Medical science uses interesting terminology when it comes to abortion statistics.
The following article, from the British Medical Journal, refers to two kinds of abortion; one that is merely categorised as abortion, and the other called unsafe abortion, which gives the impression that the former is safe abortion without actually saying it.
Global abortion rate stalls while proportion of unsafe abortions rises
The global abortion rate, which declined substantially between 1995 and 2003, has now levelled out while the proportion of all abortions that are unsafe continues to increase.
The worldwide abortion rate per 1000 women aged between 15 and 44 dropped from 35 in 1995 to 29 in 2003. A new study by the Guttmacher Institute in New York and the World Health Organization has found that in 2008 the global abortion rate was 28 per 1000 women.
The study, published online in the Lancet (doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61786-8), also found that the proportion of abortions categorised as unsafe rose from 44% in 1995 to 49% in 2008.⇓
Nearly all unsafe abortions (98 %) occur in developing countries. In the developing world, 56% of all abortions are unsafe, compared with 6% in the developed world. Since 2003 the number of abortions fell by 600 000 in the developed world but increased by 2.8 million in the developing world.
One has to wonder who the abortion is safe for.
Is it the mother who is considered safe, or the child? Or perhaps the clinics are deemed safe if they are legally set up and organised. So who is at risk when it comes to unsafe abortion?
Of course the mother is being referred to, and no one would disagree with this, unless they were really hard-core, but it is amazing to note how the child has been completely ignored, because surely there is no safe place for an embryo when abortion is deemed to be the cure.
And isn’t it incredible that the main issue being raised here is the rise in unsafe abortions compared to abortions, not the figures which give us 2.8% of women between 15 and 44 having an abortion? That’s almost three in every hundred.
This was a drop from 1995, when 3.5% had an abortion. It’s good that there is a drop in the rate, but it is still astonishingly high when you consider the global population is approaching seven billion.
Remember, these are global figures, which means a staggering number of women go through the abortion process every year. I add that this article isn’t about judging the mother’s motives, because some women go through terrible experiences, and society has developed a disposable human culture, particularly since the 1960’s.
It is surely the ease with which abortions are obtained and the seeming flippant attitude towards the unborn child which makes these figures distressing.
The Altar of Rejection
It also confirms that abortion is a major industry. We are, in effect, sacrificing children at the altar of rejection at an alarming rate of 29 in every 1000 women worldwide, and this is amongst the so-called safe abortion clinics.
Feminists now use the provocative and erroneous argument that men should keep out of the discussion on the morality of abortion because it must only be the woman who makes the decision. But there must be a level of accountability when it comes to making the decision about terminating the life of an individual who has no choice in the outcome. There must be an allowance for representation of those innocents in the womb, at whatever gestation stage they may be.
In the UK today, an unborn child who is the casualty of assault on his mother who later dies in the womb is not said to have been murdered or the victim of manslaughter. He is said to have been ‘destroyed in the womb’, a clear indication of the controversy which could ensue if the anti-abortion lobby could challenge abortion if child destruction were termed murder or manslaughter.
Yet there is legal jurisdiction for trained professionals to destroy children in the womb and not be accountable for their actions in the same way as a person who assaults a pregnant woman resulting in the death of the infant.
Is rejection of a healthy child in a healthy mother’s womb a valid reason to abort?
We tragically count abortions in the millions. One has to wonder who God will hold accountable for this excessive loss of life.
Medical science should be about saving lives and improving health. All procedures should be considered safe. When the mother is at risk then we have to make the call whether the mother or child should be saved, but when neither is at risk, who are we to make it unsafe for one to save the lifestyle of the other?