Hi, I’m Taya and I’m a GreatLife Ambassador! I’m 17, I come from a family of 5, where I’m the youngest, with two older brothers. My family supports me in all that I do, especially the activities in the pro-life movement. I’d say that I’ve always been pro-life, but slowly over time as I understood more about the movement, I became very passionate about being pro-life. About a year ago I watched the movie Unplanned, after which I realized that I couldn’t just believe in the pro-life stance, I had to be active in the movement to help make a difference. Then I got involved by starting a teen pro-life group at my church, and getting more involved recently by becoming a GreatLife Ambassador! Outside of being involved in the pro-life movement, I enjoy photography, playing soccer, and helping with the youth programs at my church.
Hi! I’m Makayla. I’m a 15 yearr old Christian going into the 10th grade. I’ve been prolife for about three years, not only because I’m adopted or a Christian but because I recognize that it is morally wrong to intentionally kill a preborn life. Out of all the other prolife organizations, I chose to apply at GreatLife because they’ve showed their dedication to building a culture of life back to America. They’ve shown to be incredibly hands on in their communities in order to make a difference. And I love that. I truly believe abortion can be abolished in our lifetime.
If you want to become an ambassador alongside these awesome women, follow @greatlife_teens on Instagram, as that is where it will be announced if we are ever looking for new ambassadors!
“I can fulfill any desire because my mom chose life.”
24 July 2021
In 2002, I could have been found dismembered, thrown away—unknown and forgotten. I could have been passed off as a heavy period or a miscarriage. But neither of those things happened. Instead, I am blessed and loved by my friends and adopted family. I can fulfill any desire because my mother chose life.
I was adopted from ZhuZhou in the province of Hunan, China. I personally do not recall anything from my orphanage or the period where I was first bonding with my adopted family. I was about 18 months old at the time. My story is pretty much a mystery as I was left with nothing from my biological mom/family. There was no little note saying goodbye, no baby toy that I might have played with, no one to see who left me behind. I believe I was left at a police station or at some corner where the police found and rescued me.
God blessed me in more ways than one. Not only did He save me from an abortion—as many others would undergo due to China’s one-child/two-child policies—but He also provided me with a wonderful orphanage to provide for my needs. There are so many memoirs and books about how adopted children grow up with attachment struggles due to the harshness or unloving environments which is how my sister grew up. Rather, I had a place that loved and wanted to take care of me. I remember my adopted mom feeling jealous that my caretaker had such a special bond with me.
I was proud (and still am) of being adopted. It made me feel special—I had an aura of mystery around me. I never really thought too much about my biological family. I was never upset that I was adopted as I had read about some children who were. It was simply a part of me. But recently, I have begun to reflect on my adoption more. Sometimes, when I tell people, they feel sorry for me telling me how they find it awful that moms could just abandon their kids. That made me really stop and think. Sure, I sometimes felt sad as I theorized why my mom could have left me. Maybe she had me out of wedlock and simply did not want me. Maybe she wanted me, but the government or family did not. Maybe she lost me by accident. But I rarely dwelt on those thoughts.
Adoption should not be considered or equivalent to abandonment. Instead, adoption should be considered a gift-giving or a blessing from God. All mothers care for their children in some way or another. Even if they did not, adoption simply shows that God rescued that child and mother from the pains of abortion. I never thought of my adoption having a purpose. Now, however, I have been growing in the Pro-Life movement. I realized that my story could help persuade women to choose life and offer their children up for adoption. I know that I and others (who have been adopted) are a beacon to those considering putting their child up for adoption as well as others who are considering adoption. We are a beacon to those who were left in foster care or orphanages. I believe that is my purpose.
Day of Tears Incorporated is a pro-life organization with two goals that, if accomplished, will alter how our country views abortion.
