Friday, April 21, 2006


JivinJehoshaphat: "Access"
Why is it that according to the CDC, residents of South Dakota ( ranked 44th overall by the AGI) had an abortion rate of 6 (per 1,000 women aged 15-44) and an abortion ratio of 94 (per 1,000 live births) in 2002 when New York residents (5th overall by the AGI) had an abortion rate of 30 and an ratio of 462 in the same year? The last year the CDC records abortion statistics for California is 1997. At that time California (occurrences not residents since the resident statistics are basically non-existent in 1997) had an abortion rate of 38 and an abortion ratio of 525. California, by the way, was ranked #1 overall by the AGI. I'm sorry but with results like those, I don't think South Dakota is going to be running to New York and California for advice on lowering abortions.

Good point. If "access" to contraception prevented abortion, NY would have a low abortion rate and women in South Dakota would be keeping far more than a single lonely abortion facility afloat with their custom.

But you gotta take lamentations about "access" with a grain of salt. Planned Parenthood lamented that women in DC lacked "adequate access" to abortion -- when DC had the highest abortion rate in the nation. And that's even taking into account that roughly half of the abortions performed in DC were sold to out-of-state women.

What the heck would they consider "adequate access"? Mobile abortion vans with some sort of radar that could home in on women considering abortion and would pull up in front of their house to perform an on-the-spot, government-funded abortion as soon as the idea entered her mind?

No comments: