[Autumnleaf]

Some claim there is a correlation between increased incidence of abortion and child abuse. Some go so far as to claim that women who have had abortions are more likely to abuse or neglect children. What do you think of this?


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"He concluded with this remark: “When we are so careful not to tamper with the delicate balances of plant and animal ecology, one wonders why we do not at least study the far-reaching effects that killing unborn infants may have on the human species…Is it possible that by disrupting a primary species-preserving mechanism, medicine [i.e., abortion] is endangering humanity?”

14 years later, in a 1993 article, Dr. Ney and others still found that there was no evidence that available abortion had reduced child abuse. Unwanted children were not more abused, but women who had previous pregnancy losses were more likely to abuse or neglect children. The data suggested that subsequent pregnancy losses interfered with parent-child bonding (See Ney, P. Fung, T., Wickett, A.R., "Relationship Between Induced Abortion and Child Abuse and Neglect: Four Studies," Pre- and Perinatal Psychology Journal 8(1):43-63 Fall 1993.)"

[Tocsin]

I love it when people try and draw "logical" conclusions by extrapolating theories between a-causal relationships.


Many people who smoke, end up with lung cancer...

Many people who smoke, buy their cigarettes from stores using money...

therfore... capitalism might cause lung cancer.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Autumnleaf]

	Originally Posted by Tocsin To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I love it when people try and draw "logical" conclusions by extrapolating theories between a-causal relationships. Many people who smoke, end up with lung cancer... Many people who smoke, buy their cigarettes from stores using money... therfore... capitalism might cause lung cancer. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Hostility toward an unborn child, expressed as a willingness to abort it, may be related to hostility towards born children. Its not a stretch.

[Tocsin]

	Originally Posted by Autumnleaf To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Hostility toward an unborn child, expressed as a willingness to abort it, may be related to hostility towards born children. Its not a stretch.

What it is, is a guess.

If I remember correctly, the perspective of considering something as true just because it hasn't been proved to be false is what is called
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Second, it is a complete fabrication to assign "hostility toward an unborn child" as a motive for all abortions.

There may be many circumstances where an abotion is chosen out of medical neccessity to preserve the life/health of the mother.

There are certainly spontaneous abortions resulting from shock, trauma, or injury that have nothing to do with the intent of the mother.

Third, in the case of rape, the anger that the victim seeking an abortion has for their rapist does not neccessary transfer to a general hatred of infants or children.

[Saggita]

	Originally Posted by Autumnleaf To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Hostility toward an unborn child, expressed as a willingness to abort it, may be related to hostility towards born children. Its not a stretch.

But that doesn't mean legalized abortion is causing child abuse as the text suggests.

And I read that thing, and it's more fallacy and talks about probabilities that I can handle. We can attach the increase of child abuse to anything -- even the increase of poverty. Or the decrease of selling of bananas. The fact is that no one knows what is happening and some people are picking on abortion with no more than fallacies.

Not to mention they think fetuses are infants and those studies are from 60s and 70s. And the recent studies are over surveys on 581 low-income women on Baltimore. Which can't really prove anything, because having financial problems might have something to do with it, no?

[topquark]

	Originally Posted by Autumnleaf To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Hostility toward an unborn child, expressed as a willingness to abort it, may be related to hostility towards born children. Its not a stretch.

Ever heard the phrase "correlation does not imply causality"?

It is possible that both abortion demand and child abuse are linked to a common cause. A society that makes it very difficult to bring up children, for example one where many families live in poverty, is likely to have an increased number of people abusing their children due to the stress of the situation as well as an increased number wanting to avoid having children in the first place. I would hypothesize that by removing the option of abortion, you would end up with a lot more child abuse as families are forced into the situation of caring for children they did not want and/or aren't able to look after.

Similarly, on an individual level, someone who knows that she will not be able to bring up a child without being abusive is likely to opt for abortion. Does that mean abortion causes child abuse? No - in fact, if you removed abortion as a possible outcome in this scenario, the only remaining possibility is that the mother will abuse the child.

Personally, I have strong feelings of hostility towards both unborn and born children. I can guarantee that I would be infinitely more likely to abuse a child that I was forced to give birth to and care for than one whose existence I was able to prevent.

EDIT: I vote for moving this thread to the science forum, as it's a perfect example of how not to draw conclusions from data. It's shocking how many research papers fall into this trap.

