Did thousands of women die every year due to illegal abortions before Roe v. Wade?

Is it a problem that pull requests are approved without any comments

Is it possible to kill all life on Earth?

How to decline physical affection from a child whose parents are pressuring them?

Is there a term for this?

Did Darth Vader wear the same suit for 20+ years?

How to provide realism without making readers think grimdark

If a problem only occurs randomly once in every N times on average, how many tests do I have to perform to be certain that it's now fixed?

Is having a hidden directory under /etc safe?

You've spoiled/damaged the card

Why does MS SQL allow you to create an illegal column?

Hygienic footwear for prehensile feet?

Sucuri detects malware on wordpress but I can't find the malicious code

PhD student with mental health issues and bad performance

Can an old DSLR be upgraded to match modern smartphone image quality

What's the most polite way to tell a manager "shut up and let me work"?

Is the capacitor drawn or wired wrongly?

How can a single Member of the House block a Congressional bill?

Setting extra bits in a bool makes it true and false at the same time

Chopin: marche funèbre bar 15 impossible place

Show sparse matrices like chessboards

Why was it possible to cause an Apple //e to shut down with SHIFT and paddle button 2?

Pros and cons of writing a book review?

Did thousands of women die every year due to illegal abortions before Roe v. Wade?

Can The Malloreon be read without first reading The Belgariad?

Dr. Leana Wen, president of Planned Parenthood, has repeatedly said that thousands of women died every year as a result of abortions prior to Roe v. Wade:

We face a real situation where Roe could be overturned. And we know what will happen, which is that women will die. Thousands of women died every year pre-Roe.

_{Interview with WFAA, March 6, 2019}

Before Roe v. Wade, thousands of women died every year — and because of extreme attacks on safe, legal abortion care, this could happen again right here in America.

_{Tweet from personal account, April 24, 2019}

We’re not going to go back in time to a time before Roe when thousands of women died every year because they didn’t have access to essential health care.

_{Interview Morning Joe, May 22, 2019}

I presume that she is speaking specifically about:

American women, since Roe v. Wade was decided by the US Supreme Court, which only has jurisdiction in that country

Illegal (and likely unsafe) abortions, since the effect of Roe v. Wade was to overturn laws making abortions illegal

Is her claim true? Did thousands of women die every year due to illegal abortions before Roe v. Wade?

edited 5 hours ago

Andrew Grimm

22.1k28108303

asked 9 hours ago

Thunderforge

343216

Could be a classic example of legal-ese, though I'd hope an advocate would not be that cynically underhanded. Note that in none of her quotes is the completion of what was implied - "from abortions." Thousands of women die every year. Period. Women dying from not having access to essential health care is only very partially connected to illegal vs legalized abortions.

– PoloHoleSet
6 hours ago

1

Death is only part of the consequences. I'm sure there are large amounts of medical issues that can result from improper abortions that do not necessarily result in death. Not relevant to the truth of the claim here, but certainly worth considering nonetheless.

– cpcodes
6 hours ago

It needs to be noted that the accessibility of abortions varied widely prior to Roe V Wade. While they were nominally prohibited in most jurisdictions, this was often loosely enforced and the exception for "therapeutic" abortions was often stretched considerably. Plus, depending on the methodology used, the counting of abortion deaths likely has varied widely.

– Daniel R Hicks
5 hours ago

@DanielRHicks Your point about the differing methods of counting abortion-related deaths potentially resulting in under- or over-reporting is worth noting, but I'm not sure I understand what the accessibility of abortions has to do with the claim of "thousands" dying each year.

– Thunderforge
5 hours ago

@Thunderforge - I'm not going to try to find documentation for it, but I have read credible reports in the past (mostly prior to about 1970) that abortion (of at least a semi-legal nature) was, around that time, readily available in some areas (at least to those of sufficient means). And other claims that abortion was essentially unrestricted (at least in many jurisdictions) prior to maybe 1920, when major religious switched from condoning it to opposing it. So the goal post keeps moving.

– Daniel R Hicks
4 hours ago

|
show 2 more comments

Dr. Leana Wen, president of Planned Parenthood, has repeatedly said that thousands of women died every year as a result of abortions prior to Roe v. Wade:

We face a real situation where Roe could be overturned. And we know what will happen, which is that women will die. Thousands of women died every year pre-Roe.

