion issue be resolved at the state level, respond with the notion that some truths are self-evident - that all persons are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these is the right to life.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006

Be a hero

Regardless of what the MSM pretend, it is becoming increasingly clear that today's average person does not read the papers and is not getting his news from the major newws casts. This is both good and bad news for the country. The good news is that with more people tuning out, the MSM is having less influence on the general public. The bad news is that the public is simply tuning out of everything and that means a less informed populace. For those who stay current, the internet and talk radio are the two main sources of information. Blogs are another means of moving news, though most of the blogs seem to be commentaries on the news events of the day.

For us in the pro-life movement, it means that we must become more savvy as we endeavor to get the message of life to the general public. It is still important to have the rallies and to remind people to attend. The importance of human interaction and the accountability that it underscores are just two reasons to take the time to participate in pro-life events.

This is why your presence in prayer in front of the abortion mills is so important. Your presence can save lives.
If you do not think so, then ask the two women who changed their minds on December 10 and 24, 2005 after going to the Planned Parenthood in Phoenix. On both days over 300 people prayed in front of the abortion mill. On both occasions, a woman changed her mind.

Think about it for a moment. A life saved. Another life saved.

So what is a hero? Someone who does something valorous? Someone who saves a life?

Be a hero. Make a difference. Get involved in the pro-life movement. We need you. The moms need you. The babies need you.

Also remember to attend our annual Pro-life Rally on January 22, 2006. Mark that day and bring your family to Steele Park in Central Phoenix to stand up anad be counted for life.

Sponsored by the Arizona Life coalition which is made up of such organizations as AZRTL, CPC and CAP, this event allows us to tell our political leaders and our fellow Americans that we care about life.

Details are on the AZRTL website.

Join your fellow pro-lifers for a day of renewal and recommittment to the Culture of Life.

Make a difference. Be a hero.

Apologizing for Abortion

When are the politicians (liberal Democrats and Republicans)who have screamed about Roe v. Wade and abortion going to apologize to the millions of American women whose lives have been affected by the abortion culture in our society?

I ask the question not expecting an answer because the truth is - those who really support abortion want dead babies. They do not want women to have children. they do not want people - both men and women - to address the realities surrounding their relationships with others, their behavior in general, or the effect that such behavior has on our nation.

Such a statement may sound harsh even judgmental. Yet is is simply a reflection of the truth. While reviewing some of the statements and questions by the senators on the judiciary committee, I was struck by the absolute absense of any concern for the mother and child as they "talked" about abortion and the constitution. While I would have taken the opportunity to explain that very intelligent and reasonable people have castigated Roe v. Wade and its progeny, and would have explained some of the basic facts of life that any student of high school biology would know, I suppose judge Alito's approach was to acknowledge that he wrote what he wrote about Roe and that was when he was a lawyer. Now he is a judge and he will look at everything with an open mind.

I am not impressed by the Senators who cannot understand biology. Abortion kills babies. Abortion hurts women. More women are unable to have children when they want to have a child because of an abortion in their past. Women who have had an abortion have a greater risk of breast cancer. Over 600 women filed complaints with the FDA about the serious and sometimes deadly effects of RU-486. So who really cares about women?

A sitting senator from Massachusetts who parrots the abortion extremist rhetoric, all the while silent on the truth behind the death of a young woman 38 years ago.


a woman who gives her entire life to helping mothers have and keep their babies.

How much time, talent and treasure did NOW and NARAL and Planned Parenthood give to help women have and keep their babies.

Compare the time, talent and treasure being spent by pro-life groups, Catholic and Evangelical churches to help mothers and their unborn children.

So keep Sam Alito in your prayers. Probably the most difficult thing for him to do is listen to the tripe from some of these senators.

Fortunately, he is a highly principled human being. And I am sure his sainted mother is praying for him and our country as well.

Friday, January 06, 2006

Staying Current

Part of my responsibility as president of AZRTL is to stay current on the important events of the day and to comment on them. Hopefully my thoughts will add to the conversation on an issue. Knowing where to look and what to read is a big part of the process. I am therefore happy to report to you that there is another site to check when looking for up to the minute information on pro-life activities. After first checking on the Arizona Right to Life website, checking out the latest at Pro-life Blogs.comwill offre you some interesting stories. Just as one should check out LifeNews.comfor the latest headlines, surfing over to Pro-Life Blogs will also allow you to check out other pro-life blog sites. There are litereally thousands of web blogs and web sites dedicated to the pro-life cause. Knowledge is power and it is time we started using it.

consider the current events of the day. We mourn the loss of those killed in Iraq due to the senseless hatred of all things holy. We ask why there seems to be this overwhelming sense fo dispair surrounding us. We wonder about the terrorists and then we ask why some people are more concerned about bringing down an administration than in winning this war on terror. At the same time we pray for those who died in the mining tragedy.

So ask yourself; why do I care about another person? Why am I movitated to seek the good for another? Why is it that I cannot just walk away and pretend that it does not involve me.

Deep down - built inside all of us - hardwired so to speak is the God given call to do the right thing.

So it is that we find ourselves asking the hard questions. And while we can sometimes play the avoidance game, for those whose hearts are truly developed, there will be the pangs of guilt. We are our brother's keeper.

So it is that we rededicate ourselves to the cause of life. Now and until the law respects the right to life of every human person.

So stay current and make a difference.

