Does contraception cause or avoid abortion?

[lavendersparkle]

Leaving aside the issue of whether some forms of contraception have post-fertilisation effects, there is a debate about whether contraception makes people more or less likely to have abortions.

I think the arguments go something like this. Anti-contraception pro-lifers* claim that contraception encourages people to be in denial about the connection between sex and pregnancy. This means that people are more likely to have sex in situations where they definitely don't want to get pregnant and if they do get pregnant, they're more likely to view it as a 'mistake' which should be 'corrected' by abortion. This may seem far fetched, but there is evidence from other areas of life that sometimes actions to improve the safety are outweighed by an increase in risk taking. I don't wear a cycle helmet, in part because there is some evidence that they don't improve your overall safety as drivers drive more dangerously around cyclists wearing helmets because they aren't viewed as as vulnerable.

The pro-contraceptive argument is that, even if people are more likely to have an abortion if they get pregnant, the decrease in the number of unplanned pregnancies when people use contraception are so high that they reduce the number of abortions overall.

So, I think this needs to be looked at empirically. I think being a social scientists can help one make more sense of the correlation and causation. One thing said by anti-contraception advocates is that a large proportion of the women who have abortions were using contraception whereas very few were practising NFP, FAM or LAM. I don't think that this correlation results in a causation. Most people who practice NFP are devout Roman Catholics and they'd be pretty unlikely to have an abortion. So in this case, rather than the use of contraception causing abortion it's more that the lack of contraceptive use and the lack of abortion are both caused by the Roman Catholicism.

A pro-contraception argument is that among developed countries with legal abortion, the countries with the lowest abortion rates are the ones where contraception is most easily available and sex education is most comprehensive, such as the Netherlands. A contrasting argument is that abortion rates have risen in England and the US, even as contraceptive availability has increased.

Thinking about this I'm drawn toward a tentative conclusion. I think that ceteris paribus, more access to contraception reduces the number of abortions, because it dramatically reduces the number of unplanned pregnancies. However, I wonder whether the availability of convenient contraception has led to changes in cultural attitudes to sex and children, which in turn makes people more likely to have abortion because they have more sex and are less willing to accept unplanned children.

*This ignores other arguments against contraception just that they cause more abortions.
**This ignores wider reproductive justice issues.

Comments

[neonchameleon.livejournal.com]

However, I wonder whether the availability of convenient contraception has led to changes in cultural attitudes to sex and children, which in turn makes people more likely to have abortion because they have more sex and are less willing to accept unplanned children.

Given the problems e.g. the Victorians had with foundlings, the fact that historical societies have had by our standards an absurd birth rate (either Julian the Apostate or Justinian complained about problems Constantinople had with a falling birth rate - comfortably more than a dozen), the risible effectiveness of abstenance only sex education, and many other factors, I think that the answer is that this simply isn't relevant.

And while I'm at it, I'd be fascinated by a cite for:
One thing said by anti-contraception advocates is that a large proportion of the women who have abortions were using contraception whereas very few were practising NFP, FAM or LAM.

The best evidence I have indicates that a low abortion rate goes hand in hand with use of contraception, and that “The evidence is strong and growing that empowering women with the means to decide for themselves when to become pregnant and how many children to have significantly lowers unintended pregnancy rates and thereby reduces the need for abortion,” whereas "abortion occurs at roughly equal rates in regions where it is broadly legal and in regions where it is highly restricted"

[naath.livejournal.com]

I think the "contraception causes abortions" argument relies on assuming that without contraception people will avoid sex in order to avoid pregnancy and thus avoid abortions or unwanted children. But I don't think that's true; historically women without access to reliable contraception or abortion have killed or abandoned unwanted infants, the existence of unwanted children (presumably resulting from unwanted pregnancies, although also plausibly resulting from the child being 'wrong' in some way, female for instance) isn't a new one.

If we were to accept that the "contraceptive mentality" causes abortions I think I'd expect people using NFP (as a contraceptive method) to get abortions when it fails, and also people practising abstinence to get abortions when it fails (that is, they fail to abstain) because those methods are equally about "I don't want a baby right now". Difficult to study as many people who are using these methods are also very often anti-abortion though.

On the other hand I do think we have a problem with our social views about "who should get pregnant and when". As a society we have the notion that because contraception and abortion exist that women *should* use them to control when they get pregnant, and I think that whilst women who *want* to use them should be able to that women who *don't* (and as a result have large families, or start having children young) shouldn't be socially stigmatised.

[loveneverfails.livejournal.com]

I would go with "contraception changes sexual behavior and attitudes, because the likelihood of pregnancy is what changes sex from a short term choice to a long term choice. When sex is a short term choice instead of a long term choice, a long term effect that is unwanted is easily discarded." I still believe that contraception gives more freedom to men than it does to women, and that misogyny in sexual relationships should be considered a root cause of abortion.

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

Hm. Maybe the most effective way of reducing abortions (including infanticide or abandonment) would be to make contracpetion encouraged for people under 25, and forbidden for people over 25. The idea being, young people some of whom who are likely to end up having sex anyway will get contraception, but older people who are more likely to actually abstain if denied effective contraception will be forced to do so.

Of course, you could pick another cut-off than age, but I think either way it's a awfully unacceptable idea.

[alexandralynch.livejournal.com]

If people really wanted to do something about the abortion rate, they'd raise the minimum wage and provide more social support for children and women. Much of the abortion debate is "punish those sluts" not "Every child wanted, loved, and supported", and often ignores the fallout of their positions on the average person and on people of varying social classes.

Abstinence within a marriage can be very emotionally problematic on both sides. For us, given that we were abstaining anyway due to being apart five days out of seven, the pressure to actually be intimate when we were together was pretty strong.

Seven pregnancies, six years. Three children born, one adopted out, three abortions, one first trimester miscarriage. I am neither embarassed, regretful, or ashamed. Being pregnant messed me up worse than having the abortions did.

[traumerin.livejournal.com]

As a side note, it seems like FAM or NFP would not work very well for any Jewish women who follow the niddah laws. Does anyone try this? It seems like the window open for sexual activity would be fairly limited.