I read an article recently about abortions and was surprised that there are not actual figures, there are only estimates. SA is the only state that apparently keeps any sort of record.

From the article I formed the opinion that there are about 75000 abortions each year in Aus, which seems really high. some estimates were higher and some lower. The article offered no reason for such a figure.

I can accept there are a number required for medical reasons, but surely not that many?

Interestingly, it stated that of the number of unwanted pregnancies, 45% of women said they were on the 'pill'. How so? This means that the pill is only effective 55% of the time. Now I would have thought the pill was far better than that, or is something else the problem?

Are women not taking the pill according to instructions? Is it not convienient? Yet apparently there is longer term 'pill' alternatives, like injections. On top of that I understand there is a 'morning after' pill. Or are modern women too busy or too lazy to take the pill? And there are other types of contraceptives they can have fun in trying.

Anyone got any clues? Are women using abortion instead of contraceptive?

Abortion is big business in Australia. An article I have yet to follow up suggests that taxpayers' money is also involved in aid to these businesses. It is very likely that there is much more to this unpleasant topic than whether or not it is 'right' to get rid of unconvient babies.

I meant 'incovenient' Shades of Mrs Malaprop or the batty sheila on MKR.

Dear Banjo,

Thanks for starting this discussion.

There's so much to learn. I found the
following link quite interesting and it also
gives explanations as to "why are there still
so many abortions when contraception is readily
available," which is worth a read.

cont'd ...

Here's the link:

http://www/childrenbychoice.org.au/factsandfigures/australia-abortion-statistics

cont'd ...

Here's the link again:

http://www.childrenbychoice.org.au/factsandfigures/australia-abortion-statistics

Sorry Banjo I keep making errors and typos.
I'll try again:

http://www.childrenbychoice.org.au/factsandfigures/australian-abortion-statistics

This may be one of the few issues that I and the religious conservatives, have something in common. I oppose 'abortion on demand'. Having said that, I do not want to see a return to the bad old days of backyard abortions being performed, because abortion is illegal. Nor do I believe "a unplanned pregnancy" is a legitimate reason for termination. I do want to see prevention strategies to avoid unwanted pregnancies, but also abortion must be legal, accessible and affordable, when certain circumstances are present, such as the pregnancy endangering the life of the mother, and again it should be the mothers decision with proper medical advice, and no others.

The abortion industry is driven by greed, it seems, and the Australian tax-payer is chipping in about 2.5 billion dollars to help out the greed each year. The industry is “... a multi-billion dollar, tax-payer funded industry supporting the incomes (of) some of the WEALTHIEST MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS AND HEALTH CAR PROVIDERS in Australia.” (Mr. Roland von Marburg, M.B.B.S., FRACS., addressing a conference of Right to Life to Life Australia).

The media image of “humble” and “honest” health providers, motivated only by a woman's right to choose is not quite right, apparently.

There are around 100,000 abortions annually in Australia. Maybe we wouldn't need a ridiculous immigration (legal) of 200,000 if we kept our own children alive. The killing fees billed to Medicare add up to 500 million dollars. Then there is the cost of IVF billed to the taxpayer because there are no babies available for adoption – they have all been bumped off.

The average income of IVF doctors in Australia is 4.5 million dollars! Mr. von Marburg says that he has never met an IVF doctor who “isn't a strong supporter of abortion. Not only do Australian governments use our money to subsidise abortion, they also use us to supply the “most generous IVF in the world”.

Disgraceful!

I wish I drove a Health Car

Foxy,
Thanks for that link but it seems we still have learned little more than what I read in the article recently. Except that my estimate of the number of abortions seems too low, your link says 82000 pa.

I am still looking for reasons, so If you come across any thing please post it. I wonder what the failure rate of the oral contraceptive really is, and why?

Paul, I am not religous and I just do not understand why there is a need for so many abortions when contraception is available. I think to take a pill first thing each morning is a pretty simple task.

//I am still looking for reasons, so If you come across any thing please post it. I wonder what the failure rate of the oral contraceptive really is, and why?//

Wikipedia and the Family Planning NSW website both give a figure of 9% for the failure rate of the COCP, which is pretty high.

Vasectomies, on the other hand, are nearly 100% effective.

Should contraception only be considered the responsibility of women? Or should men take a bit more responsibility for their gametes? It's not like they're innocent of contributing to high abortion rates.

Dear Banjo,

This is taken from the link I gave earlier:

"No contraception is 100% effective and contraception can
fail even when used correctly and consistently. The World
Health Organisation estimates that even if all contraceptive
users used contraception perfectly in every sexual encounter,
there would still be six million unintended pregnancies
every year."

"Studies of Australian and New Zealand women seeking abortion
have shown that over half of women presenting for abortion
had been using contraception prior to becoming pregnant."

"The reality is that we are all human beings and make mistakes
or errors of judgement, and even when used correctly and
consistently all contraception methods can fail. One study
found that almost one in four (23.8%) of 10,173 Australian
men who had used condoms in the previous year reported having
experienced at least one condom breakage."