_{Interview with WFAA, March 6, 2019}

Before Roe v. Wade, thousands of women died every year — and because of extreme attacks on safe, legal abortion care, this could happen again right here in America.

_{Tweet from personal account, April 24, 2019}

We’re not going to go back in time to a time before Roe when thousands of women died every year because they didn’t have access to essential health care.

_{Interview Morning Joe, May 22, 2019}

I presume that she is speaking specifically about:

American women, since Roe v. Wade was decided by the US Supreme Court, which only has jurisdiction in that country

Illegal (and likely unsafe) abortions, since the effect of Roe v. Wade was to overturn laws making abortions illegal

Is her claim true? Did thousands of women die every year due to illegal abortions before Roe v. Wade?

edited 5 hours ago

Andrew Grimm

22.1k28108303

asked 9 hours ago

Thunderforge

343216

Could be a classic example of legal-ese, though I'd hope an advocate would not be that cynically underhanded. Note that in none of her quotes is the completion of what was implied - "from abortions." Thousands of women die every year. Period. Women dying from not having access to essential health care is only very partially connected to illegal vs legalized abortions.

– PoloHoleSet
6 hours ago

1

Death is only part of the consequences. I'm sure there are large amounts of medical issues that can result from improper abortions that do not necessarily result in death. Not relevant to the truth of the claim here, but certainly worth considering nonetheless.

– cpcodes
6 hours ago

It needs to be noted that the accessibility of abortions varied widely prior to Roe V Wade. While they were nominally prohibited in most jurisdictions, this was often loosely enforced and the exception for "therapeutic" abortions was often stretched considerably. Plus, depending on the methodology used, the counting of abortion deaths likely has varied widely.

– Daniel R Hicks
5 hours ago

@DanielRHicks Your point about the differing methods of counting abortion-related deaths potentially resulting in under- or over-reporting is worth noting, but I'm not sure I understand what the accessibility of abortions has to do with the claim of "thousands" dying each year.

– Thunderforge
5 hours ago

@Thunderforge - I'm not going to try to find documentation for it, but I have read credible reports in the past (mostly prior to about 1970) that abortion (of at least a semi-legal nature) was, around that time, readily available in some areas (at least to those of sufficient means). And other claims that abortion was essentially unrestricted (at least in many jurisdictions) prior to maybe 1920, when major religious switched from condoning it to opposing it. So the goal post keeps moving.

– Daniel R Hicks
4 hours ago

|
show 2 more comments

Dr. Leana Wen, president of Planned Parenthood, has repeatedly said that thousands of women died every year as a result of abortions prior to Roe v. Wade:

We face a real situation where Roe could be overturned. And we know what will happen, which is that women will die. Thousands of women died every year pre-Roe.

_{Interview with WFAA, March 6, 2019}

Before Roe v. Wade, thousands of women died every year — and because of extreme attacks on safe, legal abortion care, this could happen again right here in America.

_{Tweet from personal account, April 24, 2019}

We’re not going to go back in time to a time before Roe when thousands of women died every year because they didn’t have access to essential health care.

_{Interview Morning Joe, May 22, 2019}

I presume that she is speaking specifically about:

American women, since Roe v. Wade was decided by the US Supreme Court, which only has jurisdiction in that country

Illegal (and likely unsafe) abortions, since the effect of Roe v. Wade was to overturn laws making abortions illegal

Is her claim true? Did thousands of women die every year due to illegal abortions before Roe v. Wade?

edited 5 hours ago

Andrew Grimm

22.1k28108303

asked 9 hours ago

Thunderforge

343216

Dr. Leana Wen, president of Planned Parenthood, has repeatedly said that thousands of women died every year as a result of abortions prior to Roe v. Wade:

We face a real situation where Roe could be overturned. And we know what will happen, which is that women will die. Thousands of women died every year pre-Roe.

_{Interview with WFAA, March 6, 2019}

Before Roe v. Wade, thousands of women died every year — and because of extreme attacks on safe, legal abortion care, this could happen again right here in America.

_{Tweet from personal account, April 24, 2019}

We’re not going to go back in time to a time before Roe when thousands of women died every year because they didn’t have access to essential health care.

