Oregon abortion statistics?

Question

Hey all, I'm back to ask for more info for my husband's friend. He's now saying that he thinks abortions will go up if we have open records. Are there any stats that show that abortions didn't go up in Oregon, or Australia? Thanks!

Answer 1

According to the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute report:

"The Oregon Center for Health Statistics and Vital Records reports that the number of induced abortions performed in the state dropped 18.2 percent in the four years since passage of its law restoring access to records. The national decrease in abortions during the same period was 2 percent.  This trend is similar to abortion rate trends in England and Wales when adoption records were opened."

ETA:  I'm married to a psychologist, so I'm competent to diagnose mental illness?  Please.  When you get your degree in logic (I'll show you my piece of paper, if you like), we can have an argument.  

There is no evidence that open records have any effect on abortion rates.  While it's true that statistics do not give a deductive argument that proves anything with certainty (and that's true of all statistics), if you want to maintain that open records do increase abortions, there needs to be evidence for that claim.  As it stands, the only available evidence suggests that there is no link.  

Your fallacy, HappyMom, is one of Argument from Ignorance.  Since we have no evidence, we can conclude there is a link.

The fallacy is obvious.  If we have no evidence, we can conclude nothing.  But we do have evidence.  It is imperfect, as is all statistical evidence.  But it is evidence nonetheless.

Your being married to someone proves nothing about this argument.

ETA2:  HappyMom...  What on god's green earth are you talking about?  I've taken more than my fair share of college level statistics, I've taught inductive reasoning.  Is there something else you'd like to claim to be an expert in because you aren't making any sense here.

The question asked for statistics, and these were provided.  If Oregon dropped 18.2% when the rest of the country dropped 2% during the same period, something is going on.  If Federal laws were the cause, we would have seen a closer number over the entire country.

Do correlations show causation?  No.  Of course not.  That's not what statistics show, and that's not what anyone here has said.  If you want to attack, maybe you should attack a critical thinking book and learn to think before you type.

The nature of the argument, that you seem to totally ignore in your responses (that go nowhere), is that people claim abortion will go up if records are open.  BUT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR THAT CLAIM.  The statistics show, if they show anything, the reverse.  If they show nothing at all, as you claim, then they still don't help the anti-adoptee crowd.  

The point of looking at these statistics is that THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT ABORTION GOES UP BECAUSE RECORDS ARE OPENED.

Now, you can commit all the logical fallacies you like.  Perhaps you'd like to engage in more straw man?  Or maybe it's time for some more ad hominem?  But the fact of the matter is, your "lesson" in statistics is irrelevant to what is being discussed here.  If you cannot even comprehend English, and can't write it all that well, I'm not terribly impressed by your claim to know something about statistics simply because you're married to someone who does.

You have missed the point of the discussion.  Get off your high-horse and pay attention before you start calling other people uneducated.  Because that's how YOU are coming across here.

ETA3:  And now we have evidence that you know nothing about statistics.  Your 3 examples are not a random sample.  They do not PROVE anything.  3 is far too small a sample size.  It was not chosen randomly, and gives no evidence for any conclusion whatsoever.  The fact that you use this to argue about statistics undermines any credibility you had on the issue.  You clearly know NOTHING about stats.  Thanks for stopping.

Answer 2

In light of happymoms response....

Oregon is the only state that opened up its records and didn't have any other abortion laws go into effect around the same time and during the same time as the open records law.

In new jersey there is currently a bill facing adoptee rights and Marie Tasy of the New jersey right to life testified against the bill and made reference to the states that have opened records at or around the same time as passing open records bills. Oregon happens to NOT be one of those.

There is NO abortion law that was passed in 1997, 1998, and or 1999 that effected the stats of opening records on adoptees.

Oregon is the only state we have to go off of that new abortion laws do NOT effect.

ETA: And from a quick google search, it APPEARS oregon hasn't had a new abortion law since 1983. Could this be true? really? Here is the oregon right to life page:  http://www.ortl.org/political/history_of...

Answer 3

Here is a link to Oregon's annual stats.  

I personally don't think open records will have ANY impact on the abortion rate. Don't see how they could.

Answer 4

Hi Gaia,

I'd be glad to provide you with information on the two states that fully reopened records a decade ago (Alabama and Oregon) along with the state that reopened the majority of records a decade ago (Tennessee.)  For each state, the year in the the left and the abortion rate is in the right.  As you can see, the rate has dropped in all three states, which is consistent with the overall trend in the U.S.  Allowing adopted adults to have the same rights as other people has had no effect on the abortion rates.

Oh, and for the unfriendly person who likes to specifically call me out and say that I just make us statistics, something I would never do for a variety of reasons, I've listed my source TWICE, so it can't be missed.  (I think that person would rather accuse me than bother to ask for my sources if she's not certain of them.)

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/a...