The first of these goals is to make January 22nd, the anniversary of Roe Versus Wade, a day of remembrance titled the Day of Tears. This is in memory of the millions of children whose lives were taken by “doctors” in a “women’s health clinic,” or the ones who were killed through an at-home pill. Day of Tears wishes to make a national day of mourning, similar to how the country has Memorial Day.
The second goal is to have everyone lower their flags to half-staff on January 22. This is so important because it would honor the lives lost to abortion, similar to how we honor lives lost to shootings or the recent coronavirus. Secondly, a visibly lowered flag will spark conversation.
Conversation is essential to keep the pro-life movement moving forward. There are videos done by Live Action (https://www.instagram.com/tv/CRHFTkzr2KE/?utm_medium=copy_link) and Charlie Kirk (https://youtu.be/tEDgpJ8GExM) that show how just talking to someone or showing them what an abortion is can change minds. If someone sees a flag lowered, they will wonder why. Be someone who spreads awareness of this day and encourages people to lower their flags.
Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, and Louisiana have passed the Day of Tears Resolution. If you want to help the pro-life movement in a simple way, write to your state’s congressmen/congresswomen and senators, asking them to work towards a national day of remembrance.
Pro-choice feminism is inhibiting male responsibility.
27 June 2021
The Pro-Choice narrative “My body, my choice” shines the spotlight purely on the woman: the mother. This spotlight matches the new-wave feminism that many who are Pro-Choice appear to embrace. The woman is in control. She has the say. She has the right. Let no man tell her what to do. Yet, at the same time, these Pro-Choice feminists demand men to “do more than the minimum” and “take responsibility for their actions.” This double-sided narrative has done nothing more than allow for men to continue in their wayward acts or prohibit men from wanting to fulfill their responsibilities.
According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, the father figure has changed over the course of time from sole breadwinner of the traditional family to stay-at-home dad and more. And let us be real, the man as a symbol has not always been the most righteous, godly, upstanding image—regarding the treatment of women. We have seen the abusiveness, immorality, and irresponsibility of many fathers that have pervaded society. Nevertheless, the man as a father plays a vital role in the upbringing of children, especially their sons. They serve in the roles of provider, supporter, comforter, role model, etc. A poor father figure often leaves many children to feel lost and neglected which negatively shapes their view on fatherhood affecting future generations. But instead of wanting to break this vicious cycle, the new-wave feminism and Pro-Choice agendas strengthen and continue it.
Johnathon Abbamonte, from Pop.org, cites that “73.8% of women with a history of abortion…experienced at least subtle forms of pressure to terminate their pregnancy.” The National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) further states that “partner related reasons” makes up 31% of why women choose to abort (Understanding Why). If she does not abort, she will most likely account for raising one of the 18.3 million (1 out of 4) children who will be raised without a father (US Census Bureau according to Fatherhood.org). The US Census Bureau continues in their “Survey of Income and Program Participation” to state that out of all the fathers, 7 million (20.2%) will be absent (Two Extremes of Fatherhood).
NCBI, in the same article, also states that 41% of abortions occur due to financial reasons. It can be clearly seen that mother cannot solely rely on herself to provide for her child and herself. Whether society wants to call it stereotypical/sexist or not, the mother looks towards the father to offer aid. While this dependence was meant and is beautiful, sin has allowed for man to look at the woman as vulnerable and weak, easy to coerce. This is obviously not all men, but it does explain the mindset of partners or one-night stands who pressure for abortions. They recognize that the woman relies on them whether because of “love” or for support.
Thus, abortions only allow for these types of men to be able to remove responsibility from themselves and place the “problem” on the mother only. Is this really what a woman wants? Is this truly freedom? Or is this—in modern society ideology—another misogynistic, sexist ploy to oppress the female? Besides the other moral issues surrounding abortion, removing and degrading the role/responsibility of the father and fatherhood has done nothing more than to hurt women, children (boys/men regarding this topic), and society.
