In September 2008, the Family Research Council published a study by Dr. Michael New entitled “The Effect of Parental Involvement Laws on the Incidence of Abortion Among Minors.” The study demonstrates the effectiveness of parental involvement laws (parental notice and consent) in reducing abortion rates.
New’s study examined the parental involvement laws in all 50 states and analyzed the effects of those laws on abortion rates between 1985 and 1999. The study showed that “when a state enacts a parental involvement law, the abortion rate falls by an average of approximately 13.6 percent.”
In October 2008, the Guttmacher Institute attempted to refute the conclusion of New’s study in their online publication, “The Impact of Parental Involvement Laws.” They claimed that New’s study suffered from a lack of credible supporting evidence and methodological flaws. According to Guttmacher, evidence provided by authoritative sources such as the New England Journal of Medicine present evidence contradicting New’s study.
Guttmacher also asserted that, contrary to New’s conclusion, the main reason for the decrease in abortion rates among teens has been a decrease in teen pregnancy rates; and this decrease in teen pregnancy is attributable primarily to the “improved contraception use among sexually active minors.” Lastly, Guttmacher argued that parental involvement laws put minors at risk of greater abortion complications, physical violence, and abuse.
Today, Dr. New published a response to Guttmacher’s attack, debunking all of Guttmacher’s arguments.
Credible Evidence
Contrary to Guttmacher’s assertion, New’s study relied upon evidence published by numerous authoritative sources, such as the Center for Disease Prevention and Control, the U.S. Bureau of the Census, the New England Journal of Medicine, the American Journal of Public Health, and the Journal of Health Economics, to name a few.
New refuted Guttmacher’s claim that a 2006 study published by the New England Journal of Medicine presented evidence contradicting his study. He points out that, if one reads the study carefully, it is apparent that it actually supports his conclusions. The study concluded that, after the Texas parental notice law took effect in 2000, there were statistically significant declines in the abortion rate for 15-, 16- and 17-year olds. Moreover, the authors contacted the state health departments in neighboring states and found very little evidence that Texas minors were obtaining abortions across state lines.
Methodology
New successfully disproved Guttmacher’s claim that studies such as his suffer from methodological flaws. Guttmacher falsely stated that such studies “track abortions by state of occurrence, not by state of residence,” and therefore fail to take into account the minors who travel across state lines to obtain abortions. Guttmacher suggested that parental involvement laws “may succeed in shifting the occurrence of abortions from one state to another.”
In response, New pointed out that “the CDC only releases minor abortion data by state of occurrence” and that “social scientists can only use data which is publicly available.”
Second, New pointed out that every source he cited in his study showed that parental involvement laws did not result in an increase or “shift” in the number of minors crossing state lines to obtain abortions. Peer-reviewed studies from Massachusetts, Minnesota, South Carolina, and Texas demonstrated that after parental involvement laws were enacted in those states, the abortion rate for minors decreased and the number of minors crossing state lines to obtain abortions did not contemporaneously increase (and in some cases, that number actually decreased).
Teen Pregnancy and Improved Use of Contraceptives
New disproved Guttmacher’s claims that teen pregnancy rates (and thus teen abortion rates) have been falling steadily at a national level, regardless of the enactment of state parental involvement laws. He pointed out, “states that passed pro-life parental involvement laws saw minor abortion rates fall faster than the national trend.”
New also refuted Guttmacher’s argument that the improved use of contraceptives – not parental involvement laws – is responsible for the decrease in teen pregnancy and the subsequent decrease in minor abortions. He pointed out that the study upon which Guttmacher relied in making their argument suffered from numerous flaws. Significantly, the study “assumes that minors would use contraception as consistently/reliable as adults. In reality, there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.”
Putting Minors at Risk of Abortion Complications, Physical Violence, and Abuse
New refuted Guttmacher’s assertion that parental involvement laws delay the abortion process and thereby expose minors to more dangerous abortion risks and complications. Guttmacher did not present any evidence to support this claim. New also stated that many minors are “unaware of their own medical history,” and cited cases where minors have died because they were unable to inform their abortion provider that they were allergic to anesthesia.
New easily refutes Guttmacher’s claim that parental involvement laws put minors in danger of physical violence and abuse by their parents. The U.S. Supreme Court has established that all parental involvement laws must allow a judicial bypass procedure. Moreover, parental involvement laws protect minors from sexual predators who seek to cover up their crimes by secret abortions.
In short, Dr. New’s response to Guttmacher’s attack on his study further demonstrates the effectiveness and necessity of parental involvement laws to protect minors and reduce the number of abortions in America.
