Pro-life? Look at the fruits

Sojourner's SojoMail includes an essay by Christian ethicist Dr. Glen Harold Stassen (copied below the fold) examining abortion statistics before and after George W. Bush took office in 2000. The results are surprising.

Pro-life? Look at the fruits
by Dr. Glen Harold Stassen

I am a Christian ethicist, and trained in statistical analysis. I am consistently pro-life. My son David is one witness. For my family, "pro-life" is personal. My wife caught rubella in the eighth week of her pregnancy. We decided not to terminate, to love and raise our baby. David is legally blind and severely handicapped; he also is a blessing to us and to the world.

I look at the fruits of political policies more than words. I analyzed the data on abortion during the George W. Bush presidency. There is no single source for this information - federal reports go only to 2000, and many states do not report - but I found enough data to identify trends. My findings are counterintuitive and disturbing.

Abortion was decreasing. When President Bush took office, the nation's abortion rates were at a 24-year low, after a 17.4% decline during the 1990s. This was an average decrease of 1.7% per year, mostly during the latter part of the decade. (This data comes from Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life using the Guttmacher Institute's studies).

Enter George W. Bush in 2001. One would expect the abortion rate to continue its consistent course downward, if not plunge. Instead, the opposite happened.

I found three states that have posted multi-year statistics through 2003, and abortion rates have risen in all three: Kentucky's increased by 3.2% from 2000 to 2003. Michigan's increased by 11.3% from 2000 to 2003. Pennsylvania's increased by 1.9% from 1999 to 2002. I found 13 additional states that reported statistics for 2001 and 2002. Eight states saw an increase in abortion rates (14.6% average increase), and five saw a decrease (4.3% average decrease).

Under President Bush, the decade-long trend of declining abortion rates appears to have reversed. Given the trends of the 1990s, 52,000 more abortions occurred in the United States in 2002 than would have been expected before this change of direction.

How could this be? I see three contributing factors:

First, two thirds of women who abort say they cannot afford a child (Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life Web site). In the past three years, unemployment rates increased half again. Not since Hoover had there been a net loss of jobs during a presidency until the current administration. Average real incomes decreased, and for seven years the minimum wage has not been raised to match inflation. With less income, many prospective mothers fear another mouth to feed.

Second, half of all women who abort say they do not have a reliable mate (Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life). Men who are jobless usually do not marry. Only three of the 16 states had more marriages in 2002 than in 2001, and in those states abortion rates decreased. In the 16 states overall, there were 16,392 fewer marriages than the year before, and 7,869 more abortions. As male unemployment increases, marriages fall and abortion rises.

Third, women worry about health care for themselves and their children. Since 5.2 million more people have no health insurance now than before this presidency - with women of childbearing age overrepresented in those 5.2 million - abortion increases.

The U.S. Catholic Bishops warned of this likely outcome if support for families with children was cut back. My wife and I know - as does my son David - that doctors, nurses, hospitals, medical insurance, special schooling, and parental employment are crucial for a special child. David attended the Kentucky School for the Blind, as well as several schools for children with cerebral palsy and other disabilities. He was mainstreamed in public schools as well. We have two other sons and five grandchildren, and we know that every mother, father, and child needs public and family support.

What does this tell us? Economic policy and abortion are not separate issues; they form one moral imperative. Rhetoric is hollow, mere tinkling brass, without health care, health insurance, jobs, child care, and a living wage. Pro-life in deed, not merely in word, means we need policies that provide jobs and health insurance and support for prospective mothers.

Glen Stassen is the Lewis B. Smedes Professor of Christian Ethics at Fuller Theological Seminary, and the co-author of Kingdom Ethics: Following Jesus in Contemporary Context, Christianity Today's Book of the Year in theology or ethics.

Comments

[Tony]

The study “Pro-life? Look at the fruits” by Dr. Glen Harold Stassen is full of flaws and was fabricated in an attempt to discredit President Bush. No matter where you stand on the issue of abortion, you should read the following article by Steven Ertelt which lists the errors in Dr. Stassen’s study including how he mixed up the statistic for an increase in abortion with the increase in childbirth. Look at the fruits indeed. Dr. Stassen seems to be bearing the fruits of dishonesty and incompetence.

Article can be read at: http://www.lifenews.com/nat886.html

_______________________________________________________

Abortions Did Not Increase Under President Bush, Researcher's Study Flawed

by Steven Ertelt

LifeNews.com Editor

October 20, 2004

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- In a last-minute effort to call into question President Bush's pro-life credentials, a researcher says that Bush's economic policies have led to an increase in the number of abortions during his administration. However, a leading pro-life expert on abortion statistics says the study is flawed and sometimes uses old data or wrong numbers to draw conclusions.

Glen Harold Stassen a professor of Christian Ethics at Fuller Theological Seminary, released a study last week saying that abortion was decreasing when President George W. Bush took office and it has increased since.

Stassen's study first claims that abortions were on the decline (down 17.4%) during the 1990s. The assumption he makes is that the economic policies of Bill Clinton caused the decrease.

