Ebbing Tides, Part I

More Obstacles to the Horrid Practice

It is noted with thankfulness that the United States became more pro-life over the past twelve months.  Whilst it is true that abortions are down in New Zealand, we cannot attribute it to any one event (for example, the passing of more restrictive legislation) nor even to a change in sentiment amongst the population at large.  And research is not performed on such things Downunder.  It's not the done thing, whereas plenty of money is always available for research projects indirectly promoting abortion.

We wonder whether our national conscience is being pricked and that the tap, tap, tap of information about the real live human being, fearfully and wonderfully made, in the womb of a woman is gradually causing a change in sentiment.  Also, there is evidence that the medical profession is uneasy about abortion: it's very difficult to get medical staff to participate in the practice in some areas of the country--and that has to have an effect.

We read that in the United States significant progress was made in 2013 against the horrid practice.  But the kind of progress was piecemeal, gradual, here a little, there a little.  No king hits.  And that's the way we expect that we will finally be rid of this monstrosity.  Breitbart provides us with the following "state of play" account:

America Became Increasingly Pro-Life in 2013

by John Sexton  
3 Jan 2014
Breitbart News

 A new report from the Guttmacher Institute, the non-profit research arm of Planned Parenthood, finds that more abortions restrictions were implemented in 2013 than in any other year save 2011. The number of states Guttmacher classfies as "hostile" to abortion has doubled since 2000.

Despite its rooting interest in the outcome, Guttmacher's methodology is straightforward enough. It subdivides state legislation into 10 categories which represent obstacles to getting an abortion. These can include things like parental notification, waiting periods, laws regulating abortion facilities, etc. Any state which has at least 4 of these in place is considered hostile.

As you can see in the map below, the number of states which restrict abortion has more than doubled since the year 2000:


Here's Guttmacher's explanation of the findings from 2011-2013:

In 2000, 13 states had at least four types of major abortion restrictions and so were considered hostile to abortion rights...27 states fell into this category by 2013. In contrast, the number of states supportive of abortion rights fell from 17 to 13, while the number of middle-ground states was cut in half, from 20 to 10. The proportion of women living in restrictive states went from 31% to 56%, while the proportion living in supportive states fell from 40% to 31% over the same period.

The legislative shift happened after a surge in GOP control of state legislatures in 2010. It was likely also helped along by the Gosnell murder case which brought media attention (and identifiable victims) to the issue of late-term abortion. Several states including Pennsylvania and Texas passed new restrictions aimed at stopping future Gosnell-like clinics.

The shift also coincides with broader national attitudes toward abortion. A Rasmussen poll taken this summer found the number of people self-identifying as pro-choice was down to 46 percent, nearly on par with the 43 percent who consider themselves pro-life.