_{Interview Morning Joe, May 22, 2019}

I presume that she is speaking specifically about:

American women, since Roe v. Wade was decided by the US Supreme Court, which only has jurisdiction in that country

Illegal (and likely unsafe) abortions, since the effect of Roe v. Wade was to overturn laws making abortions illegal

Is her claim true? Did thousands of women die every year due to illegal abortions before Roe v. Wade?

united-states history abortion

edited 5 hours ago

Andrew Grimm

22.1k28108303

asked 9 hours ago

Thunderforge

343216

edited 5 hours ago

Andrew Grimm

22.1k28108303

asked 9 hours ago

Thunderforge

343216

edited 5 hours ago

Andrew Grimm

22.1k28108303

edited 5 hours ago

Andrew Grimm

22.1k28108303

edited 5 hours ago

Andrew Grimm

22.1k28108303

asked 9 hours ago

Thunderforge

343216

asked 9 hours ago

Thunderforge

343216

asked 9 hours ago

Thunderforge

343216

Could be a classic example of legal-ese, though I'd hope an advocate would not be that cynically underhanded. Note that in none of her quotes is the completion of what was implied - "from abortions." Thousands of women die every year. Period. Women dying from not having access to essential health care is only very partially connected to illegal vs legalized abortions.

– PoloHoleSet
6 hours ago

1

Death is only part of the consequences. I'm sure there are large amounts of medical issues that can result from improper abortions that do not necessarily result in death. Not relevant to the truth of the claim here, but certainly worth considering nonetheless.

– cpcodes
6 hours ago

It needs to be noted that the accessibility of abortions varied widely prior to Roe V Wade. While they were nominally prohibited in most jurisdictions, this was often loosely enforced and the exception for "therapeutic" abortions was often stretched considerably. Plus, depending on the methodology used, the counting of abortion deaths likely has varied widely.

– Daniel R Hicks
5 hours ago

@DanielRHicks Your point about the differing methods of counting abortion-related deaths potentially resulting in under- or over-reporting is worth noting, but I'm not sure I understand what the accessibility of abortions has to do with the claim of "thousands" dying each year.

– Thunderforge
5 hours ago

@Thunderforge - I'm not going to try to find documentation for it, but I have read credible reports in the past (mostly prior to about 1970) that abortion (of at least a semi-legal nature) was, around that time, readily available in some areas (at least to those of sufficient means). And other claims that abortion was essentially unrestricted (at least in many jurisdictions) prior to maybe 1920, when major religious switched from condoning it to opposing it. So the goal post keeps moving.

– Daniel R Hicks
4 hours ago

|
show 2 more comments

Could be a classic example of legal-ese, though I'd hope an advocate would not be that cynically underhanded. Note that in none of her quotes is the completion of what was implied - "from abortions." Thousands of women die every year. Period. Women dying from not having access to essential health care is only very partially connected to illegal vs legalized abortions.

– PoloHoleSet
6 hours ago

1

Death is only part of the consequences. I'm sure there are large amounts of medical issues that can result from improper abortions that do not necessarily result in death. Not relevant to the truth of the claim here, but certainly worth considering nonetheless.

– cpcodes
6 hours ago

It needs to be noted that the accessibility of abortions varied widely prior to Roe V Wade. While they were nominally prohibited in most jurisdictions, this was often loosely enforced and the exception for "therapeutic" abortions was often stretched considerably. Plus, depending on the methodology used, the counting of abortion deaths likely has varied widely.

– Daniel R Hicks
5 hours ago

@DanielRHicks Your point about the differing methods of counting abortion-related deaths potentially resulting in under- or over-reporting is worth noting, but I'm not sure I understand what the accessibility of abortions has to do with the claim of "thousands" dying each year.

– Thunderforge
5 hours ago

@Thunderforge - I'm not going to try to find documentation for it, but I have read credible reports in the past (mostly prior to about 1970) that abortion (of at least a semi-legal nature) was, around that time, readily available in some areas (at least to those of sufficient means). And other claims that abortion was essentially unrestricted (at least in many jurisdictions) prior to maybe 1920, when major religious switched from condoning it to opposing it. So the goal post keeps moving.

– Daniel R Hicks
4 hours ago

Could be a classic example of legal-ese, though I'd hope an advocate would not be that cynically underhanded. Note that in none of her quotes is the completion of what was implied - "from abortions." Thousands of women die every year. Period. Women dying from not having access to essential health care is only very partially connected to illegal vs legalized abortions.

– PoloHoleSet
6 hours ago

Death is only part of the consequences. I'm sure there are large amounts of medical issues that can result from improper abortions that do not necessarily result in death. Not relevant to the truth of the claim here, but certainly worth considering nonetheless.

