A absolutely excellent balanced article that was a relief to read.

My feeling that the original article by Tsitas was in a way mirroring what the anti-abortion lobby was doing, that is trying to claim ownership of women's feelings and using them for the purpose of pushing your own world view. Tsitas to me seemed to be saying that there is a correct way to react to such a situtation and anyone who didn't react in the approved way was a fault. Human beings of course respond emotionally in a wide range of ways to events in their life and there is no one correct way of feeling.

I can imagine that a woman who experienced grief after an abortion and who reached out to say she was experiencing these feelings and was more or less told 'to get over it', that she was at fault for feeling this way might be more at risk of slipping into a real depression. Having her grief acknowleged and sympathy given I think would help her come to terms more with it.

So if women are told that they may have a adverse pyschological reaction to their abortion and then they experience it, are maybe better placed to seek help for it. At the same time women considering abortion should be told that the great number of women do not experience any impact what's so-ever and that would insulate them from people who are telling them that they should be exhibiting some form of emotional distress. It may be that even women who thought that they were at risk of grieving after an abortion would still proceed as that was the best choice in their situtation. They would just be aware of this possibility and be prepared to accept that too.

The author spent most of the article denying that abortion can be traumatic. She only added "the pro-choice feminist movement has to work to provide a space for all women to share their stories of abortion, and not to disregard those we think give a platform to the anti-choice lobby." right at the very end, as an afterthought. No-one is claiming that all abortions create psychological damage, only that some do. Some people are so worried about women's freedom of choice that they will not discuss the consequences of those choices.

Excellent informative article, and a very appropriate response to the Tsitas piece, thank you for this.

Only one comment - the pro choice goal to work towards a situation in which no woman regrets her choice - that might be unrealistic, regret can be normal, for all kinds of reasons. Maybe helping a woman through and past that regret to acceptance of herself and her decision?

Briar:” Only one comment - the pro choice goal to work towards a situation in which no woman regrets her choice - that might be unrealistic, regret can be normal, for all kinds of reasons. Maybe helping a woman through and past that regret to acceptance of herself and her decision?”

Unless the decision was wrong then they have to accept that and live with it like a grown up. Is living with a regret something to be protected from? But I don’t think it is something others should use as a weapon either.

Why would pro-choice people want no women to regret their choice? It seems perfectly natural that some might at some point afterwards.

There is a deep philosophical dilemma here which has to be resolved with intellectual honesty before real progress can be made in assisting women who are hurting after an abortion.

We have to ascertain the nature of what is being removed from a woman's body when she is subjected to an abortion procedure.

This article uses the terms "abortion" and "termination" some 38 times without once naming what is aborted or terminated.

Is it as some say "just a bunch of cells" over which a woman has ownership and disposal rights?

The closest this article comes to an answer on this is that "a serious maternal or fetal health problem" is aborted or terminated.

But is that what is being aborted or terminated--"a problem"? A piece of problematical rubbish, 'a parasitical growth’ to be removed and incinerated? Is that all that is being aborted or terminated?

Or is it a tiny human being, the young of the human species, a human child already conceived, already alive and growing, being protected and nurtured in his/her mother's womb?

Medical science confirms the real presence of a small genetically unique human being. From first knowledge of the pregnancy, we can identify the child's father, and whether the child is a son or a daughter.

If the science is right about this lively little presence in the mother's womb, then the grief of mothers after aborting or terminating is both genuine and understandable.

Authentic medical procedures do no intentionally lethal harm to either patient, the mother or her unborn child.

Lethal violence against these tiniest and most defenceless of all children is never 'necessary'. All violence against children is preventable.

Before as well as after birth, children should never receive less protection than adults.

Their mothers' personal and social needs can and should be met by non-violent means.

Jewely, I just meant that sometimes people can get stuck in regret (or any other emotion) and it can be hard to move on if that happens. Just because we regret something doesn't mean we have to live with that regret forever, we can learn to let it go and move on, like, as you say, grown ups.

Thank-you Kate for a well written, balanced and compassionate article. The studies you quote are consistent with my own observations over a 12 year career in the Health System and a lifetime among diverse peoples.

Abortion isn't an ideological decision no matter how much feminists and religious people want to co-opt/stain/judge individual women's private choices.