Society and feminism complain of the lack of men taking responsibility and action yet mocks and scorns the idea of masculinity. Starting at a young age, males are brought up hearing that they are sexist and misogynistic and unfair to women. Then they hear that they are not doing the “bare minimum” even though a few seconds before they were accused of not allowing a woman to do what a man can do. With abortion, “My body, my choice” (or any abortion argument) sends a message to men that their actions have no consequence. They are free to go around and have no care in the world for what they have done.
But this is clearly immoral and unfair. He does share a role in a woman’s pregnancy. To tell men that they have no voice because they do not have a uterus is simply ignoring the father’s role in creating the child. Yes, women definitely feel the pain and everything that entails pregnancy, but let us remember that without the man, she would never have such a situation. Society needs to stop with its double negative. If it wants to criticize the male population, call them to take responsibility and stop prohibiting men from doing so.
So now what? How can society rectify this? Break the cycle. Break the cycle of boyfriends forcing their girlfriends to have an abortion so they can escape the responsibility of raising their child. Break the cycle of fathers abandoning their families so that their boys will not grow up thinking it is ok to do the same thing. Break the cycle of society destroying the beauty and goodness of the family nucleus and the moral upbringing of children.
Fear that banning abortion will force mothers to undergo unsafe abortions and will increase those death rates is unfounded.
20 June 2021
Recently the news is all about Texas banning abortions as early as six weeks and the Mississippi case that might overturn Roe vs. Wade. These are eventful landmarks in the history of Pro-Life and Abortion in the US. Many of the Pro-Abortion & Choice community are up in arms because they believe these policies will do nothing but make abortions unsafe and hurt more women.
The Texas Heartbeat Act is not new as other states like Georgia have introduced and implemented other similar bills. However, the outcry against such legislation has been increasingly growing during this month. Angry Instagram stories of individuals and groups protesting such a bill saying that their “reproductive rights” are being violated as women do not even know they’re pregnant before 6 weeks. They claim that their basic healthcare is being taken away.
What many do not realize is that abortions have never been safe. Whether these abortions were back alley or in a surgical room of Planned Parenthood, mothers face the possibility of death, lifelong health problems, and mental and spiritual effects. There are many who will deny these things and will proudly exclaim that they felt nothing, have no regret, and are perfectly healthy after receiving an abortion procedure, but that is not the case for many other women. To use the words of Sackin “even one woman’s death from abortion before it was legal is one too many” (Sackin quoted by Washington Post), and I would add that even when abortion is legal, one woman’s death is one too many.
Many Pro-Abortionists, especially those part of Planned Parenthood and NARAL, have frequently admitted that they had exaggerated their figures regarding the number of women dying from unsafe abortions. Dr. Bernard Nathanson is repeatedly used to exemplify this point. He states that:
How many deaths were we talking about when abortion was illegal? In NARAL [the National Abortion Rights Action League], we generally emphasized the frame of the individual case, not the mass statistics, but when we spoke of the latter it was always ‘5,000 to 10,000 deaths a year.’ I confess that I knew the figures were totally false, and I suppose the others did too if they stopped to think of it. But in the ‘morality’ of our revolution, it was a useful figure, widely accepted, so why go out of our way to correct it with honest statistics? The overriding concern was to get the laws eliminated, and anything within reason that had to be done was permissible. (Nathanson quoted by EWTN)
EWTN continues by reporting that Marian Faux makes a similar claim—”An image of tens of thousands of women being maimed or killed each year by illegal abortion was so persuasive a piece of propaganda that the [pro-abortion] movement could be forgiven its failure to double-check the facts.” And finally, the same Washington Post article admits that Sackin’s calculations of “as many as 5,000 annual deaths” did not have any citations to accurately prove that they were correct (Kessler).
Why are these abortion industries lying about their figures? Why not be truthful? The fact is that these people want women to believe that without them, they [the women] would die or be hurt. In their minds, women need abortion industries so that they don’t end up like the 1800s dropping dead from pregnancies. Whether these pregnancies of the past ended in natural childbirth deaths, nasty miscarriages, or harrowing back-alley abortions, women no longer have to fear these things because legalized abortions are so much safer.
