The “Abortion to Save the Life of the Mother” Scam

The word "abortion" on Wood: Abortion to Save the Life of the Mother
                                                       Photo by Africa Images at Canva

Mainstream media outlets are full of stories about pregnant people whose lives are endangered by their pregnancy and who need an abortion. But sometimes, abortion to save the life of the mother is a scam.

Pro-Lifers and Abortions to Save the Life of the Mother

Individual cases vary, and there are indeed times when a pregnant person’s life can be endangered by a pregnancy. In many of these cases, premature delivery instead of abortion is an option, even when the child is too premature to survive. Directly killing the baby by dismemberment isn’t a requirement. Live Action News discusses how a premature delivery, even when a child has no chance of survival, is different from an abortion.

The media often casts pro-lifers as the bad guys when we require confirmation of a life-endangering pregnancy or put ground rules in place for abortions to save a woman’s life. But there is a very good reason pro-lifers want (and need) to do this.

Pro-abortion activists are trying to create a loophole. They want to give one doctor, the abortionist, the authority, with no oversight, to claim that an abortion endangers the pregnant person’s life. You need to know some history to understand why this is so problematic.

Public Opinion of Doctors Before Roe

Before Roe, there was far more support for legalizing abortion among doctors than among laypeople. In a 1968 poll, 86.9% of doctors were in favor of liberalizing abortion laws, including 94.6% of psychiatrists.1 In 1965, 89% of psychiatrists said they would recommend abortion if the mother’s emotional health was endangered by the pregnancy.2

A Loophole in the Law

Therefore, many doctors were committed to giving women abortions on request. Yet abortions could only be done legally to save the mother’s life. So, doctors created a loophole. If a woman threatened suicide because of her pregnancy, then this meant her life was in danger. Thus, an abortion could comply with the law.

Dr. Allan Guttmacher, who would become the director of Planned Parenthood, stated in 1958:

At Mount Sinai, our rules are specific. The law says that one may abort to save the life of the mother, and therefore we insist that suicidal intent must be present in the psychiatric patient in order to validate the abortion.3

These women were often carefully coached on what to say.

Statistics on Abortion “to Save the Life of the Mother”

From 1952 to 1955 there were 57 abortions committed at Mount Sinai Hospital, and 47.3% were on healthy mothers, done on grounds of averting suicide.4 From 1951 to 1953, 37.8% of abortions committed in New York City were done for this reason. This was up from only 8.2% in 1943.5 Between 1960-1962, it was 61%.6 In 1943, in Buffalo, New York, only 10% of abortions were justified by the risk of suicide. By 1963, this percentage had increased to 80%7, and the overall number of abortions increased considerably.

Sometimes, the pregnant person simply told the abortionist that she was suicidal. In other cases, the abortionist enlisted a psychiatrist accomplice who met with the woman and certified that she was suicidal. He would write a letter or fill out some paperwork, and the abortion would be done.

Doctors Admitted to Dishonesty

Many in the medical field openly admitted that these “consultations” and certifications were a sham.

Two authors writing in 1973 stated:

Some liberal-minded psychiatrists admit frankly that they sometimes must stretch their definitions of life-threatening mental hazards a bit, because they know that their approval is the only chance a woman may have of obtaining a legal therapeutic abortion.8

They quoted Dr. Leon Eisenberg of Harvard admitting, “I write letters recommending abortion that are frankly fraudulent because I am satisfied to be used so that someone may obtain what our society otherwise would deny to her.”9

These weren’t pro-life authors. In their book, they compared abortion to “removing a wart from the side of the nose.”10

Dr. Pietro Castelnuovo Tedesco, associate professor of psychiatry at UCLA, said in 1972:

[P]sychiatrists would testify that a woman would probably commit suicide if she didn’t get an abortion … We were fudging on behalf of the patient for humanitarian reasons. It may have been for a good cause, but it was still fudging on psychiatric standards and on scientific truthfulness.11

In the documentary Voices of Choice produced by Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health, abortionist Dr. Mildred Hanson described how she coached women who appeared before committees at hospitals for permission to get abortions before Roe:

We had a system put into motion so we could almost assure the patient that the process would go forward. I would coach her that she must convince the psychiatrist that she was indeed suicidal. How when she crossed a bridge she would think, “I’m just going to crawl over the top and jump over.”