You can utilize this source to follow abortion statistics in the entire U.S.

d**n, I love this question.  :-)

Alabama

1998  --   12%

1999  --   12%

2000  --12%

2001  --12%

2002  --11%

2003  --11%

2004  --11%

Oregon

1999  --18%

2000  --18%

2001  --18%

2002  --16%

2003  --16%

2004  --14%

Tennessee

1998  --14%

1999  --13%

2000  --13%

2001  --12%

2002  --13%

2003  --12%

2004  --11%

ETA:

Well, happymomana, this site happens to have stats that go back much further than the late '90's. How fortunate for us.  If you look at the stats for every single state, which I personally have done, you WILL see that the trend in these states matches the overall trend in the U.S.

But, since we're talking about the rates since the reopening of records, we're looking at a ten-ish year span.  Because the rates are consistent, it's quite clear that one event -- reopening records -- didn't have the horrible impact on raising abortion rates that some anti-adoptee people projected.  THAT is the issue at hand in the question.

Why don't you take a closer look before you start in with the pooh pooh stuff?  Most of us are quite educated enough to understand about statistics, too.  Really.  One person who posted a response here has a Ph.D.

Thank you  :-)

ETA2:

Phil, you rock.  Yes, my ex-husband is a physician -- an anesthesiologist to be exact.  However, I don't think I'll be performing any surgeries any time soon.  LOL.

It reminds me of that old commercial:  "I'm not a doctor, but I play one on TV."  Ummm....Okkkaaaayyyy......?

ETA3:

Thank you, Gersh.  Wow, not only do we have stats that don't show a through-the-roof increase (which some quite literally projected, such as Marie Tasy,) but we've even got a state -- Oregon -- that had NO changes in abortion law at the time that records reopened.  Oregon STILL had a drop quite consistent with the overall drop in the U.S.

ETA4:  Hmmm, read answerer's ETA .  She still missed the point.  NO ONE is saying that the rates are about ONE issue, except for those who would have us believe that open records would cause a dramatic increase in abortions.  However, the CONSISTENCY of the falling rates in ALL states does strongly suggest that reopening records did not impact abortion rates.  Surely, you are capable to seeing that.  No statistics are ever perfect, nor can they ever be used in a vacuum.  NO ONE HERE IS SUGGESTING THAT!  However, the best we can do is use the stats that are available in the environment of the last 10 years.  There is NOTHING that suggests that reopening records has positively impacted the abortion rates in the states that have done so.  But, again, the CONSISTENCY shown in those states when viewed alongside all other states, strongly suggests that reopening records has had no impact on the abortion rates.

Statistics will never be a perfect science because of the varying factors.  Stats are simply a gauge.  However, it's good to know that the Federal laws that have changed (which you pointed out) have affected EVERY state, so when we look at the consistency of the dropped rates in all states, at least those Federal laws are as close to a constant as one may expect when dealing with stats.

ETA5:

Opedial, you are right that it shouldn't matter.  Giving adopted person's back their equal treatment under the law should have absolutely NOTHING to do with choices that pregnant women make.  However, there are those who vehemently fight against our rights by using the argument that the abortion rates will quite literally skyrocket.  Unfortunately, there are a few zealot legislators who listen to this and actually consider it in their decision, as legislators are much more interested in constituent votes than in the constitutionality of a law.

In California, a legislator looked at the Supreme Court rulings in two states (Oregon and Tennessee) that stated that open records are Constitutional, and do not trample on ANYONE's Constitutional rights.  One of the legislators spoke right up and said (paraphrasing --- NOT changing the meaning,) "It's our job to pass the laws.  We don't have to worry about whether those laws are legal.  That's up for the courts to decide."

ETA6:

Here, here, PHIL!

ETA7:

Happymomanna, if your 3 examples had really wanted an abortion, they could have gone elsewhere.  I don't just mean a different clinic in Oregon, either.  

Apparently they made a different choice based on something other than the inability to walk through a door.

HOWEVER, WHAT THE HECK DO THESE ANECDOTES HAVE TO DO WITH REOPENING RECORDS AND ITS AFFECT ON THE ABORTION RATES?   The anti-adoptee people are clearly stating that REOPENING RECORDS will be THE CAUSE of abortions skyrocketing.  WE ARE SIMPLY STATING THAT THERE IS NO PROOF OF THIS -- AT ALL!  GOT  IT?

ETA8:

Happymomanna FINALLY stated what we've been trying to get at all along when she says:

"ETA: Random too is the idea that simply looking at Abortion Rates have anything to do with Open BC's...."

THIS is what we fight against in our fight to reopen records.  WE HAVE to show something to legislators that will lead them to be convinced that reopening records will NOT skyrocket abortion rates.  Believe me when I tell you, these legislators ASK for the abortion rates in states, as they consider it good enough for government work (quite literally, it seems.)  WE ALL KNOW that one cannot look at abortion rates and pull out any sort of clear correlation between abortion rates and open records.  HOWEVER, legislators ask for the rates and DO use them as a gauge.  Whether we find that to be sensible or not really doesn't matter.  They want to see those numbers.  They draw the conclusion that there is a correlation because the NCFA, the Right To Life, the Catholic Charities adoption agencies ALL argue that reopening records will gravely increase abortion rates.  