I must admit when I considered the whole legalize or not issue, I thought legalized abortions would keep women safer. After a careful examination, I realized I too had fallen into the same promise/lie that the abortion industries wanted women to believe.
1). Illegalizing abortions would actually protect women should they find that Planned Parenthood or any other organization has wronged them. They can sue them for losses. Due to legalized abortions, it is much harder to confront these groups as they do have the backing of the law. Many Pro-abortion doctors and medical professionals would simply shrug off a woman’s complaint saying along the lines of “it’s done and over” or “you chose to go through with it” or “it’s not our problem anymore.” However, with laws partially illegalizing abortions like the Texas Heartbeat Bill or, in the future, those that fully illegalize abortions, mothers or family members can properly sue such agencies and actually stand a chance in court.
2). Legalized abortions are not 100% safe as these organizations claim them to be. Many women suffer from long term affects due to surgeries or the pill. These include feeling nauseous, cramping, abdominal pain or even bleeding, damage to organs, and complications with future births (Foundations of Life). Mayo Clinic even admits that the woman may have vaginal bleeding or the risk of having to have more than one abortion should the first attempt fail.
3). Mary Steichen Calderone quoted by the Washington Post confirms that unsafe abortions are becoming safer due to many women who go to trained physicians “undercover.” The article also mentions that sulfa drugs and penicillin help keep abortions safer. Most of these drugs are already over the counter and are not deemed illegal.
In summary, abortion can be illegalized without severe repercussions for the woman. The fear that illegalizing abortions will force the mothers to undergo unsafe abortions and will increase those death rates is unfounded. Because of the rise of modern medicine that can be purchased over counter, performing an illegal abortion or, at least, one not sanctioned by tax dollars would still be possible and have the same amount of safety as legalized abortions. Abortion should be illegal. Even though abortions would still occur illegally, as both sides know, it would still prevent the murder of millions. Do not be tricked by pro-choicers saying everyone who wanted an abortion would go through with it and do so in a way that would cost the mother’s life as well.
You may have heard the phrase, “I’m personally pro-life, but I don’t want to make that decision for somebody else.” Let’s talk about that stance.
5 June 2021
As we all know, abortion is one of the most controversial human rights issues of our time. We meet many people who are strictly pro-life or pro-choice. But what about the people on the fence? Have you ever talked to someone who is ‘personally pro-life’? You may have heard the phrase, “I’m personally pro-life, but I don’t want to make that decision for somebody else”.
According to a 2015 poll, 39% of the American public don’t pick a side when it comes to abortion. This position is extremely dangerous. Either the pre-born are human people deserving of life, or they’re just a blob of tissue that can be simply removed at the mother’s whim. Science shows that human life begins at conception, and there is no other scientific data that supports the idea that life begins at any other time. In fact, 96% of liberal, pro-choice, and non-religious scientists agree that human life begins at conception.
Even if you are ‘personally against abortion’, to be pro-choice about abortion is to be pro abortion. The only good reason for being ‘personally’ against abortion is that you know that the preborn is a human person, which gives you a moral obligation to preserve his life. This is the only good reason for being against abortion, and it demands that we stand against those who choose to have an abortion for themselves.
There is no ‘even ground’ for this debate. How can we say that someone is free to believe abortion is murder, but should not act as if that is true and stand up to save lives? It’s simple – you are either pro-abortion or anti-abortion. Speak for yourself, but I am against killing innocent people, no matter their age.
A post by Live Action speaks on the personally prolife stance perfectly:
In summary, it is impossible to be ‘personally pro-life’ and not take a stand against abortion.
Early in the first paragraph, the author says, “It has often been said, and never with more truth than at the present time, that man breeds his cattle with more intelligence and care than he breeds his own kind.”