Is that unethical to coach a person? Is that lying? Maybe … But when you are between a rock and a hard place you do what you have to do.

A Doctor Gives Pregnant Women Advice

Dr. Robert E Hall wrote A Doctor’s Guide to Having an Abortion in 1971. Hall wrote the book for pregnant women, as a guide on how to get abortions.

Hall writes:

A surprising number of hospital abortions are being performed in the 34 states with … laws which still require a threat to the woman’s life. Somehow the medical profession has always managed to bend these laws as it has seen fit, and right now many doctors in legislatively unreformed areas are openly responding to the growing demand for safe abortions…

Many practice in the most famous medical centers, where they can actually use the reputation of the hospital to protect them from the law. Most pretend to adhere to the law by going through the motions of having a psychiatrist friend certify their patients as suicidal.12

He then instructs:

Most of you will not qualify for an abortion on medical or fetal grounds. Without these qualifications, then, you must convince the doctor that you are suicidal. Some doctors will be satisfied with evidence that you are terribly upset…

[Y]ou will probably have to dramatize your symptoms. Tell your doctor how agitated or depressed you are, that you can’t sleep at night, and that you’re thinking of doing away with yourself…

I don’t mean that you have to lie to these men. Just spell out your fears, your fantasies, and your thoughts of self-destruction. Almost every unhappily pregnant woman has them. Emphasize them – make the most of them. And if the doctor is at all sympathetic to your plight, he will exaggerate your story until, by the time he asks for official approval of your abortion, you will sound like a raving maniac.

There is a certain element of theater in all of this, but it is founded on fact, and you must play your role in order to get an above–board abortion in an unreformed state.13

Actual Suicides Were Rare

Even before Roe, actual suicides among pregnant people were rare. In fact, according to a 1965 study, the suicide rate for pregnant women was one-sixth that of nonpregnant women.14

Of course, this didn’t matter to the doctors.

A More Recent Example

As recently as the 2000s, the suicide subterfuge was still going on.

Alice Eve Cohen wrote a 2009 memoir called What I Thought I Knew. It was about her journey through a pregnancy with a disabled child. Doctors had told Cohen she was infertile, and she was taking estrogen. She didn’t realize she was pregnant until the 26th week. After testing, doctors said that her daughter was intersex, had limb deformities, and might have a fatal disease. Cohen sought a third trimester abortion.

She went to a late-term abortionist named William Raushbaum, who is now deceased. This was their conversation:

‘I don’t want to have a baby. I’m depressed and terrified. I had no prenatal care for the first six months, and the baby was subjected to drugs and x-rays, a CAT scan –’

‘Yes, and?’

‘– And she’s female, but she has a penis, and she might have CAH, a fatal salt-wasting –’

‘Yes, and?’

‘–And I’m scared I’ll go into labor any day and the baby will be premature and severely disabled and–’

‘Yes, and?’

‘Why do you keep saying ‘yes, and?’

‘Is your life in danger?’

‘What do you mean?’…

‘I don’t have time for stupidity. Why are you in my office? I can’t legally put words into your mouth. Exactly how depressed are you?’

‘I think about killing myself.’

‘Thank you! I’m sorry you’re so unhappy, but that’s why we’re here, isn’t it? Since you’re contemplating suicide, the mother’s life is in danger, which is the only way you can get a legal abortion. Not in New York State, which has no exception to the 24-week limit.

You could, however, have an abortion in Wichita, Kansas … Do you want me to call the abortion clinic in Wichita right now?’