Piss off and let them all be.

Kate writes

'The answer is terrifyingly simple: abortion is still heavily stigmatised in most areas of Australian society'

No immorality is promoted and then people are taught not to take responsibility for their actions. The real lack of compassion is not to the woman agreeing to the killing of the unborn but to the unborn child itself. The only reason the adoption list is so long in this country results from us killing our own and then wanting to bring them from overseas. As usual the tears are directed in the wrong direction.

runner, Monday, 11 April 2011 1:23:30 PM

There is, or was, no child to need compassion.

The 'adoption list" and abortion are separate issues. Women are not factories for the likes of you.

Ah gotchya Briar. I guess I see regret as something negative, permanent, manageable. I get you mean that some people might need help moving past them. Happy to agree.

Rita, nice spiel.

“Lethal violence against these tiniest and most defenceless of all children is never 'necessary'. All violence against children is preventable.”

No it isn’t and we’ve never prevented it.

“ Or is it a tiny human being, the young of the human species, a human child already conceived, already alive and growing, being protected and nurtured in his/her mother's womb?”

I’m shocked you didn’t work in fluffy ducks and cute little kittens somewhere there.

This article concerned me - words used clearly begged some important questions.

Why use the term anti-choice when talking about people who are unambiguously pro-life?

Those who see a troubled pregnancy to its end have many choices - raising the child or adoption being but two.

Those who carry a child to term avoid the negative psychological burdens that afflict many who have abortions.

Why not call the so-called pro-choice people for what they are - clearly they are anti-life.

A pro-choice perspective calls for only one choice, and that is the conduct of a medical procedure that is only fatal.

So much for a medical requirement that calls on a doctor to "first, do no harm".

"anti-choice when talking about people who are unambiguously pro-life"

I'm not so sure that it is unambiguously pro-life. I know that not all those who oppose access to abortion are the same but there are enough (particularly from religious fundy backgrounds) who are pro-military action and pro-death penalty to make the concept of pro-life as a description somewhat less than unambiguous.

At the extreme's it's spin from both sides.

The term pro-abortion is probably even more misleading. Many of those who accept a woman's right to choice on the matter don't like abortion, most would rather see less abortions but the term pro-abortion is still used by some.

I don't like abortion, I'd not ever want to be in the position of needing to make such a choice.

R0bert

Yes indeed Robert, I too hate the term pro-abortion.

I doubt I would ever have an abortion, but I would never force a woman to carry on with a pregnancy if she really doesn't want to.

Sure, some women might regret having had abortions, and some women who have had abortions couldn't care less.

The main point in this debate is that it is LEGAL in Australia for women to have abortions, so the pro-life people can rant and rave about the depravity of it all, and the false protestations of caring about how women 'feel' post abortions, but their cause is already lost.

Pro-choice, where abortions are concerned, is here to stay.
As it should be in any modern society.

Suzi writes

'Pro-choice, where abortions are concerned, is here to stay.
As it should be in any modern society.

She should of written

,Pro-choice, where abortions are concerned, is here to stay.
As it should be in any barbaric society.

Runner thinks, that 7 billion people. is not a problem.....lol....Oh thats right! His God is coming to pick him up..LOL...you can join OUG as well:)...with respect:)

Its action.....we need!.......Not faith!

Like I said......If this planet dies.....guess what?

Its all over!.....

LEAP

Runner <",Pro-choice, where abortions are concerned, is here to stay.
As it should be in any barbaric society."

Well Runner, abortions have been happening in all countries since the beginning of records at least, so the whole world is 'barbaric'.

Then again, it is only a choice.
If you or yours don't want to be involved in abortion, then don't.
Just leave others to their own legal choices, and butt out.

Really suzonline - you just cannot tell those who seek to support the right to life of a human being at its most vulnerable and defenceless that they should butt out.

Abortion is a social or societal concern. Those who seek to end the scourge of abortion are properly concerned with the impact that this violent action has on all members of the community.

Maybe there is a little of the anti-smoking campaign here: smoking is legal/lawful yet there is a massive campaign to reduce the numbers smoking precisely because smoking harms people.

Abortion fatally harms people. And abortion frequently sends the mothers who have them into psychiatric care for depression, alcoholism and abuse of tranquillizers.