She says a man will put more effort into his cattle than his children. Lack of what she deems as quality humans-ones with high educations, ones from fortunate backgrounds- will continue to surface in this article. A perfect example:
“The draft figures alone should be sufficient to galvanize the human race to action, for the intelligence tests made on our soldiers during the recent war indicated that approximately 25 per cent of our population never attains a mentality superior to that of a twelve-year-old child.”
If this is true, so what? Not every person should be a genius scientist, go to college, or even be good at math. Every person is gifted, some with intelligence in regards to school, others in different ways. Everyone has something to bring to the world. If you do not have a high education, you are still needed. You may be building houses, serving food, stocking shelves, or fixing cars (not that those people cannot be smart;
the point is that their careers are essential trades, and may be highly skilled, but are often done without college education). Margaret Sanger likely relied on these people in her day-to-day life. If she lived in a house, went to the grocery store, or had a car that needed repairs, these workers made her life easier.
“The object of civilization is to obtain the highest and most splendid culture of which humanity is capable. But such attainment is unthinkable if we continue to breed from the present race stock that yields us our largest amount of progeny. Some method must be devised to eliminate the degenerate and the defective;”
She is stating that we need to eliminate the people who do not fit her description of perfect- with no “defects.” What she saw as perfect, as we will look into in another article, is also strictly white.
Less than two paragraphs in, Margaret has devalued humans she sees as imperfect to “the degenerate and the defective.”
“It is impossible to conceive of eugenic legislation that would be acceptable and that would cover the present need.”
The term eugenics is often used when talking about the Holocaust. Hitler and others believed Jews to be a dirty race, less fit than the Aryans. No proof backs eugenicists’ beliefs. The concept of eugenics is this- have the people with desirable traits reproduce, and limit reproduction of those with undesirable traits.
Throughout history, the “undesirable traits” have been race and ethnicity.
“Fortunately, however, birth control offers an avenue of escape…Given Birth Control, the unfit will voluntarily eliminate their kind.”
Since she cannot legally prohibit the reproduction of “undesirables,” she attempts to reach her goal by manipulating the “unfit” into being eliminated.
“It is reasonable to assume that women of subnormal mentality, however lacking they may be in vision and altruism, would prefer to avoid the pain and responsibilities of procreation, if the satisfaction of sex could be divorced from reproduction.”
She wants to take away consequences.
“Birth Control will be an effective force in the solution of the problem of the social evil, and in the control of venereal diseases.”
Her expectations were unrealistic, as almost 100 years later, STDs are still around. She has another unrealistic expectation: that Birth Control will end prostitution. Wouldn’t having prevention of any consequences only strengthen the amount of prostitution?
“With adequate knowledge of Birth Control, these young men would very generally choose marriage instead of prostitution, and the solution of the problem of the social evil might be achieved.”
“Almost any rational person is willing to admit that the earning power of an average husband and the physical health of an average wife are unequal to the demands of an excessively large family, and that earning power and health should be considered in determining the number of children in a family.”
She does make a good point that having many children can place a financial strain on families.
She goes on to say, “Marriage itself is reduced to prostitution when the child is regarded as a necessary justification for sex relations.”
So nearly every marriage before the last century or so was prostitution? Her statement goes against many religious beliefs, so people exercising those beliefs are involved in prostitution?
“The home is the backbone of the state, and upon it depends the whole social structure.”
The previous statement is true, something nice in this paper.
Some other high expectations she has:
“Birth Control means liberation for women and for men. It means freedom and happiness. It means gifts and blessing for the family and the nation.”
“Birth Control will give the husband courage.”
“Husband and wife…will be made permanently happy and successful.”
“Birth Control will thus make of the home a place of peace, harmony, and love.”
“Birth Control will prevent abortion.”
All of these statements could be true in some cases, but not in most. Abortion, at the time, was an illegal thing. Her hypothesis of birth control preventing abortion was inaccurate, especially now with Obama Care completely covering the cost of birth control.