I nodded. He called Wichita and scheduled an abortion for Tuesday, in one week.16

She was over 27 weeks.

In the end, Cohen chose life. She and her partner named the baby Eliana. Eliana was born with a physical disability but learned to walk, run, climb, and ride a scooter. Cohen went through a long and difficult battle with postpartum depression but came to love her daughter dearly.

Footnotes

1.     Jane E. Brody “Abortion: Once a Whispered Problem, Now a Public Debate” New York Times January 8, 1968

2.     Leslie Aldrich Westoff and Charles F Westoff From Now to Zero: Fertility, Contraception and Abortion in America (Boston, Massachusetts: Little, Brown and Co., 1971) 133 – 134

3.     Quoted in Mary S Calderone, MD Abortion in the United States (New York: Paul B Hoeber, Inc., 1958) 139

4.     Ibid., table 6-13, p. 93

5.     Ibid., table 6 – 10, p. 84

6.     American Journal of Public Health 964 (1965). Cited in David Granfield The Abortion Decision (Garden City, New York: Image Books, 1971) 100

7.     K Niswander, R Klein, and C Randall “Changing Attitudes to Therapeutic Abortion” American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 28 (1966) 124

8.     Jules Saltman and Stanley Zimbering Abortion Today (Springfield, Illinois: Charles C Thomas Publisher, 1973) 49-50

9.     Ibid., 50

10. Ibid., 15

11. Quoted in Clifford E Bajema Abortion and the Meaning of Personhood (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1974) 70

12.Robert E Hall MD A Doctor’s Guide to Having an Abortion (Bergenfield, New Jersey: New American Library, 1971)

13.Robert E Hall MD A Doctor’s Guide to Having an Abortion (Bergenfield, New Jersey: New American Library, 1971) 22-23

14.Ibid., 24-25

15.Ajay Rosenberg, et al. “Suicide, Psychiatrists and Therapeutic Abortion” California Medicine, 102:407, 1965

16.Alice Eve Cohen What I Thought I Knew (New York: Penguin Books, 2009) 44-45

Bio

Sarah Terzo covered the abortion issue for over 13 years as a professional journalist. In this capacity, she has written nearly a thousand articles about abortion and read over 850 books on the topic. She has been researching and writing about abortion since attending The College of New Jersey (class of 1997) where she minored in Women’s Studies.

Share on Facebook

Support from parents is major factor in teens’ decision to reject abortion

The authors of a study on teen pregnancy and the abortion decision found that:

“The knowledge that as a teenage mother they would not be on their own and still considered as a part of their family was crucial to many young women in their decision to continue [with the pregnancy].”

They quoted a teenage girl named Leone who decided against abortion. She said:

“If my mum and dad said they wouldn’t support me I think that would have changed my mind, because I wouldn’t have been able to afford to look after her.”

Sharon Tabberer, Christine Hall, Shirley Prendergast, and Andrew Webster Teenage Pregnancy and Choice: Abortion or Motherhood: Influences on the Decision (York, UK: Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2000) 24

Share on Facebook

Abortion rate rose drastically in Canada in the 1970s

While Canada did not completely legalize abortion until 1988 through a Supreme Court decision, the country began loosening its restrictions on abortion in 1969. Starting then, women could get abortions with the approval of a committee of doctors.

As abortion became more and more available in Canada in the 1970s, the abortion rate increased. In 1970, there were 11,152 abortions. By 1980, that number had gone up to 65,751.

These statistics show that when abortion becomes legally available, abortion rates increase over time as more women choose to have abortions.

