More Evidence That Abortion Is Not Associated With Increased Risk of Mental Illness

Stotland, Nada L.; Shrestha, Angela

doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.0838

Cited by 23 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Given this limitation, comparisons to other groups of women who have not been exposed to abortion are the only option. While no comparison group is perfect, [192][193][194] nearly every comparison can be useful for teasing out patterns that may help to inform patients and caregivers regarding the many varieties of abortion experiences.…”

Section: Self-censure and Defense Mechanisms Contribute To Underreporting Of Sequelaementioning

confidence: 99%

“…For all the reasons given above, the best evidence indicates that reasonable patients may consider any and all of the comparisons discussed above to be of value in their efforts to evaluate the potential risks and benefits of an abortion in their own personal circumstance 23,25 Finally, it has been argued that the differences between women who abort and those who do not are so extreme that the only meaningful comparison is between women who abort and women who sought but were denied an abortion. 194 While this comparison might be informative, it is clearly not a perfect comparison since the reasons why women may end up being denied an abortion are also likely to make these women significantly different than the average woman seeking and obtaining an abortion. Moreover, since in most countries where abortion is legal, very few women are denied an abortion undertaking such studies may be impractical.…”

Section: Self-censure and Defense Mechanisms Contribute To Underreporting Of Sequelaementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The abortion and mental health controversy: A comprehensive literature review of common ground agreements, disagreements, actionable recommendations, and research opportunities

Reardon¹

2018

SAGE Open Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The abortion and mental health controversy is driven by two different perspectives regarding how best to interpret accepted facts. When interpreting the data, abortion and mental health proponents are inclined to emphasize risks associated with abortion, whereas abortion and mental health minimalists emphasize pre-existing risk factors as the primary explanation for the correlations with more negative outcomes. Still, both sides agree that (a) abortion is consistently associated with elevated rates of mental illness compared to women without a history of abortion; (b) the abortion experience directly contributes to mental health problems for at least some women; (c) there are risk factors, such as pre-existing mental illness, that identify women at greatest risk of mental health problems after an abortion; and (d) it is impossible to conduct research in this field in a manner that can definitively identify the extent to which any mental illnesses following abortion can be reliably attributed to abortion in and of itself. The areas of disagreement, which are more nuanced, are addressed at length. Obstacles in the way of research and further consensus include (a) multiple pathways for abortion and mental health risks, (b) concurrent positive and negative reactions, (c) indeterminate time frames and degrees of reactions, (d) poorly defined terms, (e) multiple factors of causation, and (f) inherent preconceptions based on ideology and disproportionate exposure to different types of women. Recommendations for collaboration include (a) mixed research teams, (b) co-design of national longitudinal prospective studies accessible to any researcher, (c) better adherence to data sharing and re-analysis standards, and (d) attention to a broader list of research questions.

show abstract

Section: Self-censure and Defense Mechanisms Contribute To Underreporting Of Sequelaementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Self-censure and Defense Mechanisms Contribute To Underreporting Of Sequelaementioning

confidence: 99%

The abortion and mental health controversy: A comprehensive literature review of common ground agreements, disagreements, actionable recommendations, and research opportunities

Reardon¹

2018

SAGE Open Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Religions and cultures that prohibit abortion or limit its use view abortion as a deliberate termination of a vital and sacred life [ 4 , 5 ]. Comparatively, some researchers claim that abortion could be safe and beneficial to women [ 6 , 7 ]. Women right activist groups view abortion as a decision to be made solely by the pregnant mother without any external or background influences [ 8 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attitudes of Medical and Health Sciences Students towards Abortion in Jordan

Saadeh

Alfaqih

Odat

et al. 2021

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Jordan laws on permitting abortion are considered moderate. Religion is one of the key determinants of people’s attitudes towards abortion and plays a crucial role in people’s readiness to accept or refute this practice. In this study, we examined the attitudes of medical and health sciences students towards abortion. Methods. In this cross-sectional study, a self-administered questionnaire survey was distributed to students at Jordan University of Science and Technology. Attitudes towards abortion were tested using 16 items that were included in the survey. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression models were used in the analysis. Results. A total of 1324 students in the medicine and dentistry colleges participated in the study. Two-thirds of the participants were women. Most participants were 20–25 years old, and they grew up in a family of 6–8 members. The overall attitude towards abortion was negative, except if the pregnancy was a threat to the mother’s life (91.5%) or if the conception occurred from rape (54.2%). Otherwise, the students indicated that every conceived child has the right to be born (76.8%) and that abortion is considered murder (53.1%). Furthermore, the students who were more likely to support abortion were those attending the medical college, living in a city, and/or raised in smaller families ( p = 0.04 ). Conclusions. Compared with other students, medical students were more supportive of abortion. This implied the necessity to include training on safe abortion in the medical curriculum and increase public awareness of the importance of safe abortion.

show abstract

“…In this study, it was claimed that 5.5% of the mental illness in this group was directly attributable to the decision to have an abortion (Coleman 2011: 180). When one looks at the more relevant control group -women who wanted an abortion but were not allowed one -the picture is different (Biggs, Upadhyay, McCulloch & Foster, 2017;Stotland & Shrestha 2018).…”

Section: Long-term Psychological Effects For the Womanmentioning

confidence: 99%

Abortion and multifetal pregnancy reduction: An ethical comparison

Dahl¹,

Vaksdal²,

Barra³

et al. 2021

Etikk Praksis - Nord J Appl Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, multifetal pregnancy reduction (MFPR) has increasingly been a subject of debate in Norway. The intensity of this debate reached a tentative maximum when the Legislation Department delivered their interpretative statement, Section 2 - Interpretation of the Abortion Act, in 2016 in response to a request from the Ministry of Health (2014) that the Legislation Department consider whether the Abortion Act allows for MFPR of healthy fetuses in multiple pregnancies. The Legislation Department concluded that the current abortion legislation [as of 2016] allows for MFPR subject to the constraints that the law otherwise stipulates. The debate has not subsided, and during autumn 2018 it was further intensified in connection with the Norwegian Christian Democratic "crossroads" policy and signals from the Conservatives to consider removing section 2.3c and to forbid MFPR. Many of the arguments in the MFPR debate are seemingly similar to arguments put forward in the general abortion debate, and an analysis to ascertain what distinguishes MFPR from other abortions has yet to be conducted. The aim of this article is, therefore, to examine whether there is a moral distinction between abortion and MFPR of healthy fetuses. We will cover the typical arguments emerging in the debate in Norway and exemplify them with scholarly articles from the literature. We have dubbed the most important arguments against MFPR that we have identified the harm argument, the slippery-slope argument, the intention argument, the grief argument, the long-term psychological effects for the woman argument, and the sorting argument. We conclude that these arguments do not measure up in terms of demonstrating a morally relevant difference between MFPR of healthy fetuses and other abortions. Our conclusion is, therefore — despite what several discussants seem to think — that there is no morally relevant difference between the two. Therefore, on the same conditions as we allow for abortions, we should also allow MFPR. Keywords: abortion, ethics, medical ethics, MFPR, selective MFPR

show abstract

More Evidence That Abortion Is Not Associated With Increased Risk of Mental Illness

Cited by 23 publications

References 10 publications

The abortion and mental health controversy: A comprehensive literature review of common ground agreements, disagreements, actionable recommendations, and research opportunities

The abortion and mental health controversy: A comprehensive literature review of common ground agreements, disagreements, actionable recommendations, and research opportunities

Attitudes of Medical and Health Sciences Students towards Abortion in Jordan

Abortion and multifetal pregnancy reduction: An ethical comparison

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About