“It will give the woman a chance to develop mother-love, instead of being an irritable drudge, overwhelmed by the demands of too many children, a broken-spirited, harassed slave of excessive motherhood.”
The connotation of this is very negative. She seems to dislike the concept of large families. For some people, a large family would not work, but others want large families. Some women even enjoy mothering many children.
Because Margaret Sanger (a mother of three) does not think she could handle a large family, she assumes every woman with many children is an oppressed baby machine (as China has said about the Ugher
“Birth control will prevent child labor.”
Legislation did that, not birth control.
“Constant exhortations from writers and preachers to the men and women of the better educated classes are being made to urge them to increase their small and carefully controlled families. This is a very definite testimony to the general conviction that in these families are to be found the finest children, the best Americans of the future. Give the women of the poorer classes a chance also to limit and control their families, and it will be found that in very many cases the material is equally good. The difference is that, like plants crowded too close together on poor soil, there is no chance to develop and the whole families are left impoverished in mind and body. Give room for each [to] grow and all may become fine and healthy American citizens.”
Earlier she has said mothers are stressed out with more children, but she is outright saying these more “desirable” people should have more children, and the “less desirable” should have fewer.
While this article of hers may not be as blatantly racist as others, she is definitely classist.
This article is neither for nor against Magart Sanger’s Birth Control, but its purpose is to start showing who the founder of Planned Parenthood was.
Suicidal thoughts, future infertility, life-threatening conditions, and substance abuse.
20 February 2021
While the Pro-Life Movement has drawn attention to abortion being murder, abortion’s effect on women has not been stressed enough. Post-abortive (PA) mothers suffer from depression, suicide, future infertility, addiction, and cancer.
An Italian study revealed that the rate of maternal deaths after abortion is more than twice the rate as those giving birth.
A similar Finnish study reported similar results.
A U.S. study of about 170,000 low income California women showed they had a 154% higher suicide risk than if they had given birth. They had twice the risk of dying in the next two years.
A British study says post-abortive women are 35% more likely to display suicidal behaviors and 21% more likely to commit suicide than non-abortive women. Other studies have decided PA women are 2.6 times more likely to commit suicide.
Post Abortive Syndrome
After giving birth or adopting, mothers have a 10-20% chance of developing postpartum depression. At least 19% of post-abortive women suffer from PAS, or Post Abortion Syndrome. Half of post-abortive women have some, but not all symptoms, which include easy irritation, rage outbursts, trouble sleeping, flashbacks to the abortion, anxiety attacks, and severe grief on the anniversasry of the abortion or child’s due date. They also may experience nightmares and abuse drugs and alcohol.
Danger, Complications, and Future Pregnancies
Abortion is the 5th leading cause of maternal death in the United States, following infection, hemorrhage, pulmonary ebolism, and anesthetic issues. Abortion can lead to ectopic pregnancies.
An ectopic pregnancy occurs when the fertilized egg grows outside of the uterus. This is life-threatening for the mother; if it gets too big it will infringe on other organs. Sadly, the baby cannot be saved. An ectopic pregnancy can cause reduced fertility. The odds of having one of these are increased by medicated abortions more than surgical.
Twenty percent of women experience physical complications after an abortion. Some complications: infection, bleeding, embolism (the blocking of an artery), uterine perforation, cervical damage, and shock. Minor complications include nausea, diarrhea, and bleeding. Studies have proven that these risks are higher with medication.
One fifth of patients who receive medical abortions needed another surgery, as their first was not sufficient.
Having an abortion can lead to fertility problems and miscarriages. Women who got abortions as teens have a 3.3 times greater chance of having a stillborn first child. Their chances of having a premature child are double, and their child will have a 2.7 times greater chance of having a very low birth weight. A miscarriage is 60% more likely to occur. Abortion may cause future labor complications the woman would not have had.