Here are the statistics:

In 1970:

11,152 abortions

rate: 3.0

In 1971:

30,923 abortions

rate: 8.6

number of abortions: 177.3% increase

abortion rate: 186.7 % increase

In 1972:

38,853 abortions

rate: 11.2

percent increase in abortions: 25.6%

percent increase in abortion rate: 30.2%

In 1973:

43,201 abortions

rate: 12.6

percent increase in abortions: 11.4%

percent increase in abortion rate: 8.7%

In 1974:

48,136 abortions

rate: 13.7

percent increase in abortions: 11.4%

percent increase in abortion rate: 8.7%

In 1975:

49,311 abortions

abortion rate: 13.7

percent increase in abortions: 2.4%

In 1976:

54,478 abortions

abortion rate: 15.1

percent increase in abortions: 10.5%

percent increase in abortion rate 10.2%

In 1977:

57,564 abortions

abortion rate: 15.9

percent increase in abortions: 5.7%

percent increase in rate: 5.3%

In 1978:

62,290 abortions

abortion rate: 17.4%

percent increase in abortions: 8.2%

percent increase in abortion rate: 9.4%

In 1979:

65,043 abortions

abortion rate: 17.8

percent increase in abortions: 4.4%

percent increase in abortion rate: 2.3%

In 1980:

65,751 abortions

estimated abortion rate: 17.9

percent increase in abortions: 1.1%

percent increase in abortion rate (estimated): 0.6%

Sources:

Statistics Canada Daily (Catalogue 11 – 001E), Statistics Canada, Monday, November 30, 1981, pp. 4–6

Statistics Canada (Catalogue 82 – 211), Tuesday, November 23, 1982

Bruce Alton The Abortion Question (Toronto: Anglican Book Centre, 1983) 12

Share on Facebook

“Conscious Abortion” and Ridiculous Pro-Choice Exercises

In the article “Conscious Abortion: Engaging the Fetus in a Compassionate Dialogue” in the Journal of Prenatal and Perinatal Psychology and Health, psychologist Claudette Nantel encourages women to communicate with their baby before an abortion, tell them how much they love them, say goodbye, and even get their child’s permission for the abortion.

Really.

Nantel admits the baby’s humanity, defining “fetus” as “an unborn baby in its mother’s womb, at any time from conception to birth.”1

“A heart-to-heart conversation”

“Conscious abortion” hinges on the belief that the baby in the womb can “hear” and understand the woman’s thoughts and even telepathically communicate back. Family doctor G McGarey suggested2 that someone having an abortion should have “a heart-to-heart conversation with her baby in the womb, explaining how this is not a good time for her to raise a child, reassuring them that they are deeply loved.”3

According to McGarey, it’s important for women to make sure their babies know they love them… before they have them dismembered or poisoned. McGarey has guided women through the process and says many of her colleagues use it.

Several other counselors tell women with unwanted pregnancies to ask their baby to leave the womb. PH Fairfield instructs the following: “With deep love and concern, ask [the baby] to leave. Let yourself feel the divine love and connection with them, then tell them that it is not time for them to come in, or that you would like them to come back at a later time.”It is hoped, then, the baby will choose to leave, and the woman will miscarry. If not, then they believe abortion is needed to complete the process.

Another practitioner, M Axness, says women having abortions should communicate with the baby “through prayer, imagination, art, letter, dance, song – a level of communication with the newly arrived being in their wombs through which they explain to the baby that it isn’t the right time for him or her to come and that it is necessary to separate.”5

Ask for consent and wait for “a response of agreement”

HH Watkins has women with unwanted pregnancies ask the baby to consent to the abortion. The child, according to Watkins and Nantel, will then telepathically communicate to the mother that they agree to be aborted. Watkins instructs women to:

visualize the fetus, express their conflict about the pregnancy, then wait for a response (feeling, hearing, and seeing). The women were encouraged to repeat this exercise at home, and when/if they felt a response of agreement from the fetus, to visualize the fetus leaving their body.6

She says this leads the women to have “a deeper sense of self, more respect for life, and positive feelings about a better-timed future pregnancy through the process of dialogue with their baby.”Presumably, all these blessings will come after the abortion.