Every person who supports abortion - including those rare cases where conception has occurred after rape - supports the killing (termination) of an innocent human.

I laugh at those who say they are pro-life because they are against the death penalty. Better to be pro-life against the death penalty AND against abortion.

MJS2122,

That's all a bit silly really. The whole debate is mute as it relies on the definition of when there is a human, or a potential human.

In the end, why is abortion more upsetting to pro-lifers than contraception? Both are denying life. So contraception is a ok, but when it fails you have a problem rectifying it? Sounds bizarre to me.

If you're pro-life you must be anti-contraception. You actually should also be against sex for anything other than making babies.

Maybe pro-lifers should put their money where their mouth is, and put themselves up as surrogates.

Houellebecq

'Maybe pro-lifers should put their money where their mouth is, and put themselves up as surrogates.'

I would say that many pro deathers should stop promoting immoral behaviour and that would cut the unwanted pregnancy rate drastically. The problem is that many don't want to have their own immoral life curtailed.

MJS2122, just like all anti-abortion people, you conveniently forget the 'life' of the pregnant women.

Before legalised abortion was voted in by the predominantly male politicians of the day, women (and their babies) were dying in significant numbers after trying to abort themselves, or after having unqualified 'backyard abortions'.

Even in the unlikely event that abortions became totally illegal, how would you, and those like you, 'force' women to carry on with a pregnancy they definitely don't want, for whatever reason?

Would you tie them all up in pregnancy homes until they had their babies? Or would you simply turn a blind eye to botched abortions and dead women, just like the 'good old days'?

The women of this nation are not going back to those archaic days, ever.

MJS:“Really suzonline - you just cannot tell those who seek to support the right to life of a human being at its most vulnerable and defenceless that they should butt out.”

She can and she did. Ha!

MJS:“Every person who supports abortion - including those rare cases where conception has occurred after rape - supports the killing (termination) of an innocent human.”

That’d be me, I support it. I’m pro-killing innocent humans in the first trimester. I’d prefer a label with less keystrokes but hey.

Great article. I appreciated that mention has been given to a number of circumstances leading to abortion, with associated possibility for distress. However, I was disappointed that there is just as much possibility for distress when the all-time most prolific aborter of fertilized human cells (or nascent human beings) is God.

Re-run of my comment - complete this time:
Great article. I appreciated that mention has been given to a number of circumstances leading to abortion, with associated possibility for distress. However, I was disappointed that there was no mention that there is just as much possibility for distress when the all-time most prolific aborter of fertilized human cells (or nascent human beings) is God.

Well said Colinsett.

Why do anti-choice people make an issue and such assumptions over post abortion grief and yet remain silent on the feelings of the many women who miscarry?

BTW. I miscarried in my teens and was completely relieved - no regrets, but also miscarried when older and ready for children and did grieve.

Anti-choice people see the issue in black and white terms only and little sincere concern for women or children (just aborted embryos - not the miscarried ones).

This is where the religious Time-warps loose the debate. All mammals comprehend the connection at birth, hence the love attachment. The human females brain-wiring's are made to deal with the lost, and since the emotional attachment of bonding has never taken place, the pro-lifers arguments are found to be in contempt of natures laws.

Remember, religion is a man-made concept, that comes from superstitious paranoid simpletons that quite frankly, didn't know sh!t from clay:)....its still the woman's choice; and if the righteous one,s don't have a problem with raising a child in a world that will never have the room for that potential human to prosper, then that show again......blatant contempt and hypocritical spin, with its all about the love for the child, and its well beings.

REAP

Leap:“and since the emotional attachment of bonding has never taken place, the pro-lifers arguments are found to be in contempt of natures laws.”

Can’t say I have been misfortunate enough to lose a baby by choice or Gods will (nice one Colinsett) but I did get the nesting thing and I believe you do bond with your baby/s before birth.

I still don’t see it as any kind of convincing argument for the pro-life crowd to over balance giving women the right to choose. It’s no small choice after all, in fact it’s one of the biggest decisions I could imagine ever making.

Runner I’m not sure what immoral brush you are painting everyone with but I swear you never used to be this sweepingly condemning, did you? The absence of compassion, understanding and forgiveness of your fellow man is alarming. Please stop sneering at everyone.

