Abortion and Adoption: what evidence is there to show...?

Question

Is there any evidence that shows abortion legalization has impacted adoption rates (U.S. and globally)? Please cite source.

Answer 1

It's probably more of a combination of abortion, greater use of contraceptives, and more single mothers keeping their babies instead of putting them up for adoption. Still, there are way too many children out there who are available for adoption and not enough people wanting to take them in. Very few want to adopt older children, those with special needs, black or mixed race children, siblings wishing to be adopted together, and children with behavioral problems.

Answer 2

In my reading I found that there are certainly many factors to consider, and any lowered adoption rates were significantly higher for whites than other races.

I do have to wonder, however, why is it so important that there be many children to adopt?  Why is there a concern about a lower number of children "available for adoption?"  My own personal feelings about abortion aside, I am asking this solely as a specific, question in a vacuum, so to speak, with abortion not being considered.  Would it not be better than worse to have fewer children relinquished by their own parents?  If the concern is for the children, then it is sad that there be a higher, rather than lower, number of children relinquished.  Considering the sadness that many natural parents experience, even long term, following relinquishment, it makes it even more of a sad circumstance to have more relinquishments rather than fewer.

Anyway, here are the findings and source.  The full study with methods can be viewed at:

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/...

Findings from 2002 study by the Guttmacher Institute.

Our results indicate that adoptions, particularly of children born to white women and by petitioners unrelated to the child, decreased in the 1960s and early 1970s when states repealed their laws restricting access to abortion. Roe v. Wade also may have lowered rates of adoption of children born to white women. Legal reforms allowing small increases in access to abortion, such as allowing the procedure for women who became pregnant as a result of rape or incest, did not affect adoption rates of children born to white women.

The estimated effect of abortion legalization on adoption rates is sizable and can account for much of the decline in adoptions during the early 1970s. In our sample, the number of adoptions of children born to white women was 42% lower in 1975 than in 1970.†‡ Our estimates in Table 4 indicate that these adoptions fell by 34-37% in states that repealed abortion laws; a similar decline may have occurred in other states after Roe v. Wade, but this effect is imprecisely estimated and not statistically different from zero.†§ Abortion legalization therefore appears to account for much of the decline in adoptions of children born to white women between 1970 and 1975.

Our results also indicate that allowing legal abortion under certain circumstances prior to Roe led to a 15-18% decline in adoptions of children born to nonwhite women. This result is surprising, because relatively few women were covered by such exceptions, which were limited largely to rape, incest and serious risks to the mother's health. In addition, rates of adoptions of children born to nonwhite women were slightly higher in 1975 than in 1970,27 suggesting that the negative relationship indicated by the econometric model was counterbalanced by other factors. However, the negative relationship between adoptions and abortion reforms is sensitive to the coding of when states changed their abortion laws, suggesting that there may not have been any effect. Our failure to find significant effects of abortion law repeals and Roe may be due in part to the low rate of relinquishments among nonwhites, as it may be difficult to quantify an effect, even one of the magnitude estimated for white adoptions, on such a small base.

Changes in adoption policies concerning children who were not of the same race as their adoptive parents also may have contributed to the results for nonwhites. Support for adoptions of black children by nonblack parents weakened considerably after 1972 in response to a position paper from the National Association of Black Social Workers opposing such adoptions. The number of adoptions of black children by nonblacks rose during the late 1960s, peaked in 1971 and declined steadily through 1975.28 This time frame coincides with the period when states were repealing their abortion laws and when Roe was handed down, possibly confounding our attempts to find an effect of changes in abortion law on adoptions of children born to nonwhite women.

We do not find that Roe v. Wade had a significant effect on adoptions, although our results suggest there may have been a negative effect on adoptions of children born to white women. One potential explanation for the model's failure to precisely estimate the impact of Roe is that some states affected by the ruling moved quickly to restrict access to abortion in the post-Roe period. In 1975, for example, seven states enacted or began enforcing restrictions on Medicaid funding for abortions, and 14 states put into effect parental involvement laws.29 In addition, our data extend through 1975, only two years after Roe, and it may have taken several years for the ruling's full impact on adoptions to emerge. Furthermore, previous research has noted that Roe may not have had as large an effect on fertility as earlier repeal of state abortion laws had, possibly because women traveled to states that legalized abortion in the early 1970s.30

Our finding that access to legal abortion in the early 1970s, particularly before Roe v. Wade, had a large negative effect on adoption rates is in contrast to findings on the effects of post-Roe abortion restrictions. One study found that adoption rates were negatively associated with Medicaid funding restrictions and parental involvement laws, while another study did not find conclusive effects.31 This suggests that the effect of a substantial change in abortion access, such as legalization, may differ considerably from the effect of changes that affect subgroups of women. Indeed, we find that relaxing abortion laws to allow for abortion in cases of rape and incest did not lower rates of adoptions of children born to white women during the late 1960s and early 1970s, although it had an effect on adoptions of children with nonwhite mothers.