"Many women may not be in a position to negotiate contraception
use, due to the effects of alcohol, or other drugs, lack of
power in relationship decision-making, religious reasons, or
being forced or coerced into having sex."

"Other barriers to women accessing contraception include lack
of information about options, geographic location (particularly
women living in rural areas) cost, privacy concerns, or
medical practitioners refusing to prescribe due to their personal
beliefs and values."

Absolutely Toni, I could not agree more, men need to be responsible. What is the make up of the 75,000? Which is about the population of Rockhampton. How many are done for medical reasons, and how many for other reasons. There is also the morning after pill. I don't think anyone plans that an abortion will be the cure should they get pregnant, so there must be reasons why women get pregnant, then choose abortion. I am sure they would much prefer not to get pregnant in the first place. No matter how you look at it abortion is not a nice thing, no matter how well it is performed.

Dear Paul,

I can't even begin to imagine how difficult it would
be to make the decision to have an abortion. I think it
would have to be one of the most difficult decisions
any one would have to make. If only it could be
prevented. But obviously it can't be in so many cases.
Tragic all round.

the simple reason their are so many abortions (baby slaughter) is because pathetically week Governments have allowed totally immoral socialist to make it very easy to murder. ttbn sums it up very well. How heartening to see Trump take some action on this vile industry. The main victim (the unborn child) is not considered. Just like the Nazis failed to see Jews as people so the dishonest medical/science profession renamed unborn babies as fetus's as if that really changes who that person is. The vast majority of baby murders are simply convenience. Meanwhile those waiting to adopt kids have had to jump through multiple hoops. How sick and dumb is the world of the socialist/feminist. Thankfully many are now waking up.

It is not reasonable to expect cooperation in the keeping of the uniform statistics necessary for policy review where abortion is still seen as an offence and jurisdictions differ.

It is silly to believe that the unavailability of perfect contraception would solve the apparent problem of 'too many' abortions.

It comes down to which is the greater evil:

-that some women and couples who want children are being forced by circumstances beyond their reasonable control to terminate pregnancies (by for example, employment uncertainties),
or,
-that many, in fact all, women and couples have their fertility choices removed by the State.

The Australian electorate strongly opposes the second proposition. That the State is kept out of it as far out of it as is possible.

For myself, I know a number of women and couples who are putting off children they want and that choice is solely down to financial considerations, employment (continuation) uncertainty and too much tax burden (local, State and federal governments).

What if the policies coming out of Canberra (both sides of government) were indirectly resulting in far higher number of terminations and women and couples of best childbearing/raising ages being forced to delay, with the inevitable fertility problems of late starts?

Not that some politicians might wrinkle their brows in contemplation of that. They are much more concerned about taking advantage of their travel and other entitlements. There are far too many of Dastardly's ilk.

In the above post,
"The Australian electorate strongly opposes the second proposition. That the State is kept out of it as far out of it as is possible"
should be,
"The Australian electorate strongly opposes the second proposition, demanding that the State is kept out of it as far out of it as is possible".

Yeah leoj I suppose we should also consider ' financial reasons' as to whether we let oldies live or the disabled for that matter. What a pathetically lame excuse for taking life.

My,

"It is silly to believe that the unavailability of perfect contraception would solve the apparent problem of 'too many' abortions'

should be,

"It is silly to believe that the AVAILABILITY of perfect contraception would solve the apparent problem of 'too many' abortions."

Sorry, some distractions this morning

Toni,
Thanks for that, I did get the NSW family planning website where there is all sorts of info.

While there seems no definite or major reason for failures of the pill, I will concede the taking the oral pill is not as simple as I assumed and can be quite complicated. There are many reasons why it is not used or not used strictly as it should.

Oh, by the way I understand that a male pill could come out in future which stops the sperms from swimming and cannot get to the egg. But I do not expect that to impact the abortion rate. Many men are slack and unless its use can be linked to renewing the car rego they will 'forget'. Maybe if it worked instantly it would help, but she would have to remind him at dinner and buy the packet when she shopped.

"Many men are slack and unless its use can be linked to renewing the car rego they will 'forget'"

Men are selfish, uncaring and irresponsible? That is not my experience of men of any age.

Another poster suggested vasectomies.

Feminists recommend that men abstain from sex unless they are prepared to accept the burden of an unplanned child. Men 'get' that feminists exclude them from fertility decisions, including termination.

Any wonder that some men decline to respond to surveys and so on regarding contraception. They believe their views are not welcome and will be discounted. How dare a man comment on anything that might affect a woman's body?

The man hate has got to stop.

There is a lot of resistance to collecting and analysing termination numbers. Some of that reluctance is understandable. However with incomplete numbers and substantial gaps no inferences of any worth can be drawn.

What if there has been a big, sustained spike in terminations affecting women (and couples!) in their best child bearing and child raising years, 20-35? What might that say about social policies?