Pelvic Inflammatory Disease, or PID, can lead to ectopic pregnancies. PID can occur when a woman gets an abortion while infected with chlamydia (¼ chances). Five percent of women who get an abortion without being infected will also get PID. It is also life-threatening and reduces fertility.
Abortion can cause endometritis, which causes fevers, pain in the low abdomen, and abnormal bleeding. Endometritis is the number one cause of infection after giving birth.
Two percent of women will have immediate life-threatening complications after an abortion, according to Heartbeat International. Nine instant, major complications are infection, severe blood loss, embolism, damage to the uterus, anesthesia complications, convulsions, hemorrhaging, cervical injury, and endotoxic shock (caused by a drop in blood pressure). Injury to surrounding organs caused by a mistake by the doctor is also a risk.
All these risks are magnified with multiple abortions. This is important because nearly half (45%) of abortions are repeat ones, meaning the woman has already aborted one child prior.
After a D and C, or dilation and curettage, a surgical abortion (D&Cs are not always abortions, but in this article the only dilation and cutterages written of will be in reference to the surgical abortion), women may hemorrhage, get infections, or get uterine damage. D and Cs are the cause of 90% of Asherman’s Syndrome cases, says Cleveland Clinic. Common symptoms of Asherman’s Syndrome are interruptions to or an abnormal menstrual cycle, severe cramping and pain, and an inability to get or stay pregnant.
The Mental Impact
After the loss of a pregnancy, the American Pregnancy Association states that the following are all normal feelings: guilt, anger, shame, remorse, regret, loss of self esteem and confidence, feeling isolated and lonely, sleeping problems, trouble in relationships, and suicidal thoughts.
The British Journal of Psychiatry showed that post-abortive women had an 81% increase in mental health issues. In this study, 163,831 of 877,181 women had an abortion. According to the study, post-abortive women are 27% more likely to use marijuana, 21% more likely to show suicidal behaviors, and 35% more likely to commit suicide.
Post-abortive women exhibit twice the alcoholism, and an increased risk of drinking during the following pregnancies. They are more likely to abuse their future children and get divorced. One study found that drug use is 6.1 times higher in them, and they are 4.5 times more likely to use drugs during their next pregnancy.
Ten to thirty percent will have serious psychological problems. The odds of anxiety issues are 34% higher, and depression is 37% higher. If you have had multiple abortions, the chance of perinatal mortality, or a late miscarriage, are raised by 80%.
Sleep disorders within the first six months after pregnancy are doubled with abortion, compared to a woman who gave birth. The abortive one will have a higher chance for four years, but less than double.
Another study says suicidal thoughts are raised by sixty percent after an abortion.
A 2009 study by the American Association for Cancer Research showed women with abortions had a 40% higher risk of contracting breast cancer. They also have raised chances of cervical, ovarian, and liver cancer.
“Abortion is Safer than Giving Birth?”
A 2012 study by Dr. David Grimes supported the pro-choice, “Abortion is safer than birth,” claim. However, this study cannot be seen as perfect and flawless because the man in charge is partial. He is a retired abortionist and abortion activist, and was affiliated with Planned Parenthood.
The information he relied on was supplied by Planned Parenthood’s Guttmacher Institute.
The Study: Death risk with birth and with abortion.
He used a close to perfect number to represent the deaths in a full-term pregnancy.
He used an inaccurate number of deaths with abortion, as it is not madatory to report those, so he could not have had a near-accurate number.
His study was interpretation of estimates.
Denmark and Finland studies show opposite results.
“Compared to women who delivered, women who had an early or late abortion had significantly higher mortality rates within 1 through 10 years,” NCBI says on the Denmark study.
In conclusion, abortion harms women in addition to the unborn. Suicide, depression, cancer, and bleeding are not empowering.
Howard, Hannah. “New Study: Elevated Suicide Rates Among Mothers after Abortion.” Charlotte Lozier Institute, 10 Sept. 2019, lozierinstitute.org/new-study-elevated-suicide-rates-among-mothers-after-abortion/.