Jewely...your wisdom's chime in strong, and how your an asset in any-ones language.

"but I did get the nesting thing and I believe you do bond with your baby/s before birth." Yes I missed that bit:)

Thanks

LEAP

Jewely you write

'Runner I’m not sure what immoral brush you are painting everyone with but I swear you never used to be this sweepingly condemning, did you? The absence of compassion, understanding and forgiveness of your fellow man is alarming. Please stop sneering at everyone.

You seem very blind to the posts. No one is asking forgiveness just trying to justify killing the unborn. Very hard to forgive someone until they come out of denial and stop promoting such abhorrent practices. We are talking about killing human beings not just stealing a little candy.

Runner, stealing candy is illegal, abortion is not.
And what's more, no-one is asking your forgiveness.
You must surely feel humble in your own presence?

Hi Runner, I might be blind, I also might be wrong, they could be wrong and I am blind to it. I’m open to all the possibilities on most subjects. I was more concerned something was going on with you and how angry you seem on most topics lately.

I understand you find abortion abhorrent but it hasn’t just been this thread where you’ve leapt straight to feathering and tarring. It occurred to me maybe something else was at the real core of what was causing these sorts of responses.

I feel sorry for women having to make the abortion decision and don’t pre-judge every situation being the result of some kind of immoral behavior.

Jewely I think he's been like that for a long time.

Personally I suspect it's a cover for some serious secret sin of his own, there is just way too much time spent dwelling on other's immorality or often imagined immorality.

R0bert

Runner's version of god ensures that heaven will be the emptiest place in the universe - Runner's behaviour towards his fellow beings ensures that he won't make it to eternal joy either.

Runner you require a mirror and a good think about how you treat people. I don't know compassionate you are to people in your life, but your behaviour towards the people posting on OLO who merely differ from you is reprehensible.

However, maybe god's work is for Runner to create less christians.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5cXWElb-GE&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atTSwau9fwM&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXzladhscMQ&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10PDdV2r0EM&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STlYN5KCiWg&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JW6PRABq4HM&feature=related

See!, religious people will not, can not, see anything but there programing, and that's a bit of shame really.....but hey! There just might be a GOD:)

Abortion is some the church needs to stick its nose somewhere else............preferably on another planet, but the middle of any sandy-desert will do fine:)....Well! Thats where all the magic happens................doesn't it:)

Runner:) Your just the greatest star on here mate.....We love you...LOL...No really! we do:)

REAP

This one even David.F may or might of seen one in his favour, when we talked about labels. Sorry David, but they do:) This out all...if religion should be aloud at all, is for you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Vaw658Bow8&feature=related

To the rest of you white people/normal people, I think your all gutless, spineless cowards. I think the sound what a sheep makes, is you all-over! Religion is a poison only you can see, and if you don't, there will always be us fighting for you.

Like I will always say, its your world:)

LEAP

Just one more-of a lot:) aborion/abortion....these matters of personal choice.....is just what it is! But the Church will say...with the types that are in-effect not responsible for there mind conditions, that's been told by the biggest......what ever you want to call them....and remember law:)......that after much personal review,...lol...the gods that's all.....are in-fact.....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1czXvHSjDac&feature=related........just what it is:)

Again!.....its your world.

Good luck.....if you need it:)

LEA

Just in-case you,ve missed the point, here is my favorite, and all one needs to be heard:) yes,yes,yes...no more sheep! I for get sometimes, that you can actually can think for yourselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STlYN5KCiWg&feature=related

Dont hurt them.....just ignore them. In time, like all things that once was, fossils will found, or maybe they wont:)

REST IN PEACE!

Religion.

LEA

Lets add some more:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2MkODdVBuU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mM2dC1iWzww&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M114bK4qaiM&feature=related

And my observational seeings of that time of year.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rq96ElgrHQE&feature=related

Not that this has anything do with....."stop!..."having children"....cause
god willing......their futures are looking so bright:)

And even if god said OK, your brain would say other-wise:)

But I hope you all........that's women in general......can see what a world you can...and ONLY you can.....give birth to a child that you love with-doubt, and have a world for it to live in:) But! maybe we should breed coz dic-heads says so.

I don't know:)

Your a woman..........right!

Good luck with your thoughts.

LEAP