Firstly, in my personal experience with young women and abortions it's not failure of contraception but either laziness or dislike of some side effects of some types that stop women using them.
Some, like the pill and the implant put weight on women. Others they might find annoying or messy. I know some women who have had four or more abortions, simply as a form of birth control.
None if which is an excuse and as many Pregnancies occurr with non permanent partners, condoms should also be used more often , especially in view of the escalating rate of stds.
On the issue of men taking responsibility for pregnancies, as a woman I disagree. As long as women have total control over what happens to that foetus, then they take full responsibility for the pregnancy.
Want men to take some responsibility then give them some rights over their unborn child

At the root of the controversy concerning abortion
seems to be a basic value judgement about the
human status of the fetus. If the fetus is considered
a baby, then abortion is a form of killing; if it
is considered a mere collection of cells and tissue,
then abortion is a morally neutral surgical
procedure.

The status of the fetus is inherently ambiguous; it
is neither self-evidently a human being nor self-evidently
just tissue (for if these matters were self-evident, there
would be little disagreement about abortion).

On the one hand, the fetus is not a human being in the
usual sense, for it is generally not viable. Indeed, no
society treats the fetus as human, for example, if the
mother accidentally miscarries, the fetus is not given a
funeral, but is simply disposed of like any other tissue.
On the other hand, the fetus is not like any other tissue,
such as discarded nail or hair clippings.

The fetus is potentially a human being, one that might
become alive and unique. The conflicting value
judgements about abortion stem from this fundamental
ambiguity in the status of the fetus.

The question is further compounded by a related issue, the
right of a woman to control her own body. Added to that
is the other ambiguity that half the genes in the fetus
were contributed by the father, and although the woman
must bear the child, society may make the father responsible
for the child's support for years thereafter. If the father
waives his responsibilities - by deserting the mother - then
of course he has no further rights in the matter. But if he
accepts his responsibilities and wants the child born,
what are his rights in relation to the mother's right to
control her body?

Of course for those who believe that the fetus is human,
there is a third party present; the mother is controlling
not only her own body, but somebody else's potential
body and life - the baby's.

There are other abortion-related issues that go beyond the
immediate concerns of the parents.

To be continued later.

Foxy,
Wrong! Wrong!
your claim, "On the one hand, the fetus is not a human being in the
usual sense, for it is generally not viable. Indeed, no
society treats the fetus as human, for example, if the
mother accidentally miscarries, the fetus is not given a
funeral, but is simply disposed of like any other tissue.
On the other hand, the fetus is not like any other tissue,
such as discarded nail or hair clippings."

Many funeral homes give services to mothers of naturally aborted fetus.
I have a friend a young mother who has two naturally premature aborted babies buried in a cemetery in Western Sydney. Many funeral homes perform counseling and burial services to assist mothers to grieve the loss

Dear Josephus,

The reference was to the underdeveloped fetus-
in the first stages of pregnancy. I also
have friends who miscarried in later stages
and did have funerals.

If someone wants to argue the pros and cons of abortion then perhaps s/he should start another thread.

This thread attempts to examine why proper statistics are not being kept on terminations (SA is a bit better maybe) and why the number of abortions is apparently so high.

It follows, are there spikes in unexpected groups and if so why?

Stating that the fetus is not human and because of that those questions and the original post are irrelevant is a sneaky way of hijacking the thread and quashing debate. That is a ploy. Lets show some respect for the OP.

Of course the OP poses questions of serious concern that could reflect on the justifications that were put for abortion, mainly that foolish adolescents were the ones getting pregnant and also, that women who were raped should have an abortion.

What if it turns out that:

- it is educated women and working couples of best childbearing age (take that as 20-35) who are the main group and they having abortions in increasing numbers

and

-NOT necessarily because of any limitations of contraception (although a small % might relate to that), but because economic circumstances are increasingly putting children beyond their reach?

A indicator of the above would be that the women and couples who are society's best choice for successful child raising and the best for a child, including safety and education, are putting children off far later than before and into years where pregnancy is more difficult and less likely, where they may require medical intervention or adoption.

leoj,
Thank you for your input.

The big problem here is lack of information. Until such time as the states request hospitals to keep stats we are flying blind on such issues. Computers were supposed to make it easy to gather this sort of information and then we could have rational debate in the best interests of all concerned.

Surely it is not unreasonable to expect hospitals to keep stats on the number of abortions performed and the reasons for the abortions.

I have found the lack of information available to be a factor in looking at the elimination of FGM. Obviously every obtertricion and midwife would observe if the patient giving birth had been subjected to FGM and probably noted that on her medical record, but the fact is not utilized to give a larger picture of the problem.

In the meantime we can only speculate about numbers and reasons.

Leoj, the suggestion that the majority of abortions may well be sought by well educated women is even more horrifying than the thought of young girls wanting them.
Education removes any excuse for unwanted pregnancy. Of course there is the occasional exception but these days most recommended types of contraception are over 90% effective.
For those whose contraception genuinely fails, well, to me, abortion shouldn't be just because a pregnancy is " inconvenient".

Not keeping the data solves a lot of problems, doesn't it?

Big Nana,
I neglected to thank you also for your input, so thank you. Only by keeping data will we find out how extensive it is for some women to use abortion as a means of birth control. It is a worry when some women find having an abortion is more conveinient than contraception. Perhaps more needs to be done to make contraception simpler.

I would strongly support any moves to improve data collection so rational decisions can be made on good information.