– cpcodes
6 hours ago

It needs to be noted that the accessibility of abortions varied widely prior to Roe V Wade. While they were nominally prohibited in most jurisdictions, this was often loosely enforced and the exception for "therapeutic" abortions was often stretched considerably. Plus, depending on the methodology used, the counting of abortion deaths likely has varied widely.

– Daniel R Hicks
5 hours ago

@DanielRHicks Your point about the differing methods of counting abortion-related deaths potentially resulting in under- or over-reporting is worth noting, but I'm not sure I understand what the accessibility of abortions has to do with the claim of "thousands" dying each year.

– Thunderforge
5 hours ago

@Thunderforge - I'm not going to try to find documentation for it, but I have read credible reports in the past (mostly prior to about 1970) that abortion (of at least a semi-legal nature) was, around that time, readily available in some areas (at least to those of sufficient means). And other claims that abortion was essentially unrestricted (at least in many jurisdictions) prior to maybe 1920, when major religious switched from condoning it to opposing it. So the goal post keeps moving.

– Daniel R Hicks
4 hours ago

|
show 2 more comments

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

When? If you go back far enough, the answer is pretty clearly yes...

The data collected by Tietze showed 2,677 deaths from abortion in 1933...

...and then maybe...

...compared with 888 in 1945, with much of the decline in septic cases associated with illegal abortions. (The numbers also include deaths from "therapeutic abortions," permitted by law, and "spontaneous abortions.")

...and then no, not even close:

The CDC began collecting data on abortion mortality in 1972, the year before Roe was decided. In 1972, the number of deaths in the United States from legal abortions was 24 and from illegal abortions 39, according to the CDC.

This quote is from the article How many women died in abortions before Roe v. Wade? by the Washington Post, originally published as a longer article here. Tietze's data is from the Bureau of
the Census and can be found in his paper Abortion as a Cause of Death (1948) and the 1972 CDC stats are explained on their website.

edited 8 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

Laurel

13.1k65362

So to clarify: even as early as 1945, a statement that there were "thousands" of deaths would be an exaggeration, given that it was around 900?

– Thunderforge
8 hours ago

3

@Thunderforge There’s almost certainly underreporting in those numbers. I’m not sure what a good estimate would be though

– Laurel
8 hours ago

1

The statistics often seem to lack a clear definition of "abortion". "Spontaneous abortions" (miscarriages) may or may not be included.

– Daniel R Hicks
4 hours ago

add a comment |

This article covers the history, including representative statistics. This paper provides some more statistics. The key quotation is:

In 1940 there were 1407 abortion-related deaths (excluding spontaneous abortions). By 1966 there were 160 abortion-related deaths, an 89% decline that took place before any state had passed less restrictive abortion laws.

The introduction of antibiotics made a massive difference to the death rate for both abortion and giving birth; before then infection was the biggest risk for both.

Widespread availability of contraception meant fewer unwanted pregnancies, and hence probably less abortion. However estimates of the general rate of illegal abortion are very difficult to make.

Doctors may have been more willing to perform illegal abortions in the 1960s, making the procedure safer.

Hence the death toll from illegal abortions after a ban today would more likely be a 100 - 200 per year rather than thousands.

edited 8 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

Paul Johnson

8,17253449

Wouldn't antibiotics and contraception being even more widely available today than in 1966 suggest that there would be even fewer abortion-related deaths after a ban today? Based on what you've described, 100-200 per year sounds high to me.

– Thunderforge
8 hours ago

1

@Thunderforge Possibly. OTOH antibiotic resistance is an increasing problem. There are a lot of factors, including pregnacy tests leading to earlier termination and the availability of safe abortificants from abroad. I'm just quoting the articles I found rather than speculating.

– Paul Johnson
8 hours ago

Also of note, most (all?) anti-biotics require a prescription. Getting a prescription requires going to a doctor, who, if you failed to tell them that you had an abortion performed, would determine that one was performed during an examination, and if the law required the doctor to then report illegal abortions, few people would be able to obtain anti-biotics, and hence the numbers would likely be more on par to the earlier numbers from prior to the widespread availability of anti-biotics. Or would doctor-patient privilege allow doctors to treat illegal abortions without reporting them?