Nearly every time Watkins did this exercise, the mother allegedly “heard” the baby agree to be aborted. Obviously, this was what they wanted to “hear.” Under Watkins’ influence, the women convinced themselves their babies accepted being aborted. All of the babies “consented” to their violent deaths – except one.

One woman “heard” the child say no.

After getting this “answer,” the woman responded, “You don’t mean that?”

Watkins recalls what happened next:

 [She] continued the process of weeping and talking to the fetus at home until there was only silence in response. She concluded the fetus accepted her intended surgical intervention. She began the abortion visualization, but no miscarriage occurred.

The surgical intervention was accomplished without complication, healing was rapid, and the client felt little or no remorse. She knew at all levels she had made the appropriate decision for herself.8

So apparently the baby, by his or her silence, consented to be aborted after all.

Twisting reality

One woman had three abortions. Of the first child, she said, “I was young and much more centered on myself and my life circumstances than on the baby. I was not really in contact with this baby.”9

But with the other two, “I was able to go inside myself and have an intimate relationship with these two babies.”10

She thinks her children existed for the purpose of telling her to leave the man she was with, and says:

I never felt I was doing them harm. Just before the abortion for each of them, I asked the lady who showed me the ultrasound screen to give me five minutes alone with the baby, before the intervention.

I spoke to each of them in a fluid, soft manner, more like saying, ‘Thank you, see you later…’ The ultrasound screen conversations were way of recognizing the relationship, expressing my gratitude…

It was so clear for me that these two children had not come to me saying, ‘Let me be born.’11

In this woman’s mind, her babies existed solely for her – to give her a life lesson. She says, “These babies helped me, and I acted on what they helped me with. I honored them. And they had a tremendous healing effect on the guilt and angst which I carried a long time during and after my first abortion.”12

After they gave her that lesson, they could be discarded. To avoid guilt, she convinced herself that her children were content to be discarded. After all, they had served their purpose.

According to her, her aborted babies were “beings who were my equals, partners in learning.”13

The possibility that these “equals” could have a right to life of their own never occurred to her.

Note also the euphemism being used in these cases — “intervention” rather than abortion.

The phenomenon of “conscious abortion” is about twisting reality to make abortion acceptable, even while admitting it’s killing babies. If doctors, counselors, and women having abortions believe the baby has no objections, they don’t have to feel guilty.

The article isn’t clear on how widespread the practice of “conscious abortion” is, but quotes multiple practitioners of it, some of whom reveal that their colleagues are doing it as well. The article even quotes a French woman who works in an abortion facility and does this exercise with women before their abortions. 

  1. Claudette Nantel “Conscious Abortion: Engaging the Fetus in a Compassionate Dialogue” Journal of Prenatal and Perinatal Psychology and Health 35 (2) Summer 2021: 2
  2. G McGarey Born to Live (Inkwell Productions 2008) 59 – 60
  3. Claudette Nantel “Conscious Abortion…” 10
  4. PH Fairfield “Conscious Abortion” and the Idea of Abortion Itself” Journal of Prenatal and Perinatal Psychology and Health, 20 (4): 2006:346
  5. M Axness “To Be or Not to Be: Prenatal Origins of the Existential “Yes” v. The Self Struggle” Journal of Prenatal and Perinatal Psychology and Health 31 (2): 155
  6. Claudette Nantel “Conscious Abortion…” 13
  7. HH Watkins “Treating the Trauma of Abortion” Journal of Pre-and Perinatal Psychology and Health 1 (2) 1986: 136
  8. HH Watkins “Treating the Trauma of Abortion” 137
  9. Claudette Nantel “Conscious Abortion…” 17
  10. Ibid., 14
  11. Ibid., 15
  12. Ibid.
  13. Ibid.
Share on Facebook

Pro-lifers more likely to consider abortion “important” than pro-choicers

This is an older study, but I think it’s still relevant.

As quoted in the book Abortion Debate in the United States and Canada:

“It is predicted that if those who hold mixed stands about abortion are excluded, the remaining consistent supporters and opponents of abortion should show equal strength of feelings with regard to their respective positions.

