From: wdo@TEFS1.acd.com (Bill Overpeck)
Subject: Re: Some useful statistics
Organization: Applied Computing Devices, Inc., Terre Haute IN
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 19:32:41 GMT

In <1992Jul23.003014.180282@cs.cmu.edu> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu 
   (Susan Garvin) writes: >
In article <1992Jul22.185747.3417@acd4.acd.com> wdo@TEFS1.acd.com 
   (Bill Overpeck) writes: ##
In <1992Jul21.152018.67042@cs.cmu.edu> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu 
   (Susan Garvin) writes: >

##The study of psychological aftereffects in members of Women
##Exploited by Abortion (the Reardon study) is not worth refuting
##again.  (Can you say biased sample?)
#
#Despite the bias of the study sample, should the adverse sequelae
#experienced by these women be relegated to insignificance because 
#such women seem to represent a minority?  Do these women deserve
#a hearing or should we simply infer a "pro-lie" political agenda?
>
>I was criticizing the study, Bill.  I should think that that
>was obvious.  

It was - my comments were tangential. 

>The results of the study are often cited as
>an estimate of how many women have psychological problems
>following abortion.

Understood.

##The evidence which supports the safety of legal abortion is
##overwhelming.  Unscrupulous anti-abortion people attempt to
##fabricate evidence to refute it, but these attempts have been
##exposed as frauds over and over again.  
#
#So are you saying that no one ever experiences any emotional trauma
#subsequent to abortion?  Or just that those numbers are so few that
#it's an insufficient reason to restrict the practice?  Even if the
#latter is true, we're still left with some number of women who do
#report serious emotional consequences.  Should anything at all be
#done (prior to the procedure) to preclude the possibility of such 
#reactions?
>
>Well, I was speaking of physical problems here, but since you
>obviously misunderstood, I'll just answer your questions.

Yes, I did misunderstand that part...

>I think that the number of women who suffer emotional trauma
>following an abortion is insufficient to make abortion 
>illegal.  I have said, in this forum, that I believe that
>some women do in fact have emotional problems following
>abortion.  I don't think that alcohol should be illegal
>because a minority of people have serious problems controlling
>their drinking, either.
>
>If you paid your colleagues who work in abortion clinics the
>courtesy of asking them what kind of counseling they offer,
>rather than just assuming the worst, you would know the
>answer to your last question.  

I don't know anyone who works in such a capacity as there 
aren't any clinics in Terre Haute that provide abortion 
services.  And I'm not assuming the worst - you infer too 
much, I'm afraid.

>Clinic counselors make 
>every attempt to discover coercion, which seems to be the
>primary complaint of WEBA members.  Reputable clinics offer
>follow-up counselling after the abortion, and many sponsor
>groups for women who wish to talk about their experience
>with others.  

Do you know whether most clinics employ degreed and licensed 
counselors?  In the recent HBO special, the clinic counselor 
seemed to be a volunteer (which is what we use at CPCs, as well).  
Just curious.

>There's a book called _The Ambivalence of Abortion_ that
>discusses some of the problems that women have from a
>pro-choice point of view.  There's also a new book
>out called _Abortion: A Positive Decision_ that deals
>with the benefits women report from having chosen 
>abortion.  I would recommend them both.

Thanks, I'll check them out.

Bill

Newsgroups: talk.abortion