– cpcodes
6 hours ago

@cpcodes "few people would be able to obtain anti-biotics, and hence the numbers would likely be more on par to the earlier numbers from prior to the widespread availability of anti-biotics". If this were the case, wouldn't it also be the case in 1966 (before any state legalized abortion)? As far as I know, antibiotics were available then and still required a prescription, so that seems like something that would be unchanged if abortion bans were implemented today.

– Thunderforge
5 hours ago

@Thunderforge it depends on how exactly the law gets implemented compared to before 1966. If they go full El Salvador, and call the police to arrest you as soon as it even looks like you've had a miscarriage, it would probably be worse. If doctors wrote prescriptions and didn't tell a soul, it'd probably be better.

– mbrig
1 hour ago

add a comment |

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

When? If you go back far enough, the answer is pretty clearly yes...

The data collected by Tietze showed 2,677 deaths from abortion in 1933...

...and then maybe...

...compared with 888 in 1945, with much of the decline in septic cases associated with illegal abortions. (The numbers also include deaths from "therapeutic abortions," permitted by law, and "spontaneous abortions.")

...and then no, not even close:

The CDC began collecting data on abortion mortality in 1972, the year before Roe was decided. In 1972, the number of deaths in the United States from legal abortions was 24 and from illegal abortions 39, according to the CDC.

edited 8 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

Laurel

13.1k65362

So to clarify: even as early as 1945, a statement that there were "thousands" of deaths would be an exaggeration, given that it was around 900?

– Thunderforge
8 hours ago

3

@Thunderforge There’s almost certainly underreporting in those numbers. I’m not sure what a good estimate would be though

– Laurel
8 hours ago

1

The statistics often seem to lack a clear definition of "abortion". "Spontaneous abortions" (miscarriages) may or may not be included.

– Daniel R Hicks
4 hours ago

add a comment |

When? If you go back far enough, the answer is pretty clearly yes...

The data collected by Tietze showed 2,677 deaths from abortion in 1933...

...and then maybe...

...compared with 888 in 1945, with much of the decline in septic cases associated with illegal abortions. (The numbers also include deaths from "therapeutic abortions," permitted by law, and "spontaneous abortions.")

...and then no, not even close:

The CDC began collecting data on abortion mortality in 1972, the year before Roe was decided. In 1972, the number of deaths in the United States from legal abortions was 24 and from illegal abortions 39, according to the CDC.

edited 8 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

Laurel

13.1k65362

So to clarify: even as early as 1945, a statement that there were "thousands" of deaths would be an exaggeration, given that it was around 900?

– Thunderforge
8 hours ago

3

@Thunderforge There’s almost certainly underreporting in those numbers. I’m not sure what a good estimate would be though

– Laurel
8 hours ago

1

The statistics often seem to lack a clear definition of "abortion". "Spontaneous abortions" (miscarriages) may or may not be included.

– Daniel R Hicks
4 hours ago

add a comment |

When? If you go back far enough, the answer is pretty clearly yes...

The data collected by Tietze showed 2,677 deaths from abortion in 1933...

...and then maybe...

...compared with 888 in 1945, with much of the decline in septic cases associated with illegal abortions. (The numbers also include deaths from "therapeutic abortions," permitted by law, and "spontaneous abortions.")

...and then no, not even close:

The CDC began collecting data on abortion mortality in 1972, the year before Roe was decided. In 1972, the number of deaths in the United States from legal abortions was 24 and from illegal abortions 39, according to the CDC.

edited 8 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

Laurel

13.1k65362

When? If you go back far enough, the answer is pretty clearly yes...

The data collected by Tietze showed 2,677 deaths from abortion in 1933...

...and then maybe...

...compared with 888 in 1945, with much of the decline in septic cases associated with illegal abortions. (The numbers also include deaths from "therapeutic abortions," permitted by law, and "spontaneous abortions.")

...and then no, not even close:

The CDC began collecting data on abortion mortality in 1972, the year before Roe was decided. In 1972, the number of deaths in the United States from legal abortions was 24 and from illegal abortions 39, according to the CDC.

edited 8 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

Laurel

13.1k65362

edited 8 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

Laurel

13.1k65362

answered 8 hours ago

Laurel

13.1k65362

answered 8 hours ago

Laurel

13.1k65362

So to clarify: even as early as 1945, a statement that there were "thousands" of deaths would be an exaggeration, given that it was around 900?

