Misplaced Pages

David Reardon: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:27, 4 December 2007 editIronAngelAlice (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,988 edits Undid revision 175758956 by Strider12 (talk) reverting to agreed upon text - please see talk page← Previous edit Revision as of 02:19, 5 December 2007 edit undoIronAngelAlice (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,988 edits →The New York Times Magazine: adding back Boston Globe referenceNext edit →
Line 49: Line 49:
Bazelon writes: Bazelon writes:
:: "For anti-abortion activists, this strategy offers distinct advantages. It challenges the connection between access to abortion and women’s rights — if women are suffering because of their abortions, then how could making the procedure readily available leave women better off? It replaces mute pictures of dead fetuses with the voices of women who narrate their stories in raw detail and who claim they can move legislators to tears. And it trades condemnation for pity and forgiveness. “Pro-lifers who say, ‘I don’t understand how anyone could have an abortion,’ are blind to how hurtful this statement can be,” Reardon writes on his Web site. “A more humble pro-life attitude would be to say, ‘Who am I to throw stones at others?’<ref>Bazelon, Emily. ''The New York Times Magazine''. </ref> :: "For anti-abortion activists, this strategy offers distinct advantages. It challenges the connection between access to abortion and women’s rights — if women are suffering because of their abortions, then how could making the procedure readily available leave women better off? It replaces mute pictures of dead fetuses with the voices of women who narrate their stories in raw detail and who claim they can move legislators to tears. And it trades condemnation for pity and forgiveness. “Pro-lifers who say, ‘I don’t understand how anyone could have an abortion,’ are blind to how hurtful this statement can be,” Reardon writes on his Web site. “A more humble pro-life attitude would be to say, ‘Who am I to throw stones at others?’<ref>Bazelon, Emily. ''The New York Times Magazine''. </ref>

===Boston Globe===
Boston Globe reporter Michael Kranish has described Reardon as a ] advocate who "wants Congress to impose strict barriers to abortion."<ref name="BostonG">, by Michael Kranish. Published in the '']'' on ] ]; accessed ] ].</ref> Kranish describes Reardon as both an advocate and a researcher, noting that "Reardon, like many people who play this dual role, insists he can objectively look at the data without being influenced by his personal viewpoint."<ref name="BostonG"/>


==Other criticisms== ==Other criticisms==

Revision as of 02:19, 5 December 2007

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

David C. Reardon, director of the Elliot Institute, is a biomedical ethicist specializing in research and education related to the effects of abortion on women, as well as a pro-life advocate in favor of strict barriers to abortion.

The Elliot Institute

Reardon is the director of the Elliot Institute which, according to its web site, is "engaged in research and educational activities related to the effects of eugenics, abortion, population control, and sexual attitudes and practices on individuals and society at large".

The Elliot Institute has endorsed model legislation regarding informed consent provisions for women considering abortion and bills that would increase the liablity of physicians who provide abortions that are deemed "unsafe or unnecessary". The Elliot Institute is also leading an effort to build a coaliton of groups to advocate for laws that would create a preemptive ban on human genetic engineering.

Academic credentials

Reardon received his Ph.D. from Pacific Western University, an unaccredited distance learning school.

Studies and books on abortion

Reardon has written a number of journal articles and books on what he asserts are the harmful sequelae of abortion. In 1985, Reardon surveyed members of a group called Women Exploited by Abortion, and found high rates of nervous breakdowns, substance abuse, and suicide attempts. Reardon described this finding as proof of a link between abortion and psychological harm. However, his findings were dismissed as non-generalizable by expert panels and the medical community, due to the selection bias introduced by surveying only women from a pro-life organization who already felt "exploited" by their abortion.

Subsequently, Reardon has published several peer-reviewed studies on the physical and psychological effects of abortion. His studies have consistently reported a statistical association between abortion and death, psychiatric hospitalization, substance abuse, depression, anxiety, sleep disorders, and other sequelae. Reardon's findings conflict with the majority of medical opinion and evidence, which does not support a link between abortion and any adverse physical or psychological effects.

Reardon is also the author of seven books on abortion, including Making Abortion Rare, in which he argued that abortion is harmful to women and suggested that emphasizing this alleged harm should be a weapon in the anti-abortion arsenal. Reardon also wrote The Devil's Bargain, in which he states that abortion is a sin pushed on by women by the Devil. Once a woman chooses to have an abortion, Reardon wrote, "Satan turns on her... he charges her with the crime of an unforgivable murder, a secret shame of which she can never be free."

Position on abortion debate

In regard to the political debate surrounding abortion, Reardon has argued that the traditional pro-choice perspective on abortion ignores the long-term impact of the abortion experience on women's lives, and that the traditional pro-life perspective should be replaced by a "pro-woman/pro-life" approach which focuses on both women and fetuses. Reardon describes his own position as both "pro-life" (believing a human fetus is deserving of protection) and "anti-abortion" (believing abortion hurts women).

In a 2002 article in Ethics & Medicine, Reardon argued that in order to be effective, pro-life efforts had to present "a moral vision that consistently demonstrates just as much concern for women as for their unborn children." Reardon therefore encouraged the pro-life movement to embrace and disseminate information stating that abortion was harmful to women, writing:

In some cases, it is unnecessary to convince people of abortion's dangers. It is sufficient simply to raise enough doubts about abortion that they will refuse actively to oppose the proposed anti-abortion initiative.

In the same article, Reardon summarized his view of abortion thus: "Because abortion is evil, we can expect, and can even know, that it will harm those who participate in it. Nothing good comes from evil."

According to the Elliot Institute website, Reardon "is a frequent guest on Christian radio and Christian television talk shows and has been a frequently invited speaker state and national conventions for crisis pregnancy centers and pro-life organizations." Reardon addressed the National Pro-Life Religious Council in 1998, where he discussed emotional reactions to abortion in the context of the disputed entity of "post-abortion syndrome".

Academic criticism

Critics of Reardon include Barbara Major of the Department of Psychology at the University of California, Santa Barbara and Nancy Russo, a psychology professor at Arizona State University.

Barbara Major argues that the results of one of Reardon's studies of 194,694 Medi-Cal patients finding significantly higher psychiatric admission rates after abortion is "inconsistent with a number of well-designed earlier studies" which did not find higher rates of psychological problems after abortion. She also argues that by comparing women who had abortions to women who delivered pregnancies Reardon's methodology in this study is flawed, asserting that a more appropriate comparison would be to women who wished to abort their pregnancy but chose not to or were not allowed to do so. She explains that a higher incidence of psychological problems among women who have abortions is likely to be explained by higher rates of pre-existing psychological problems among women inclined to have abortions. She also asserts that the findings reported by Reardon may be easily misinterpreted by the public: "On the basis of correlations such as the one reported here, abortion-rights opponents assert that scientific evidence indicates that abortion causes psychological harm. Because they are not experts in scientific reasoning, most people are unable to evaluate the validity of these claims. Statistics such as those reported by Reardon and colleagues thus run a high risk of being used in ways that misinform and mislead the public."

Reardon has generally responded to these criticisms with the counter-charge that his critics arguments and motives are tainted by pro-choice biases. In response to Major's commentary regarding his study of psychiatric hospitalization following abortion, Reardon asserts that Major's critique fails to inform readers that his methodology is the same as that of one of her colleagues which she favorably reviewed previously, or that her own published studies have confirmed that a small portion of women having abortion had negative abortion reactions, including twenty percent who experienced clinical depression and 1.4% who experienced what Major described as "PTSD based on their responses to the abortion-specific measure."

In response to the controversy and challenges presented by Reardon's research, a group of New Zealand researchers undertook a study published in 2006 to test Major's argument that psychological differences between women with a history of abortions and those with no history of abortion can be best explained by more pre-existing psychological disorders among the types of women most likely to undergo an abortion. The team, led by David Fergusson, examined data collected from a longitudinal study of 500 New Zealand women between the age of 15 and 25 years of age. The study found an statistical association between abortions and elevated rates of suicidal behaviors, depression, substance abuse, anxiety, and other mental problems. Moreover, after attempting to explain these differences by examining demographic variables and measures of mental health prior to the women's first pregnancies, they concluded that the difference in subsequent mental health could not be easily explained by causes other than exposure to abortion. In the conclusions section of their paper Fergusson's team noted that their findings conflicted with the American Psychological Association's position on abortion. However, the authors of the New Zealand study are careful to not draw a causal relationship between abortion and mental illness, substance abuse, depression or other factors.

Criticism in the press

The Washington Monthly

In a Washington Monthly article titled, "Research and Destroy" author Chris Mooney profiles Reardon as an example of what he describes as "Christian conservatives have gone a long way towards creating their own scientific counter-establishment". He also notes that Reardon's findings conflict with those of the American Psychological Association, which has rejected the "the notion that abortion regularly causes severe or clinical mental problems", and with the conclusions which Surgeon General C. Everett Koop delivered by letter to President Reagan in 1988. Koop stated that "scientific studies do not provide conclusive data about the health effects of abortion on women."

