The comprehensive analysis of mental health risks associated with abortion, recently published in the esteemed British Journal of Psychiatry, sheds new light on a deeply debated issue. Authored by Priscilla Coleman of Bowling Green State University, this groundbreaking study scrutinizes 22 research endeavors spanning from 1995 to 2009, encompassing a staggering 877,181 women, among whom 163,831 underwent abortion procedures.
The findings of this extensive analysis are both striking and sobering. They reveal a significant correlation between abortion and subsequent mental health challenges, with women who have undergone the procedure facing an alarming 81 percent higher risk of experiencing mental health issues compared to their counterparts who have not had abortions. Furthermore, the research indicates a staggering 138 percent higher risk of mental health problems among women who have had abortions compared to those who have given birth. Even in comparison to women with unplanned pregnancies who chose to give birth, those who opted for abortion faced a 55 percent higher risk of mental health issues.
Delving deeper into the data, the analysis highlights that women with a history of abortion exhibit elevated rates of anxiety, depression, alcohol misuse, marijuana use, and suicidal behavior when contrasted with individuals who have not undergone abortion procedures. Such findings underscore the profound and enduring impact that abortion can have on the psychological well-being of women.
It is noteworthy that Coleman’s research aligns closely with a subsequent 2010 study by Canadian researchers, which arrived at similarly conclusive results regarding the heightened risk of mental health problems associated with abortion. Despite these compelling findings, a minority of “pro-choice” academics persist in producing studies purporting that any mental health issues post-abortion are merely pre-existing conditions. They advocate for abortion as a preferable option for women’s mental health over giving birth to an unplanned child.
In light of these findings, Coleman emphasizes the ethical responsibility of healthcare professionals to provide patients with accurate information regarding the benefits and risks of medical procedures. However, disturbingly, accounts from former abortion clinic staff and investigative journalists reveal a pattern of concealing both mental and physical health risks associated with abortion, as well as the reality of the procedure’s violent termination of a fetus’s life.
Susan Wills, in her role as assistant director for education and outreach for the U.S. bishops’ Secretariat of Pro-life Activities, underscores the importance of disseminating this critical information to women considering abortion. While patients have the right to make informed choices about their healthcare, they can only do so if presented with transparent and evidence-based information. Thus, it falls upon advocates like Wills and others to ensure that women are empowered with knowledge that may ultimately shape their decisions and safeguard their well-being.
Chelsea Garcia is a political writer with a special interest in international relations and social issues. Events surrounding the war in Ukraine and the war in Israel are a major focus for political journalists. But as a former local reporter, she is also interested in national politics.
Chelsea Garcia studied media, communication and political science in Texas, USA, and learned the journalistic trade during an internship at a daily newspaper. In addition to her political writing, she is pursuing a master's degree in multimedia and writing at Texas.