Wednesday, January 04, 2006

Remembering the fragility of life

This evening after finishing an executive committee meeting at the AZTRL offices, I turned on the news to find out what was happening with the search for the minors in West Virginia trapped in the mine following and explosion. The news reported as did the internet that 12 of the 13 men were alive. I was thankful not just for their sakes but for the sake of their families.

But the news a few hours later was not good. 12 of the 13 had died. It was sad and my body ached for the loss. I shook my head and prayed for their souls and for the families that God would console them with His mercy. And as I considered the evening's events and the tragic news, I felt prompted to write down these thoughts about such events that remind us all of the fragility of life.

We all have this notion that we are going to live forever - especially when we are young. In a sense we are right. We will live - should I say that our souls will live forever. It is something deep inside of us that knows that. Yet at the same time we are all going to shed the "shackles of this mortal frame" sometime and somewhere.

Which means that we all need to take stock at who we are and what is our purpose in life.

If you are reading this blog, then you probably know where I am going with this thought and how each of us can have a positive impact on the world around us. First it starts off with a commitment to life and to supporting the cause of life. There are many ways you can do this. The first is to educate yourself on the issue. Then you must use your knowledge to do good, ie defend life. I want to organize and build up the grassroots. There you can help big time. And we need contacts so that we at AZRTL can be invited to speak at various forums. We are also available to speak at your church.

As 2006 opens before us, you and I have a responsibility to get out our message that life is good. As we ponder the loss of life and all the resources being used to locate the minors, let us be mindful of the least of our brothers and sisters. You and I can make a difference.

Thanks for your support, your prayers and your willingness to stand up for life.

Monday, January 02, 2006

From a friend who keeps me posted on events happening "down under," here is an article worth considering.

Happy New Year and congratulations to those Ohio State Buckeyes for winning the 35th Annual Fiesta Bowl.

Abortion linked to mental problems
> By Julie Robotham Medical Editor
> January 3, 2006
> HAVING an abortion as a young woman raises the risk of developing later
> mental health problems - including depression, anxiety and drug and
> alcohol
> abuse - according to the most detailed long-term study to date into the
> divisive question.
> The results could undermine the legal basis for access to abortion in
> jurisdictions, including NSW, in which termination is legal only if
> continuing the pregnancy would threaten the woman's physical or mental
> health, said David Fergusson, the leader of the New Zealand study.
> The findings tipped the balance of scientific evidence towards the
> conclusion that abortion increased psychological distress rather than
> alleviating it, said Professor Fergusson, who supports unrestricted access
> to abortion and describes himself as "an atheist, a rationalist and
> pro-choice". That could make it more difficult for doctors to claim they
> were performing an abortion on health grounds, he said.
> "There'll be cheering for our results on the pro-life side and denouncing
> us
> angrily on the pro-choice side," said Professor Fergusson, a psychologist
> and epidemiologist at the Christchurch School of Medicine and Health
> Sciences. "Neither of those positions is sound."
> He said the study was conducted to address the dearth of reliable evidence
> on the mental health effects of abortion. "The issue is not a trivial
> one,"
> he said.
> "Abortion is the most common medical or surgical procedure young women
> undergo by far [and] there are potential adverse reactions. The aim of our
> research was never political. It was to say, 'The science in this area is
> not good. Let's add to it'."
> The findings come from the Christchurch Health and Development Study of
> 1265
> children tracked since birth in the 1970s. The researchers found 41 per
> cent
> of the more than 500 women remaining in the cohort had become pregnant by
> age 25 and 14.6 per cent had sought an abortion. In total, 90 pregnancies
> were terminated.
> At age 25, 42 per cent of those who had had an abortion had also
> experienced
> major depression at some stage during the previous four years - nearly
> double the rate of those who had never been pregnant and 35 per cent
> higher
> than those who had chosen to continue a pregnancy.
> The risk of anxiety disorders was raised by a similar degree, while the
> women who had had at least one abortion were twice as likely to drink
> alcohol at dangerous levels compared with those who had not terminated
> their
> pregnancies, and three times as likely to be dependent on illicit drugs.
> The
> study was published this week in the Journal of Child Psychiatry and
> Psychology.
> Professor Fergusson said the results had surprised him, but they were
> statistically strong. Separate analysis had confirmed the mental health
> problems followed abortion - not the other way round. The study, funded
> mainly by the New Zealand Government, had assessed the young women's
> mental
> health regularly through adolescence, and had also considered their family
> and educational circumstances.
> It was plausible that abortion might trigger mental illness, he said,
> because it could be a traumatic life event and involve loss - both of
> which
> are linked to increased psychological problems.
> Edith Weisberg, the research director of FPA Health, formerly Family
> Planning NSW, said the research was disturbing and important, but it also
> had limitations. Some women might not have mentioned their abortions, the
> effects might be different for older women, and the study had not explored
> why the women had terminated their pregnancies or their attitudes to
> abortion, she said. "The reason they had the abortion may be more of a
> problem than the abortion itself," she said.
> - Annual abortion rate - 80,000-90,000.
> - 62 per cent of people surveyed by Southern Cross Bioethics Institute
> support abortion on demand; 87 per cent want abortion rate cut.
> - The Federal Parliament will consider whether to remove a ban on abortion
> pill RU486.

It would be fascinating to have the CDC do an objective study on the after effects of abortion on women. They could track those who were physically injured, those who died those who suffered mental problems, those whose relationships with the father ended and at what time after the abortion. Yes, that would be any interesting study. Perhaps there could be actual research done to confirm the research of Dr. Joel Brind who has written about the increased risk of breast cancer among those women who have had abortions.

Then again, it will be interesting if this article gets any circulation.