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?