– Thunderforge
8 hours ago

3

@Thunderforge There’s almost certainly underreporting in those numbers. I’m not sure what a good estimate would be though

– Laurel
8 hours ago

1

The statistics often seem to lack a clear definition of "abortion". "Spontaneous abortions" (miscarriages) may or may not be included.

– Daniel R Hicks
4 hours ago

add a comment |

So to clarify: even as early as 1945, a statement that there were "thousands" of deaths would be an exaggeration, given that it was around 900?

– Thunderforge
8 hours ago

3

@Thunderforge There’s almost certainly underreporting in those numbers. I’m not sure what a good estimate would be though

– Laurel
8 hours ago

1

The statistics often seem to lack a clear definition of "abortion". "Spontaneous abortions" (miscarriages) may or may not be included.

– Daniel R Hicks
4 hours ago

So to clarify: even as early as 1945, a statement that there were "thousands" of deaths would be an exaggeration, given that it was around 900?

– Thunderforge
8 hours ago

@Thunderforge There’s almost certainly underreporting in those numbers. I’m not sure what a good estimate would be though

– Laurel
8 hours ago

The statistics often seem to lack a clear definition of "abortion". "Spontaneous abortions" (miscarriages) may or may not be included.

– Daniel R Hicks
4 hours ago

add a comment |

This article covers the history, including representative statistics. This paper provides some more statistics. The key quotation is:

In 1940 there were 1407 abortion-related deaths (excluding spontaneous abortions). By 1966 there were 160 abortion-related deaths, an 89% decline that took place before any state had passed less restrictive abortion laws.

The introduction of antibiotics made a massive difference to the death rate for both abortion and giving birth; before then infection was the biggest risk for both.

Widespread availability of contraception meant fewer unwanted pregnancies, and hence probably less abortion. However estimates of the general rate of illegal abortion are very difficult to make.

Doctors may have been more willing to perform illegal abortions in the 1960s, making the procedure safer.

Hence the death toll from illegal abortions after a ban today would more likely be a 100 - 200 per year rather than thousands.

edited 8 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

Paul Johnson

8,17253449

Wouldn't antibiotics and contraception being even more widely available today than in 1966 suggest that there would be even fewer abortion-related deaths after a ban today? Based on what you've described, 100-200 per year sounds high to me.

– Thunderforge
8 hours ago

1

@Thunderforge Possibly. OTOH antibiotic resistance is an increasing problem. There are a lot of factors, including pregnacy tests leading to earlier termination and the availability of safe abortificants from abroad. I'm just quoting the articles I found rather than speculating.

– Paul Johnson
8 hours ago

Also of note, most (all?) anti-biotics require a prescription. Getting a prescription requires going to a doctor, who, if you failed to tell them that you had an abortion performed, would determine that one was performed during an examination, and if the law required the doctor to then report illegal abortions, few people would be able to obtain anti-biotics, and hence the numbers would likely be more on par to the earlier numbers from prior to the widespread availability of anti-biotics. Or would doctor-patient privilege allow doctors to treat illegal abortions without reporting them?

– cpcodes
6 hours ago

@cpcodes "few people would be able to obtain anti-biotics, and hence the numbers would likely be more on par to the earlier numbers from prior to the widespread availability of anti-biotics". If this were the case, wouldn't it also be the case in 1966 (before any state legalized abortion)? As far as I know, antibiotics were available then and still required a prescription, so that seems like something that would be unchanged if abortion bans were implemented today.

– Thunderforge
5 hours ago

@Thunderforge it depends on how exactly the law gets implemented compared to before 1966. If they go full El Salvador, and call the police to arrest you as soon as it even looks like you've had a miscarriage, it would probably be worse. If doctors wrote prescriptions and didn't tell a soul, it'd probably be better.

– mbrig
1 hour ago

add a comment |

This article covers the history, including representative statistics. This paper provides some more statistics. The key quotation is:

In 1940 there were 1407 abortion-related deaths (excluding spontaneous abortions). By 1966 there were 160 abortion-related deaths, an 89% decline that took place before any state had passed less restrictive abortion laws.

The introduction of antibiotics made a massive difference to the death rate for both abortion and giving birth; before then infection was the biggest risk for both.

Widespread availability of contraception meant fewer unwanted pregnancies, and hence probably less abortion. However estimates of the general rate of illegal abortion are very difficult to make.

Doctors may have been more willing to perform illegal abortions in the 1960s, making the procedure safer.

Hence the death toll from illegal abortions after a ban today would more likely be a 100 - 200 per year rather than thousands.

edited 8 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

Paul Johnson

8,17253449

Wouldn't antibiotics and contraception being even more widely available today than in 1966 suggest that there would be even fewer abortion-related deaths after a ban today? Based on what you've described, 100-200 per year sounds high to me.

– Thunderforge
8 hours ago

1

@Thunderforge Possibly. OTOH antibiotic resistance is an increasing problem. There are a lot of factors, including pregnacy tests leading to earlier termination and the availability of safe abortificants from abroad. I'm just quoting the articles I found rather than speculating.

– Paul Johnson
8 hours ago

Also of note, most (all?) anti-biotics require a prescription. Getting a prescription requires going to a doctor, who, if you failed to tell them that you had an abortion performed, would determine that one was performed during an examination, and if the law required the doctor to then report illegal abortions, few people would be able to obtain anti-biotics, and hence the numbers would likely be more on par to the earlier numbers from prior to the widespread availability of anti-biotics. Or would doctor-patient privilege allow doctors to treat illegal abortions without reporting them?

– cpcodes
6 hours ago

@cpcodes "few people would be able to obtain anti-biotics, and hence the numbers would likely be more on par to the earlier numbers from prior to the widespread availability of anti-biotics". If this were the case, wouldn't it also be the case in 1966 (before any state legalized abortion)? As far as I know, antibiotics were available then and still required a prescription, so that seems like something that would be unchanged if abortion bans were implemented today.

– Thunderforge
5 hours ago

@Thunderforge it depends on how exactly the law gets implemented compared to before 1966. If they go full El Salvador, and call the police to arrest you as soon as it even looks like you've had a miscarriage, it would probably be worse. If doctors wrote prescriptions and didn't tell a soul, it'd probably be better.

– mbrig
1 hour ago

add a comment |

This article covers the history, including representative statistics. This paper provides some more statistics. The key quotation is:

In 1940 there were 1407 abortion-related deaths (excluding spontaneous abortions). By 1966 there were 160 abortion-related deaths, an 89% decline that took place before any state had passed less restrictive abortion laws.

The introduction of antibiotics made a massive difference to the death rate for both abortion and giving birth; before then infection was the biggest risk for both.

Widespread availability of contraception meant fewer unwanted pregnancies, and hence probably less abortion. However estimates of the general rate of illegal abortion are very difficult to make.

Doctors may have been more willing to perform illegal abortions in the 1960s, making the procedure safer.

Hence the death toll from illegal abortions after a ban today would more likely be a 100 - 200 per year rather than thousands.

edited 8 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

Paul Johnson

8,17253449

This article covers the history, including representative statistics. This paper provides some more statistics. The key quotation is:

In 1940 there were 1407 abortion-related deaths (excluding spontaneous abortions). By 1966 there were 160 abortion-related deaths, an 89% decline that took place before any state had passed less restrictive abortion laws.

The introduction of antibiotics made a massive difference to the death rate for both abortion and giving birth; before then infection was the biggest risk for both.

Widespread availability of contraception meant fewer unwanted pregnancies, and hence probably less abortion. However estimates of the general rate of illegal abortion are very difficult to make.

Doctors may have been more willing to perform illegal abortions in the 1960s, making the procedure safer.

Hence the death toll from illegal abortions after a ban today would more likely be a 100 - 200 per year rather than thousands.

edited 8 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

Paul Johnson

8,17253449

edited 8 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

Paul Johnson

8,17253449

answered 8 hours ago

Paul Johnson

8,17253449

answered 8 hours ago

Paul Johnson

8,17253449

Wouldn't antibiotics and contraception being even more widely available today than in 1966 suggest that there would be even fewer abortion-related deaths after a ban today? Based on what you've described, 100-200 per year sounds high to me.

– Thunderforge
8 hours ago

1

@Thunderforge Possibly. OTOH antibiotic resistance is an increasing problem. There are a lot of factors, including pregnacy tests leading to earlier termination and the availability of safe abortificants from abroad. I'm just quoting the articles I found rather than speculating.

– Paul Johnson
8 hours ago

Also of note, most (all?) anti-biotics require a prescription. Getting a prescription requires going to a doctor, who, if you failed to tell them that you had an abortion performed, would determine that one was performed during an examination, and if the law required the doctor to then report illegal abortions, few people would be able to obtain anti-biotics, and hence the numbers would likely be more on par to the earlier numbers from prior to the widespread availability of anti-biotics. Or would doctor-patient privilege allow doctors to treat illegal abortions without reporting them?