No matter what WE think of these stats charts, the legislators want to see them, and DO use them, as a gauge.  So, at this point all we have are stats that show that there has been no giant swell in states that have reopened records in the past 10 years.  That's what they want to see.

Answer 5

Some excellent answers above.

The only thing I will add is who cares if abortion rates go up? The world needs more abortions.

Answer 6

http://paragraphein.wordpress.com/2006/0...

I didn't get state-specific in the above post in terms of abortion numbers, but.... there is a little piece at the end where I talk about Australia abortion rates vs. U.S. abortion rates. The U.S. rate was higher for the year I crunched those stats.

There is zero proof that abortion rates have anything to do with adoption laws. In fact, the stats suggest open records will have NO effect on abortion rates. And that is because, as many of us have said over and over on these boards, the women who relinquish their children are by and large not the same women who would get abortions. Two different subsets of the population.

Answer 7

Yes the rates will go up..... because abortion clinics use the same coercion tactics that adoption agencies use.

It's rather ubiquitous that these clinics PROFIT from the sale of children er "products of conception" to medical reserach facilities.

Answer 8

Does it really matter if they go up?  By saying that I think that we are saying that the only two choices are abortion and adoption, but there are three choices, one of which is to raise the child.  I say all three are valid for that person, and if people were upset about open records that they woudl not choose adoption they are left with two other choices.  Why fault them their choices?

Answer 9

You would also need to factor in the other changes about abortion that have taken place as well.  There has been changes in a few areas like age without parental notice and permission.

The other changes in abortion laws may in fact drive the numbers up or down so just the open BC records cannot be the only thing considered.

People who want to help make changes or use an argument should try to also understand "why" their arguments do not hold weight when only a narrow fact is considered. These kinds of statistics or use of statistics Don't Support an argument with educated people who understand how statistics work and what makes an argument invalid.... We get a lot farther with our arguments when we use statistics and scientific information in the manner that they are designed to be used. Bottom line is that using the Abortion Rates and ONE issue that may affect them is not going to convience anyone who has taken College Level Statistics and understands it...  In fact, useing the statstics in the wrong way or unscientific way will HURT any efforts people make in order to try and support a point of view.

Abotions numbers are NOT only impacted by one point--The numbers cannot be based Only on Open BC policies to think that these numbers can be directly corrolated is Ignorant which is the very reason so many people don't get far when trying to use statistic to support their point of view.... Sorry this is just the way it really is.... and to make a good argument it is wise to remember that the use of stats such as abortion rates includes too many factors.

Right now with the Oregon Rates it can also be assumed that they have gone down due to some of the "consent" law changes as well as s*x education...



If we really want to Hash this all out we also need to look at the Pregnancy Rate--has that gone down as well? We need to look at the fact that in Oregon the Morning After Pills have been legal and availble for a few years... We need to consider the fact that a few years ago any girl over 12 in Oregon could be taken to have an abortion without her parents even knowing! This has also changed now there are new restrictions about the ages--there are new limits on Plan Parenthood and the information they can EVEN give to girls... The True EDUCATED Fact of the matter is that these stats are NOT about One issue and only uneducated people would assume they are.....sorry but that is how it works in the real world....

*****Oregon has not made changes but the Federal Government has... Regulations about Age of Consent, Parental Notification and Planned Parenthood has many new limitations... So to have Limits on Abortion Clinics, and the methods they used.... Many limitations on ACCESS to abortions have been made--Not by the States but, by the Federal Government....  and many of these changes have been made since 1996....  In Oregon the NUMBER of abortion clinics have DRAMATICALLY dropped over the past 10 years.... It is ALSO a FACT that Picketing and Demonstration Laws have Changed and in Oregon the Peoples Rights nearly always over ride other factors... In Oregon Picketers at Aboption Clinics have a Huge Amount of impact and there are few limits on the activities of these people... Women entering these clinics are nearly attacked and people stand around with graphic pictures of dead babies... Throw Red Paint on Girls and generally have a huge presence in front of the Clinics.... This in istself has had a huge impact on Access....

***I personally know 3 babies that have been born in the past 2 years based ONLY on the fact their mother got to the clinic and was Unable to walk through the Crowd.... I know because I was the one who drove them to the clinic....and they would not go inside--and decided to make a different choice....

The records about Abortion are not as easy to find for prior to 1996.

It is NOT very scientific to consider only one thing as a reason for a change in statistics...  There are too many issues that play into these numbers... People with any kind of statisics background or understanding will Not Accept an agurment like this one.

It could be assumed that the rate went up due to one thing and then was pulled down due to another thing...

And what about changes in s*x Education and the huge improvements in Birth Control.... These issues also effect the Abortion rates...

What about the number of picketers in front of the clinics.... This does have an effect on the rates as there are women who will not pass the crowds....

What about imporvements in the economy and social services perhaps the Great Economy we have had in Oregon made it more possible for people to choose not to have an abortion....

The bottom line is One Issue alone doesn't effect Abortion rates.