The New York Times Magazine

In a front page story for New York Times Magazine describing the growing movement of post-abortion counseling ministries around the United States, Emily Bazelon, a senior editor at Slate, asserts that Reardon is the "Moses" of the post-abortion movement's efforts to promote the idea that "abortion harms women and that this should be a weapon in the anti-abortion arsenal". She writes that Reardon has claimed the anti-abortion movement will "never win over a majority... by asserting the sancitity of fetal life. Those in the ambivalent middle 'have hardened their hearts to the unborn ‘fetus’' and are 'focused totally on the woman.' And so the anti-abortion movement must do the same". She also quotes Reardon's book, Aborted Women, where he claims, "Even if pro-abortionists got five paragraphs explaining that abortion is safe and we got only one line saying it’s dangerous, the seed of doubt is planted".

Bazelon writes:

"For anti-abortion activists, this strategy offers distinct advantages. It challenges the connection between access to abortion and women’s rights — if women are suffering because of their abortions, then how could making the procedure readily available leave women better off? It replaces mute pictures of dead fetuses with the voices of women who narrate their stories in raw detail and who claim they can move legislators to tears. And it trades condemnation for pity and forgiveness. “Pro-lifers who say, ‘I don’t understand how anyone could have an abortion,’ are blind to how hurtful this statement can be,” Reardon writes on his Web site. “A more humble pro-life attitude would be to say, ‘Who am I to throw stones at others?’

Boston Globe

Boston Globe reporter Michael Kranish has described Reardon as a pro-life advocate who "wants Congress to impose strict barriers to abortion." Kranish describes Reardon as both an advocate and a researcher, noting that "Reardon, like many people who play this dual role, insists he can objectively look at the data without being influenced by his personal viewpoint."

Other criticisms

Some commentators have characterized Reardon as "controversial" because a case review by Reardon suggesting that abortion associated post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)was a contributing factor behind Lorena Bobbitt's act of severing her husband's penis with a kitchen knife, in 1993. Reardon asserts that the attack, which occurred almost exactly three years after the abortion, reflected aspects of an "anniversary reaction" associated to the abortion. To support this theory, Reardon notes that Lorena testified that she had flashbacks to the abortion moments before the attack when she was in the kitchen and retrieving the knive. Court records indicate she was also treated for psychosomatic cramping and other symptoms days before the attack which Reardon also asserts may be related to post-abortion anniversary reactions.

Other critics infer that Reardon's views are biased by pro-life considerations because the Elliot Institute (of which Reardon is the Director) has advocated for a preemptive ban on human genetic engineering.