We do not find that higher welfare benefits lowered adoption rates during the period 1961-1975. Rather, average AFDC benefits were positively associated with adoption rates of children born to nonwhite women. One previous study that used cross-sectional data from 1980 found, in contrast, a negative association between AFDC benefits and adoptions.32Another study, using panel data from the 1980s, did not find a significant relationship between welfare and adoptions.33 Our failure to find a negative relationship between welfare generosity and adoption rates may be surprising, but our models included a large number of covariates that may be collinear with welfare benefits.

The relationship between adoption and abortion has public policy implications both because of the large, unmet demand for children available for adoption and because of concerns about the living circumstances of unwanted children. In 1995, for example, 9.9 million ever-married women aged 18-44 had ever considered adopting a child, 1.6 million had taken steps to adopt a child and 487,000 had actually adopted a child. Almost a half million women were planning or seeking to adopt a child in 1995.34 Consistent with findings from prior studies, our results suggest that abortion legalization led to a decline in the adoption rate and a reduction in the number of "unwanted" children relinquished and available for adoption. This reduction may have improved average infant health and childhood living conditions.

Answer 3

Well the first person seemed to have a lot of statistics- but I can tell you something from personal experience as a counselor in a pregnancy help clinic for over 10 years-  the majority of the women/girls that came in that were not going to keep their babies- aborted over adoption- and since this is the case, I would definitely say that abortions and caused less adoptions. 4,000 abortions in a day in the USA is horrendous, when you think about it.  I have counseled a lot of women in over 10 years- and the majority of the ones that I talked to that came in wanting an abortion, and went through with an abortion- said "they could not carry a child to term and then place for adoption" however I am very thankful that those statistics did not hold in my own personal life, I am adopted and have 2 adopted kids.

Thanks for all the thumbs down, I am not lying about the statistics that I experienced.  Why did I get thumbs down, because you want to believe that abortion has not caused less adoptions?

Answer 4

This is a good question, oddly enough, I was just reading something today on it.... this comes from ... cough cough A.com ( barf! ) but nevertheless, its still interesting depending on how much you believe their "sources"

It credits the "childwelfare.gov" and that is a site that I do trust, so I'm just going to copy and paste please pay attention to the beginning and the end!

    * Declining numbers of women placing children for adoption

          o The decline in the number of women placing their children for adoption is primarily due to the declining numbers of white women placing their children for adoption; rates for minority women who place their children have remained relatively stable. (Bachrach, Stolley, London, 1992)

          o The initial drop in placement rates among white women reflected the increase in abortion rates after the legalization of abortion in 1973. (Bachrach, Stolley, London, 1992)

    * Declining stigma of unwed motherhood

          o The continuing decline in placement rates reflects the diminishing stigma attached to unwed parenthood. (Bachrach, Stolley, London, 1992)

    * Declining numbers of teens placing children for adoption

          o The proportion of teens placing their children for adoption has declined sharply over recent decades. (ChildTrends, 1995)

          o When they become pregnant, very few teens choose to place their children for adoption. In a 1995 survey, 51% of teens that become pregnant give birth; 35% seek abortions; 14% miscarry. Less than 1% choose to place their children for adoption. (ChildTrends, 1995)

          o The age of unmarried mothers has increased with time. In 1970, half of nonmarital births were to teens; by 1993, the highest proportion of unmarried mothers were women in their twenties, a significant change. The birth rate for unmarried teens declined in 1995. Teen mothers, however continued to make up the largest single group of all first births to unmarried women.(Freundlich, 1998)

    * Declining pregnancy rate

          o Pregnancy rates declined by 1 percent for white women and by 5 percent for women of all other races between 1980 to 1991. (NCHS, 1995)

    * Increasing use of contraceptives

          o 4% of never-married women relied on their partners to use condoms in 1982; this number increased to 8% in 1988, and to 14% in 1995 - a more than three-fold increase. (NCHS, 1997)

          o In 1995, 10.7 million women were using female sterilization, 10.4 million were using the birth control pill, 7.9 million used condoms, and 4.2 million were using male sterilization as a contraceptive technique. (NCHS, 1997)

    * Declining abortion rate

          o There has been no research showing that women are choosing to abort their children rather than place these children for adoption. Although the adoption rate has remained relatively steady, nationwide abortion rates have continued to decline since 1990. (Freundlich, 1998)

Answer 5

Gershom gave a great answer. Thanks for the stats!

In reference to one response, "from personal experience as a counselor in a pregnancy help clinic for over 10 years- the majority of the women/girls that came in that were not going to keep their babies- aborted over adoption"  

Just because a woman chose abortion, does not mean that she would have relinquished her child had abortion not been an option.  

When I found myself pregnant at 16, I also believed (& SAID) I would have chosen abortion before over adoption.   As an adoptee, I didn't want my child wondering, as I had, why she was given up or believing that I didn't love her (enough to keep her).  Instead of abortion, I chose to have my child AND TO KEEP HER.

What has most likely had a greater affect on adoption is the fact that women are better able to take care of themselves and their children financially.  Also, the stigma of being an "unmarried" mother has greatly diminished over the past couple of decades.