Findings do not support this prediction: opponents of abortion are far more likely than proponents to regard the abortion issue as important. This finding holds true when religious affiliation is controlled.”

Maureen Muldoon Abortion Debate in the United States and Canada (New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991) 33

Cites: Jacqueline Scott and Howard Shuman “Attitude Strength and Social Action in the Abortion Dispute” American Sociological Review 53, 5, October 1988, 785 – 793

Pro-Lifers are more passionate about their beliefs.

Share on Facebook

In the UK, 718 women had their 6th (or more) abortion

Pro-life author S. Nye  writes that in 2018:

“Over 80,000 repeat abortions were carried out, with nearly 3500 of these being carried out on teenagers. The year-on-year trend is for more multiple abortions. In the same year, 718 women had their sixth abortion. Five of these women were still teenagers.”

S. Nye Whose Child? UK Abortion, a Gospel Matter (undated) 110

Cites:

David Mercer “Abortions: Five teenagers among women who had at least their 6th termination in UK last yearSky November 21, 2019

Share on Facebook

Pro-Choice author admits countries where abortions are illegal have “low maternal mortality and morbidity”

Pro-Choice author Christina Zampas writes about countries where abortion is illegal:

“Governments often hide behind the veil of low maternal mortality and morbidity rates to continue to justify restrictive [abortion] laws, even in the face of concrete cases that reflect the severe impact of such laws.”

Christina Zampas “Legal and Political Discourses on Women’s Right to Abortion” in Sylvia De Zordo, Joanna Mishtal and Lorena Anton, eds. A Fragmented Landscape: Abortion Governance and Protest Logics in Europe (New York: Berghahn, 2017) 33

She tacitly admits that some countries where abortion is legal have low maternal mortality and morbidity rates, meaning few women are killed or injured by illegal abortions in these nations.

Share on Facebook

Abortions of disabled babies are increasing in Great Britain

The number of women having “selective abortions” (i.e., abortions because the baby is disabled or sick) has increased in England.

According to British pro-life author S. Nye:

“In 2011, there were 72 selective terminations in England and Wales. By 2019, that yearly total had risen to 126. This is a 75% increase in nine years. These abortions are carried out under statutory grounds E (substantial risk the child would be born seriously handicapped).”

S. Nye Whose Child? UK Abortion, a Gospel Matter (undated) 80

Cites:

Department Of Health & Social Care “Abortion Statistics, England and Wales: 2019: Summary information from the abortion notification forms returned to the Chief Medical Officers of England and Wales. January to December 2019.” June 11 2020

Share on Facebook

Number of US abortions exceeds populations of 8 countries

Pro-life author Rick Garrett calculated:

“The total number of abortions performed to date in the US alone is more than the combined populations of Switzerland, Denmark, Finland, Austria, Sweden, Greece, New Zealand, and Norway.”

Rick Garrett The Duping of America (Maitland, Florida: Liberty Hill Press, 2021) 2

Share on Facebook

Most Americans don’t agree with the pro-choice movement

Author Ziad Munson on a 2016 study:

“… The General Social Survey… shows that in 2016 only 43% of Americans agreed with the statement that “it should be possible for a pregnant woman to obtain a legal abortion if she wants it for any reason.”

The majority of Americans thus disagree with the belief of most pro-choice activists. On the other hand, the same survey shows that 74% of Americans agreed that it should be “possible for a pregnant woman to obtain a legal abortion if she became pregnant as a result of rape.”

Cites: Tom W Smith, et al. “General Social Surveys, 1972 – 2016” retrieved June 6, 2017

Ziad Munson Abortion Politics (Medford, MA: Polity Press, 2018) 64

The pro-choice movement claims that women should be allowed to have an abortion at any stage in pregnancy for any reason. Clearly, this is a minority view.

Share on Facebook