[themuzicman]

Originally Posted by Tocsin To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

What it is, is a guess. If I remember correctly, the perspective of considering something as true just because it hasn't been proved to be false is what is called To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Second, it is a complete fabrication to assign "hostility toward an unborn child" as a motive for all abortions. There may be many circumstances where an abotion is chosen out of medical neccessity to preserve the life/health of the mother. There are certainly spontaneous abortions resulting from shock, trauma, or injury that have nothing to do with the intent of the mother. Third, in the case of rape, the anger that the victim seeking an abortion has for their rapist does not neccessary transfer to a general hatred of infants or children.

Welcome to the world of social science. It's very rare that you get an "a causes b" in psychology and sociology. This is about the best you get.

[Tristan]

	Originally Posted by Autumnleaf To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Hostility toward an unborn child, expressed as a willingness to abort it, may be related to hostility towards born children. Its not a stretch.

	Originally Posted by themuzicman To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Welcome to the world of social science. It's very rare that you get an "a causes b" in psychology and sociology. This is about the best you get.

Individuals, emotions, and circumstances can be complex. I'm sure that as a political bloc, many pro-lifers consider abortion to be an act of hostility, but I doubt the attitude is universal to all women who get abortions. Macroeconomics runs into this problem, too— not just sociology.

[Causa Mortis]

	Unwanted children were not more abused, but women who had previous pregnancy losses were more likely to abuse or neglect children.

In my experience, the ones who have abortions are the ones who are doing stupid shit (ie unprotected cock carouseling). These girls are often selfish and very much id-dominated. That these girls would treat their kids like shit is totally granted.

[themuzicman]

	Originally Posted by Tristan To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Individuals, emotions, and circumstances can be complex. I'm sure that as a political bloc, many pro-lifers consider abortion to be an act of hostility, but I doubt the attitude is universal to all women who get abortions. Macroeconomics runs into this problem, too— not just sociology.

But that's precisely why saying, "this isn't a causality study" is really ignorant of these kinds of studies. Sociology and psychology see correlation, and then have to try to assign causality themselves by looking for motivations.

[thod]

Lets not forget the correlation between those who have abortions and gender. I have no problems at all in believing the proposition. Neglect your child, neglect contraception also. Thus the statement could be rewritten "neglectful people are negligent".

[Vagrant]

	Originally Posted by themuzicman To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	But that's precisely why saying, "this isn't a causality study" is really ignorant of these kinds of studies. Sociology and psychology see correlation, and then have to try to assign causality themselves by looking for motivations.

Drawing a correlation between things is insufficient. Correlations can often be opposite to the real truth. For example, in a study of RNs, a correlation was found that nurses who take estrogen had better heart health.

But when experimented upon, the estrogen actually worsened heart health.

What caused the correlation to be opposite of what it was suggested? There was a third factor -- the nurses themselves. Nurses taking estrogen were more likely to be health conscious, and had heart benefits from that that outweighed the negative effects of estrogen.

To claim that abortion and child abuse are more than correlated would be a fallacy. I would suggest that there is a correlation between believers in the Flying Spaghetti Monster and child abuse. And I'd be right. The two have nothing to do with each other though.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[themuzicman]

	Originally Posted by Vagrant To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Drawing a correlation between things is insufficient. Correlations can often be opposite to the real truth. For example, in a study of RNs, a correlation was found that nurses who take estrogen had better heart health.

You should pay closer attention.

IN the areas of sociology and psychology, they generally cannot reach a study that proves causation, because human behavior doesn't lend itself to single cause and effect.

You can't measure the effect of having an abortion on 1000 women that directly reveals a cause of being abusive to subsequent children. One can only look for strong correlation, and then look for other factors to correct for. That's how these two (and apparently macroeconomics, which, IMHO, is the third wing of this area of science.)

So, to say that one must come up with a causation study in a sociological or psychological study shows a real ignorance of what these fields are.

[Vagrant]

You can't measure the effect of having an abortion on 1000 women that directly reveals a cause of being abusive to subsequent children. One can only look for strong correlation, and then look for other factors to correct for. That's how these two (and apparently macroeconomics, which, IMHO, is the third wing of this area of science.) So, to say that one must come up with a causation study in a sociological or psychological study shows a real ignorance of what these fields are.

To say that all you can come up with are observational studies also show a real ignorance of these fields.

I can provide correlations between child obesity and child abuse. The two have next to nothing to due with each other.

[Polymath20]

Originally Posted by Autumnleaf To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Some claim there is a correlation between increased incidence of abortion and child abuse. Some go so far as to claim that women who have had abortions are more likely to abuse or neglect children. What do you think of this? To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. "He concluded with this remark: “When we are so careful not to tamper with the delicate balances of plant and animal ecology, one wonders why we do not at least study the far-reaching effects that killing unborn infants may have on the human species…Is it possible that by disrupting a primary species-preserving mechanism, medicine [i.e., abortion] is endangering humanity?” 14 years later, in a 1993 article, Dr. Ney and others still found that there was no evidence that available abortion had reduced child abuse. Unwanted children were not more abused, but women who had previous pregnancy losses were more likely to abuse or neglect children. The data suggested that subsequent pregnancy losses interfered with parent-child bonding (See Ney, P. Fung, T., Wickett, A.R., "Relationship Between Induced Abortion and Child Abuse and Neglect: Four Studies," Pre- and Perinatal Psychology Journal 8(1):43-63 Fall 1993.)"

Studies done comparing countries with and without abortion rights have the opposite conclusion.

[LadySpock]

	Originally Posted by Tocsin To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I love it when people try and draw "logical" conclusions by extrapolating theories between a-causal relationships. Many people who smoke, end up with lung cancer... Many people who smoke, buy their cigarettes from stores using money... therfore... capitalism might cause lung cancer. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I'll play!

Many women who have sex men end up having abortions.

Many women who have sex with men use make up.

Women who use make up use money to buy the make up.

therefore...capitalism might cause abortions!

[Polymath20]

	Originally Posted by LadySpock To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I'll play! Many women who have sex men end up having abortions. Many women who have sex with men use make up. Women who use make up use money to buy the make up. therefore...capitalism might cause abortions!

Psychologists also concluded that the key to being thin was the following:

1) Don't pay attention to what you eat
2) Don't weigh yourself
3) Don't count calories
4) Don't try to eat your fruits and veggies

Why?

Because skinny people don't do any of those things either!
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[LadySpock]

Eating dinner causes sex because my husband and I usually have sex after dinner!

[Doggzilla]

We rarely agree, but Im with you on this one. Someone who would have an abortion is likely not fit to be a parent in the first place. If they can find any reason to kill their own child, then why wouldnt they have a problem slapping one around a bit, or neglecting it either.

[Daoist]

	Originally Posted by themuzicman To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Welcome to the world of social science. It's very rare that you get an "a causes b" in psychology and sociology. This is about the best you get.

I haven't tried to look at the studies in question - but you can do a lot better than simply correlating two factors.

1) You can use controls to account for things like poverty, which would likely affect both abortion and child abuse. This would take care of a few obvious objections - but still causality would be a bit of a leap.

2) The best way to test this would be to prevent people from making abortions. You can't do this experimentally, but you can study previous policies. If abortions become illegal or harder to get in a particular area, then you would expect to see a drop in child abuse in a specific time-frame (assuming abortions actually go down, which would seem intuitive although it would be difficult to confirm.) There are a number of clever ways of doing such studies.

[Maybe to Dream]

	Originally Posted by Doggzilla To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	We rarely agree, but Im with you on this one. Someone who would have an abortion is likely not fit to be a parent in the first place. If they can find any reason to kill their own child, then why wouldnt they have a problem slapping one around a bit, or neglecting it either.

This is where I want more information. Most of the women I've seen who go through abortions either 1. Don't have money or 2. Are trying to keep the guy from breaking up with them. So I've always figured that a combination of sex education, access to birth control and the morning after pill, better social safety nets, and proper self-esteem would do a lot to reduce the number of abortions taking place.

As for the child abuse correlation, I'd want to see what the demographics are before coming to a full conclusion on that tbh.

[Distance]

Neat! The psychological edition of six degrees of Kevin Bacon! When's the LOTR edition coming out?

[Booko]

I think someone has a dire need for a Fleet kit.

[Vagrant]

	Originally Posted by Doggzilla To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	We rarely agree, but Im with you on this one. Someone who would have an abortion is likely not fit to be a parent in the first place. If they can find any reason to kill their own child, then why wouldnt they have a problem slapping one around a bit, or neglecting it either.

I would think the exact opposite -- if a parent is smart enough to prevent an unwanted birth, then all their actual births will be desired -- so they won't want to slap their kid around.

[Fecal McAngry]

	Originally Posted by Autumnleaf To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Some claim there is a correlation between increased incidence of abortion and child abuse.

Has causation been proved?

Did you see INTJ Denise Minger's latest?


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.