This article is yet another attempted debunking of what we know to be high quality, methodologically sound research which serves to inform women of the mental health risk of abortion.
My response to the article has thus far not been approved, so I offer it here:
Thanks for raising the issue of the mental health adverse effects of abortion, regardless of how flawed your own arguments are. If you would like a copy of the actual article from Dr Coleman, I am happy to forward it to you so that you can be better informed.
This study was one of the few that looked at the truest comparison, that being women with unintended pregnancy who continued vs those with unintended pregnancy who aborted. The results have been validated and supported by many researchers, including those who would be considered ideologically in favour of abortion.
Given that there are well accepted risk factors for post abortive mental health problems, publicised by even the most strongly abortion advocating groups, one wonders how risk factors can exist if mental health problems don't.
It astounds me that abortion advocates insist on denying women access to essential information to inform their decision making around abortion. We require people to have information about even the remotest possible adverse effects of any other procedure. We require parental consent for minors for any other procedure. We don't question the need for discussions about alternatives or time to consider options for other procedures, in fact we insist on them.
The assault is the patronising view that if women have too much information they will be upset or feel manipulated. It really is time to have a bit more confidence that women can manage to make their own best decisions WITH access to all the facts and possibilities, and time to consider them. They don't need euphemisms, same day procedures, or protection from information.