– cpcodes
6 hours ago

@cpcodes "few people would be able to obtain anti-biotics, and hence the numbers would likely be more on par to the earlier numbers from prior to the widespread availability of anti-biotics". If this were the case, wouldn't it also be the case in 1966 (before any state legalized abortion)? As far as I know, antibiotics were available then and still required a prescription, so that seems like something that would be unchanged if abortion bans were implemented today.

– Thunderforge
5 hours ago

@Thunderforge it depends on how exactly the law gets implemented compared to before 1966. If they go full El Salvador, and call the police to arrest you as soon as it even looks like you've had a miscarriage, it would probably be worse. If doctors wrote prescriptions and didn't tell a soul, it'd probably be better.

– mbrig
1 hour ago

add a comment |

Wouldn't antibiotics and contraception being even more widely available today than in 1966 suggest that there would be even fewer abortion-related deaths after a ban today? Based on what you've described, 100-200 per year sounds high to me.

– Thunderforge
8 hours ago

1

@Thunderforge Possibly. OTOH antibiotic resistance is an increasing problem. There are a lot of factors, including pregnacy tests leading to earlier termination and the availability of safe abortificants from abroad. I'm just quoting the articles I found rather than speculating.

– Paul Johnson
8 hours ago

Also of note, most (all?) anti-biotics require a prescription. Getting a prescription requires going to a doctor, who, if you failed to tell them that you had an abortion performed, would determine that one was performed during an examination, and if the law required the doctor to then report illegal abortions, few people would be able to obtain anti-biotics, and hence the numbers would likely be more on par to the earlier numbers from prior to the widespread availability of anti-biotics. Or would doctor-patient privilege allow doctors to treat illegal abortions without reporting them?

– cpcodes
6 hours ago

@cpcodes "few people would be able to obtain anti-biotics, and hence the numbers would likely be more on par to the earlier numbers from prior to the widespread availability of anti-biotics". If this were the case, wouldn't it also be the case in 1966 (before any state legalized abortion)? As far as I know, antibiotics were available then and still required a prescription, so that seems like something that would be unchanged if abortion bans were implemented today.

– Thunderforge
5 hours ago

@Thunderforge it depends on how exactly the law gets implemented compared to before 1966. If they go full El Salvador, and call the police to arrest you as soon as it even looks like you've had a miscarriage, it would probably be worse. If doctors wrote prescriptions and didn't tell a soul, it'd probably be better.

– mbrig
1 hour ago

Wouldn't antibiotics and contraception being even more widely available today than in 1966 suggest that there would be even fewer abortion-related deaths after a ban today? Based on what you've described, 100-200 per year sounds high to me.

– Thunderforge
8 hours ago

@Thunderforge Possibly. OTOH antibiotic resistance is an increasing problem. There are a lot of factors, including pregnacy tests leading to earlier termination and the availability of safe abortificants from abroad. I'm just quoting the articles I found rather than speculating.

– Paul Johnson
8 hours ago

Also of note, most (all?) anti-biotics require a prescription. Getting a prescription requires going to a doctor, who, if you failed to tell them that you had an abortion performed, would determine that one was performed during an examination, and if the law required the doctor to then report illegal abortions, few people would be able to obtain anti-biotics, and hence the numbers would likely be more on par to the earlier numbers from prior to the widespread availability of anti-biotics. Or would doctor-patient privilege allow doctors to treat illegal abortions without reporting them?

– cpcodes
6 hours ago

@cpcodes "few people would be able to obtain anti-biotics, and hence the numbers would likely be more on par to the earlier numbers from prior to the widespread availability of anti-biotics". If this were the case, wouldn't it also be the case in 1966 (before any state legalized abortion)? As far as I know, antibiotics were available then and still required a prescription, so that seems like something that would be unchanged if abortion bans were implemented today.

– Thunderforge
5 hours ago

@Thunderforge it depends on how exactly the law gets implemented compared to before 1966. If they go full El Salvador, and call the police to arrest you as soon as it even looks like you've had a miscarriage, it would probably be worse. If doctors wrote prescriptions and didn't tell a soul, it'd probably be better.

– mbrig
1 hour ago

add a comment |

This page is only for reference, If you need detailed information, please check here

搜尋此網誌

Mdthbs