Abortions FTW.

Is there an online contest for the Least Surprising Ever Headline Ever of All Time Ever™?  If so, the Palace hereby nominates:

Abortion safer than giving birth: study.

Not only is this “news” unsurprising, it is downright yawn-inducing.  I will try to  keep awake while I go through some of the Reuters article, although I make no promises.

(Reuters Health) – Getting a legal abortion is much safer than giving birth, suggests a new U.S. study published Monday.

Stop.  Surely, you jest!

Researchers found that women were about 14 times more likely to die during or after giving birth to a live baby than to die from complications of an abortion.

Only 14 times more likely to die?  Gosh, it’s hard to see what all the fuss is about then.

Experts say the findings, though not unexpected, contradict some state laws that suggest abortions are high-risk procedures.

Of course abortions are “high-risk” procedures.  When compared to, say, brushing one’s teeth.

The message is that getting an abortion and giving birth are both safe, said Dr. Anne Davis, who studies obstetrics and gynecology at the Columbia University Medical Center in New York, and wasn’t involved in the new study.

Yes, Dr. Anne Davis:  getting an abortion and giving birth are indeed both “safe,” relatively speaking.  But as it turns out, one of them is safer than the other!  (I know, right?!)  Can you guess which one?

“We wouldn’t tell people, ‘Don’t have a baby because it’s safer to have an abortion’ — that’s ridiculous,” she told Reuters Health.

Wait.  That would be ridiculous, ‘cuz why?  In many cases — like, say, mine — carrying a pregnancy to term would put my life in danger while an early abortion would not.  Dr. Anne Davis would not only be a monster of Catholic proportions, she would also be committing medical malpractice if she did not say to me, “Hey, Iris?  Don’t have that baby; it’s safer to have an abortion.  Only if you prefer to live, of course — totally up to you.”

“We’re trying to help women who are having all reproductive experiences know what to expect.”

That is truly excellent.  First order of business: stop electing conservatives, because they lie about abortion risks.  Anyway:

An induced abortion — like any other medical procedure — requires getting informed consent from the woman, said Dr. Bryna Harwood, an ob-gyn from the University of Illinois in Chicago who also didn’t participate in the new research.

What makes it complicated, Harwood added, is when the law interferes and requires doctors to state information that isn’t always balanced or medically sound — usually exaggerating the risk of abortion.

This troubling phenomenon occurs because conservatives are lying @$$holes.


Sorry!  Anyway:

Dr. Elizabeth Raymond from Gynuity Health Projects in New York City and Dr. David Grimes of the University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, found that between 1998 and 2005, one woman died during childbirth for every 11,000 or so babies born.

That compared to one woman of every 167,000 who died from a legal abortion.

The researchers also cited a study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention which found that, from 1998 to 2001, the most common complications associated with pregnancy — including high blood pressure, urinary tract infections and mental health conditions — happened more often in women who had a live birth than those who got an abortion.

Depending on the state, however, doctors legally must go over the risks of abortion in language that may be misleading, researchers said, with skewed lists of possible complications. Others require a 24-hour waiting period in between the counseling and the abortion itself.

This troubling phenomenon occurs because a female is an irrational, infantile creatures whose sub-par ladybrain simply cannot grasp the concept of “abortion” as readily as normal humans.  Therefore, as hopeless as the endeavor is likely to be, she must be given at least one full day to try to understand that (a) she is pregnant, and (b) she does not wish to be.  This troubling phenomenon also occurs because conservatives are lying @$$holes.  (Have I mentioned that before?  I think I may have mentioned that before.)

Harwood said that laws regarding what’s said between the doctor and a woman seeking an abortion often hamper doctors’ attempts to inform patients in a balanced way.

“It is certainly an impediment to have the state dictate my informed consent process beyond the usual,” Harwood told Reuters Health.

Abortion care and pregnancy care should not really be any different than consenting people for any other procedure.

A-fucking-men to that, sister.  I wonder (not really) why state law doesn’t mandate a 24 hour waiting period, after required counseling, for having a tooth extracted?  “Sir, we’ll see you back here tomorrow afternoon.  But in the meantime, you had better think long and hard about whether you really, truly want that ingrown toenail removed.”

Davis agreed that state-mandated discussions have no place in abortion counseling. She said she was glad to see the new report, which helps dispel “misinformation” and “lies” about abortion risks included in some state laws — such as the idea that abortion is linked to cancer.

“Women who are having abortions are having a safe, common surgical procedure or taking medication for the same reason,” she told Reuters Health

“They should feel confident that the medical care they’re having is safe, long-term and short-term.”

I wonder if anyone has done a study on whether state-mandated lying about, say, increased cancer risk to women seeking abortions has resulted in one single woman changing her mind about having the procedure.  I doubt that it would.  But I can see how it might unnecessarily traumatize and further upset the stupid filthy selfish whore woman.  Why else would they do it?

7 thoughts on “Abortions FTW.

  1. Excellent post, Iris.

    Now, I suppose that when those “@$$hole conservatives” get their way and coathanger-induced abortions are once again being performed in rat-infested back alleys all across the land, the mortality rate for pregnant women will soar. Then, of course, those same @$$hole conservatives will be trumpeting the death stats over and over and over and over and over, screeching, “See!? Abortions really are dangerous!!! You should thank us for making them illegal!!!” And @$$hole conservatives everywhere will smile and nod stupidly.

    I often ask myself which aspect of the conservative “personality” I least admire. Is it their arrogance? Their dislike of truth? Their fear/hatred of anyone who isn’t exactly like them in color, language, religion, sexual orientation, political bent? Their sheer, undaunted, overwhelming asshole-ness?

    I’ll let you know when I have an answer.

  2. P.S. — They may be “@$$hole conservatives”, but at least they’ve been vindicated in one area; abstinence-only education has clearly been a remarkable success! Yes! Far fewer unwanted pregnancies means far fewer abortions! So why not outlaw them altogether?! We can all be thankful that true sex education has been forcibly removed from schools; after all, long experience has shown that not talking to kids about sex and pregnancy and STDs and responsibility will definitely ensure that thoughts of awkwardly groping each other in the dark will never intrude into their virginal and hormonal brains. From here on out, there will be far fewer pregnant and/or STD-infected young ladies around, as they’ll all be wearing their promise rings and chastity belts and pure white Christian to-come-off-only-on-my-wedding-night-and-only-in-the-dark-where-my-new-husband-and-I-will-use-the-missionary-position-for-procreational-sex-to-create-a-new-generation-of-@$$hole-conservatives panties:


    Oh, wait…

  3. I often ask myself which aspect of the conservative “personality” I least admire. Is it their arrogance? Their dislike of truth? Their fear/hatred of anyone who isn’t exactly like them in color, language, religion, sexual orientation, political bent? Their sheer, undaunted, overwhelming asshole-ness?

    I think the aspect I admire least is conservatives’ inability to keep all of their ugliness to themselves.

  4. Speaking of CPD, this just coming in:


    One of my favorite passages: “…many anti-prejudice programs encourage participants to see things from another group’s point of view. That mental exercise may be too taxing for people of low IQ.”

    IOW: yes, conservatives are stupid.

  5. Now, now. Stupid people are conservative, which is not the same thing. The problem, of course, is that there are a whole lot of stupid people.

    I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.

    John Stuart Mill, “The Contest in America,” Fraser’s Magazine (February 1862).

    Great article. Thanks for sending. I shall add it to the CPD collection in the Palace library at once!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s