However, Dr. Randy O'Bannon, director of education at the National Right to Life Committee, says most of the abortion decline in the 1990s occurred during the first few years. That's when the first President Bush was in office and shortly thereafter -- before Clinton's economic policies would have had an effect.

Stassen wrongly averages the 17.4 percent decline to say that abortions decreased at the same 1.7 percent rate every year during the 90s. Since Clinton was in office during most of the 1990s, that would give him bragging rights to the abortion decrease.

But, Dr. O'Bannon said the rate of decline was higher in the Bush years and slowed during the Clinton years. "In Clinton's last year in office, the decline was not 1.7%, but just 0.1%," O'Bannon explained.

During the Bush years and the year after, abortions decreased by 113,000, or 7 percent. The number of abortions fell by only 46,500, or 3.5 percent, during Clinton's second term in office, when his economic policies were in full effect.

The abortion number even reversed itself one year during the Clinton presidency, from 1995-1996, and went up slightly.

Since the federal government stopped collecting national abortion figures in 2000, Stassen relies on data from 16 states to establish his claim that abortions have increased dramatically under President Bush.

Stassen found that abortions increased in 11 of those 16 states claims abortions must be on the rise nationwide.

"Stassen never demonstrates that his 16 states are representative of the 50 states," O'Bannon said. "Even worse for Stassen's case is that some of his statistics are just flat wrong, while others are of ambiguous origin."

In Illinois, for example, Stassen mentions an increase in the abortion numbers from 2001-2002 and says abortions have increased under President Bush.

However, Stassen ignores the substantial decrease in the number of abortions from 2002 to 2003. The number of abortions dropped a whopping 10 percent that year to their lowest figure since Roe v. Wade legalized abortion in 1973.

"Taken as a whole, this latest drop appears to be part of a larger long term downward trend, with 2002 being a short term deviation," O'Bannon explains.

In Wisconsin, Stassen amazingly used the wrong data. Stassen says abortions in Wisconsin increased by 0.6% from 2001 to 2002. Yet, the Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services says there were 436 fewer abortions performed in Wisconsin in 2002 than in 2001.

Staseen complicates his problem in South Dakota, a state he counts as one where abortion increased during the Bush administration.

He points to a one year increase from 2001-2002 of 2.1%. However, that's the figure for the increase in the number of babies born during that period. Figures from the state's health department reveal a 9.7 percent decrease in the number of abortions during that time.

According to O'Bannon's analysis, looking at correct numbers and over longer periods than just one year, abortion increased in just 8 of the 16 states during the Bush administration rather than the 11 Stassen claims.

Those numbers, however, have no bearing on whether abortions are on the rise nationally. During the decrease in abortions in 1990, individual states saw the number of abortions rise from time to time and the same phenomenon might be happening now, says Dr. O'Bannon.

Data from other states show abortions are decreasing during the Bush years -- and at a substantial rate.

From 2001-2002, abortions are down 9.3 percent in Kansas, 4.5 percent in Pennsylvania, they fell 9.3 percent in Kentucky and 6 percent in South Carolina.

Based on his faulty statistics, Stassen claims that Bush's economic policies, and the job losses during the first half of his administration, have resulted in an increase in abortions.

But, O'Bannon says the observation is no more than an unproven correlation.

"To support his claim, Stassen, at minimum, would need to show that abortions have increased and that increases have coincided with declines in the economy. He would also need to rule out alternative explanations for any such relationship," Dr. O'Bannon said. "Stassen doesn't do this."

"Not only do the data fail to indicate a nationwide upsurge in abortions, but Stassen provides no economic data whatsoever, much less the kind of statistical analysis one would need to show that abortions and economic factors such as unemployment are linked," O'Bannon adds.

If Stassen's claim is correct, states that have been hit hard economically, such as Illinois, would show the biggest increase in the number of abortions.

While Illinois' unemployment rate has been stuck at 6.7 percent, but abortions declined substantially there during the last year. In Ohio, where job losses have been a subject of the presidential campaign, abortions are on the decline there too.

"If the economic determinism Stassen assumes was valid, those state results would be reversed," O'Bannon said.

_______________________________________________________

Permission to post granted by Lifenews.com:

“Pro-life individuals not representing a media outlet, church, pro-life group or other organization may forward content from LifeNews.com through email or post on a public access discussion web site, newsgroup, or email list provided the material obtained from LifeNews.com is not altered or changed in any way.” -- http://www.lifenews.com/reprint.html

[Ray]

I'm happy to host a debate between Dr. Stassen and Dr. O'Bannon. But what I see in Tony's comment is a personal attack on Dr. Stassen. Take issue with Stassen's methodology if you like, but I see no basis for accusing him of "fabricat[ion] in an attempt to discredit President Bush," "dishonesty," or "incompetence." That's not discussion or debate; it's just name-calling.

[Joanna]

Dear Sir, Since NO one keeps accurate records on Abortion, and Planned Parenthood hides Rape Cases, try blaming them! Don't you think that Everyone is bashing a President who took over from Ex-President Clinton who was worse. He vetoed the Ban on Partial-Birth. The numbers are incorrect, so is blaming President George W. Bush. God bless you, and try to merciful - Jesus was!