See also

References

  1. "David C. Reardon, Biographical Sketch. (2000). Afterabortion.org. Retrieved February 11, 2007.
  2. Science in support of a cause: the new research, by Michael Kranish. Published in the Boston Globe on July 31 2005; accessed November 27 2007.
  3. Elliot Institute Website "About Our Coalition"
  4. Elliot Institute Website "Politics"
  5. Elliot Institute homepage
  6. ^ Mooney, Chris. (October 1, 2004). "Research and Destroy". Washington Monthly. Retrieved February 11, 2007.
  7. PBS NOW transcript, show #329, aired on PBS on July 20 2007; accessed November 27 2007. In the transcript, PBS senior correspondent Maria Hinojosa describes Reardon: "With a PhD from an unaccredited online institution, he's turned out dozens of studies that supposedly prove abortion is dangerous to women's mental health."
  8. Authoritative databases of accredited US institutions exist at the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA database) and the United States Department of Education (USDE accreditation database); neither lists PWU as of November 2007. Several states specifically list Pacific Western University as an unaccredited institution, including:
  9. ^ Is There a Post-Abortion Syndrome?, by Emily Bazelon. Published in the New York Times Magazine on January 21 2007; accessed November 27 2007.
  10. Reardon DC, Ney PG, Scheuren F, Cougle J, Coleman PK, Strahan TW (2002). "Deaths associated with pregnancy outcome: a record linkage study of low income women". South. Med. J. 95 (8): 834–41. PMID 12190217.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  11. Reardon DC, Cougle JR, Rue VM, Shuping MW, Coleman PK, Ney PG (2003). "Psychiatric admissions of low-income women following abortion and childbirth". CMAJ. 168 (10): 1253–6. PMID 12743066.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  12. Cougle JR, Reardon DC, Coleman PK (2003). "Depression associated with abortion and childbirth: a long-term analysis of the NLSY cohort". Med. Sci. Monit. 9 (4): CR105–12. PMID 12709667.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  13. Cougle JR, Reardon DC, Coleman PK (2005). "Generalized anxiety following unintended pregnancies resolved through childbirth and abortion: a cohort study of the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth". J Anxiety Disord. 19 (1): 137–42. doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2003.12.003. PMID 15488373.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  14. Reardon DC, Coleman PK (2006). "Relative treatment rates for sleep disorders and sleep disturbances following abortion and childbirth: a prospective record-based study". Sleep. 29 (1): 105–6. PMID 16453987.
  15. Rue VM, Coleman PK, Rue JJ, Reardon DC (2004). "Induced abortion and traumatic stress: a preliminary comparison of American and Russian women". Med. Sci. Monit. 10 (10): SR5–16. PMID 15448616.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  16. Grimes DA, Creinin MD (2004). "Induced abortion: an overview for internists". Ann. Intern. Med. 140 (8): 620–6. PMID 15096333. Key summary points of article state that "Abortion does not lead to an increased risk for breast cancer or other late psychiatric or medical sequelae." On p. 624, the authors state: "The alleged 'postabortion trauma syndrome' does not exist."
  17. PBS NOW transcript, show #329. Aired on PBS on July 20 2007; accessed November 27 2007.
  18. Reversing the Gender Gap
  19. Remaining True to Ourselves an excerpt from Making Abortion Rare
  20. David C. Reardon. Making Abortion Rare: A Healing Strategy for a Divided Nation (1996) Acorn Books.
  21. ^ Reardon DC (2002). "A defense of the neglected rhetorical strategy (NRS)". Ethics Med. 18 (2): 23–32. PMID 14700036.
  22. Elliot Institute Website Retrieved November 19, 2007
  23. Real Audio from the National Pro-Life Religious Council website Retrieved November 19, 2007
  24. "Pastors Gather to Meet Challenge of Pro-Life Ministry." Publication: National Right to Life News
  25. Abortion perils debated. (2003). Canadian Medical Association Journal, 169 (2).
  26. by Brenda N Major, Ph.D.
  27. "Debates about our design are beside the point: The Reardon and Cougle findings are invalid and cannot be reproduced with properly coded data."BMJ Rapid Response by Nancy F. Russo, Ph.D. and Sarah J. Schmiege, Ph.D.
  28. "Depression and unwanted first pregnancy: Methodological issues, additional findings" by Nancy F. Russo, Ph.D. and Sarah J. Schmiege, Ph.D.
  29. Bazelon, Emily. Is There a Post-Abortion Syndrome? The New York Times Magazine.
  30. Reardon DC, Cougle JR, Rue VM, Shuping MW, Coleman PK, Ney PG. http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/abstract/168/10/1253?ijkey=479a406447b1b7181321ec50cb03d6554c9c8ead&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha Psychiatric admissions of low-income women following abortion and childbirth.] CMAJ 2003;168(10):1253-6.
  31. ^ Major B. Psychological implications of abortion — highly charged and rife with misleading research (editorial) CMAJ 2003;168(10):1257-8.Canadian Medical Association Journal, 169 (2).
  32. ^ Risk of Psychiatric Hospitalization Rises After Abortion www.afterabortion.info
  33. ^ Abortion perils debated. (2003). Canadian Medical Association Journal, 169 (2).
  34. Major B., Cozzarelli C., Cooper M. L., Zubek J., Richards C., Wilhite M., & Gramzow R. H. Psychological responses of women after first-trimester abortion. Archives of General Psychiatry 2000; 57(8), 777-84. Quoting from page 780.
  35. Abortion researcher confounded by study, and Abortion increases mental health risk: study
  36. David M. Fergusson, L. John Horwood, and Elizabeth M. Ridder, Abortion in young women and subsequent mental health Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 47(1): 16-24, 2006.
  37. David M. Fergusson, L. John Horwood, and Elizabeth M. Ridder, Abortion in young women and subsequent mental health Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 47(1): 16-24, 2006.
  38. Chris Mooney"Research and Destroy" Washington Monthly, October 2004
  39. Chris Mooney (sidebar) Bucking the Gipper, October 2004
  40. Bazelon, Emily. The New York Times Magazine. Is There a Post-Abortion Syndrome?
  41. Ibid
  42. Bazelon, Emily. The New York Times Magazine. Is There a Post-Abortion Syndrome?
  43. ^ Science in support of a cause: the new research, by Michael Kranish. Published in the Boston Globe on July 31 2005; accessed November 27 2007.
  44. Ertelt, Steven. (January 15, 2004). "New Report on Lorena Bobbitt Case Focuses on Forced Abortion." Lifenews.com. Retrieved February 11, 2007.
  45. Their Deepest Wound: An Analysis The PostAbortion Review 4(2-3) Spring & Summer 1996.
  46. www.elliotinstitute.org

Bibliography

Books

  • Aborted Women, Silent No More (1987)
  • Making Abortion Rare: A Healing Strategy for a Divided Nation (1996)
  • The Jericho Plan: Breaking Down the Walls Which Prevent Post-Abortion Healing (1996)
  • Victims and Victors: Speaking Out About Their Pregnancies, Abortions, and Children Resulting from Sexual Assault (with Julie Makimaa and Amy Sobie - 2000)
  • Forbidden Grief: The Unspoken Pain of Abortion (with Theresa Burke - 2002)
Categories: