OPEN ACCESS
PREPRINT

Counseling the Abortion-Vulnerable Patient

August 16, 2024
Volume: 39
Issue: 2
Article: 3

Table of Contents

Abstract

Induced abortion is defined as a procedure done to end a pregnancy in such a manner as to avoid a live birth ie intentional feticide. Many physicians will encounter patients considering intentional feticide (induced abortion) for various reasons. Such interactions present an opportunity not only to create a lasting bond with the patient, but also to open doors for her to explore possibilities she may not have considered, and thereby enable her to make a life-affirming decision. Given the importance of offering accurate information about induced abortion and continuation of pregnancy, this Guideline provides guidance and resources for the prolife physician encountering an abortion-vulnerable patient.

Background

Epidemiology

According to the Centers for Disease Control, the percentage of US pregnancies that were unintended declined from 43.3% in 2010 to 41.6% in 2019. Larger percentage declines in unintended pregnancy rates were seen among younger age groups, and those patterns were mirrored for pregnancy rates overall, declining by 52% for teenagers aged 15–19.1  By 2011 unintended pregnancy rates2 were highest among those who:

  • Were 18 to 24 years of age.
  • Had low income.
  • Had not completed high school.
  • Were non-Hispanic black.
  • Never married, not cohabiting.

Stulberg et al reported in 2011 that 97% of practicing obstetrician-gynecologists in the United States encounter patients seeking intentional feticide (induced abortion).3  Finer et al (Guttmacher Institute) reported:

… the two most common reasons (for having an abortion) were “having a baby would dramatically change my life” and “I can’t afford a baby now” … A large proportion of women cited relationship problems or a desire to avoid single motherhood (48%). Nearly four in 10 indicated that they had completed their childbearing, and almost one-third said they were not ready to have a child. Women also cited possible problems affecting the health of the fetus or concerns about their own health (13% and 12%, respectively).4

Definitions

The following definitions were modified from Excellence of Care: Standards of Care for Providing Sonograms and Other Medical Services in a Pregnancy Medical Clinic.5

The abortion-vulnerable patient is one who by continuing her pregnancy faces challenges and problems that she may feel unprepared or unable to manage. She may tell her physician that she is considering induced abortion, may feel that abortion is her only or best option, or simply may not have ruled out induced abortion. She may have a medical condition affecting her decision-making.

An abortion-minded patient is one who is planning to obtain an induced abortion or who has already initiated the process by making an appointment with an abortion clinic or having had laminaria placed or having taken abortion inducing drugs or herbs.

Although this Practice Guideline uses primarily the term “abortion-vulnerable” for the sake of clarity, the same counseling concepts and techniques may be applied as needed for an abortion-minded patient who is open to having a conversation.

Challenges

The practicing Obstetrician/Gynecologist (OB/GYN) faces several challenges in counseling abortion-vulnerable patients: Clinic time may be limited and patients may require more counseling time than is scheduled.69 Some physicians may feel discomfort, or perhaps an inner conflict stemming from a desire not to condemn or alienate the patient while at the same time feeling an obligation to protect the life of the unborn. Patients themselves may feel uncomfortable discussing their circumstances because of coercion from partner or family, worries about school or finances.

Ethical Responsibilities

In counseling the abortion-vulnerable patient, fundamental values to consider are respect for the dignity of human life and the duty to alleviate suffering and distress by working with community resources to help meet needs and to eliminate obstacles making life-affirming choices as easy as possible for the patient. Previously established ethical systems can be applied to counseling the abortion-vulnerable patient.1012

  • Fidelity to the patient involves protection of confidentiality, a duty to provide accurate information concerning their health and that of their preborn child, and a commitment to remain available to help and support the patient as she works through her decisions.
  • Autonomy means that the patient ultimately decides the intended outcome of her pregnancy. The physician counseling her aims to improve her ability to make a well-informed decision. It is important for a pro-life OB/GYN to represent all data honestly.
  • Beneficence moves the physician to act for the benefit of both our maternal and our fetal patients.
  • Non-maleficence is the responsibility to mitigate, while still respecting autonomy, any harm to either the maternal patient or her preborn child. This includes patient safety.
  • Justice means that with utmost respect for the dignity of all human life, we should do our best to ensure that all patients have accurate information concerning their health and that of their unborn baby and are offered support and counseling regarding viable options that enable her to continue her pregnancy, regardless of socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, or ethnic background.

General Counseling Technique and Content

Preparation is very important to good counseling of abortion-vulnerable patients. A physician can improve his or her counseling by considering counseling technique, community resources (including in-office literature and relationships with local pregnancy care centers), and evidence before being faced with an abortion-vulnerable patient.

While counseling content may vary from one patient to the next depending on individual patient needs, this Practice Guideline aims to provide the physician with a number of topics which can be considered for discussion. In general, it is wise to start by asking questions, expressing empathy, and learning about the patient’s situation.

If the patient has brought up the subject of induced abortion,  an appropriate opening question may be “How do you feel about abortion?” Some patients will express a belief that induced abortion is objectionable. She may say something like, “Well…I never thought I’d even consider it, but…” or “I never believed in it, but…”  In this case, the physician may need only to encourage fidelity to her deeply held beliefs, then go on to discuss how to overcome hurdles and challenges that make continuing the pregnancy seem difficult. However, the practicing Ob is likely to see women of diverse faith backgrounds whose situations are complicated, leading to a more complex decision-making process. The physician can help the patient to identify other areas of discussion, including perceived barriers to pregnancy continuation and avoiding coercion, many of which are listed in Table 1.

Table 1. Counseling Topics for the Abortion-Vulnerable
The woman’s own feelings about parenting, adoption, and induced abortion
Perceived barriers to continuation of pregnancy
Your role in emotional support, encouragement, and obstetrical care if she continues the pregnancy
Your identity as a pro-life physician (i.e., she can trust you to provide care for her and her baby)
Open adoption
Dealing with pressure and coercion, even from people with whom the patient has a positive relationship
Fetal development
Fetal pain
Induced abortion procedures, including induced abortion by surgery or by chemical agent
Risks of induced abortion:
-Claims that abortion is safer than childbirth highly questionable, drawn from incomplete data
-Preterm birth
-Effects on mental health
-Hemorrhage
-Uterine perforation (surgical abortion only)
-Injury to surrounding organs (surgical abortion only)
-Infection
-Particular risks associated with self-managed induced abortion
Abortion pill reversal

Part of comprehensive counseling is to encourage the patient to gather as much information as possible and to take time to understand and consider it carefully.713 Assure her that she does have options and use language of empowerment to specifically advise her to resist coercion, to focus on making a decision that she will be comfortable with for her entire life, and to make yourself available in the decision-making process and for support during her pregnancy. As you listen to and counsel the patient, be aware of signs of human trafficking, listed in Table 2.

Table 2. Red Flags for Human Trafficking
Working and Living Conditions:
-Is not free to leave or come and go as he/she wishes
-Is in the commercial sex industry and has a pimp / manager
-Is unpaid, paid very little, or paid only through tips
-Works excessively long and/or unusual hours
-Is not allowed breaks or suffers under unusual restrictions at work
-Owes a large debt and is unable to pay it off
-Was recruited through false promises concerning the nature and conditions of his/her work
-High security measures exist in the work and/or living locations (e.g. opaque windows, boarded-up windows, bars on windows, barbed wire, security cameras, etc.)
Mental Health and Behavioral Conditions:
-Is fearful, anxious, depressed, submissive, tense, or nervous/paranoid
-Exhibits unusually fearful or anxious behavior after bringing up law enforcement
-Avoids eye contact
Physical Conditions:
-Lacks medical care and/or is denied medical services by employer
-Appears malnourished or shows signs of repeated exposure to harmful chemicals
-Shows signs of physical and/or sexual abuse, physical restraint, confinement, or torture
Lack of Control:
-Has few or no personal possessions
-Is not in control of his/her own money, no financial records, or bank accountIs not in control of his/her own identification documents (ID or passport)
-Is not allowed or able to speak for themselves (a third party may insist on being present and/ or translating)
Other:
-Claims of just visiting and inability to clarify where he/she is staying/address
-Lack of sense of time, or knowledge of whereabouts and/or of what city he/she is in
-Has numerous inconsistencies in his/her story
Modified from the National Human Trafficking Resource Center.

There are a few things to avoid in counseling the abortion-vulnerable patient. Avoid  critcism, don’t minimize her emotions, and don’t try to tell her what to do.6 If possible, offer to perform (or order) an ultrasound. Dating the pregnancy, determining viability, and ruling out ectopic pregnancy will be necessary regardless of her decision. Ultrasound also affords the opportunity for your patient to actually see the life she is carrying. Women value the information gained from ultrasound.14  While it is unclear exactly how many women choose life because of ultrasound,15,16 experience has shown that many women choose to continue their pregnancies when allowed to see an ultrasound.17,18

Finally, it is generally useful to offer a follow up appointment to continue your discussions, answer questions that have come up, or repeat the ultrasound examination. You may offer to see the patient and/or her family more frequently so that she can benefit from your understanding and willingness to listen. Let her know that you will make any referrals needed for her to receive the best care.

Clinical Questions and Answers

Q: I am Faced with an Abortion-Vulnerable Patient in My Office now and I Don’t Have Time to Sift through Literature or Form Relationships with the Local Pregnancy Care Center. Who Can Help Me Right Now?

AAPLOG.org hosts multiple documents such as this, that condense useful information. It also provides a list of pro-life physicians, who may have additional local resources or may form a referral base.

The following websites and hotlines will be useful The first three sites listed provide comprehensive option counseling and do not refer for induced abortion.

  • Optionline.org, call 1-800-712-HELP (4357)
  • Options for Women, call 888-652-1140 or text “HELPLINE” to 313131.
  • Pregnancydecisionline.org, call 866-406-9327
  • Lifetimeadoption.org is devoted to helping women understand and consider adoption.
  • Care-net.org and Heartbeatinternational.org are websites devoted to pregnancy care centers, with a Christian emphasis.
  • Abortionpillrescue.com provides a telephone hotline and online chat for women who have initiated an induced abortion with mifepristone and are reconsidering their decision. The website also provides information about chemical induced abortion and the reversal process.
  • Live Action has a website called Abortionprocedures.com in which Abortionists who have performed hundreds and even thousands of induced abortions describe the most prevalent abortion procedures at every stage of pregnancy, accompanied by medical animations.
  • Bravelove.org is a pro-adoption movement dedicated to changing the perception of adoption by acknowledging birth moms for their brave decisions.

When there is a concern about human trafficking, the National Human Trafficking Resource Center can be reached at 1-888-373-7888, or by texting “HELP” TO 233733 (BEFREE). There is also an online chat available at www.humantraffickinghotline.org.

Q: How Can a busy OB/GYN begin to Establish Rapport with an  Abortion-Vulnerable Patient?

Try to create a suitable environment and a relationship with the patient that makes her feel comfortable and safe to express herself. It is helpful to show empathy, to make an effort to understand her situation from her perspective. The patient must have a sense that the physician counselor is sincere. She must know that she can count on you and your staff to follow through with the support and help you offer.

Q: Are Special Laws in Effect for Minors Participating in Sex Work?

Yes. According to federal law, any minor under the age of 18 engaging in commercial sex is a victim of sex trafficking, regardless of the presence of force, fraud, or coercion.

Q: What about the Case of the Patient whose Fetus has Anomalies?

Patients and their families who receive a life-limiting fetal diagnosis may choose perinatal palliative care, an active approach that manages symptoms of anxiety and isolation, and openly manages anticipatory grief. Perinatal palliative care has similar rates of maternal complications and maternal regret as induced abortion. Induced abortion has not been found to be an effective way to curtail or prevent grief when a life-limiting perinatal diagnosis is encountered, so parents may readily consider a perinatal palliative care. Retrospective cohort studies demonstrate that perinatal palliative care is readily taken up by patients and healthcare professionals; limited prospective evidence suggests that perinatal palliative care may improve maternal anxiety, communication, and family relationships. Offering perinatal palliative care should be part of every obstetrician/gynecologist’s counseling when adverse pre natal diagnoses are made.19,20 Please see AAPLOG’s Practice Guideline Number 1, Perinatal Palliative Care and Perinatal Hospice.

Q: What Language Can be Used to Describe Fetal Development in a Short Time?

The following is an excerpt from the AAPLOG Patient Guide pamphlet: “Your unborn child is a person. At about 22 days after fertilization your child’s heart begins to circulate his or her own blood, unique from your own, and has a heartbeat that can be detected on ultrasound. At just six weeks after fertilization, your child’s eyes and eye lids, nose, mouth, and tongue can be seen. Then just ten weeks after fertilization your child can make bodily movements. Around week 19-21 your child can hear. During this you should begin to feel movement. From fertilization on, your child is a human being and a human person, uniquely distinct from you. Your child is alive, and every life is a precious and valuable gift.”

Q: When Can Fetuses Feel Pain?

A human fetus may feel pain by as early as 12 weeks gestation, and fetuses respond to touch as early as 7.5 to 8 weeks.21,22 For more information, refer to AAPLOG’s Practice Guideline No. 2, Fetal Pain.

Q: How much does Induced Surgical Abortion Increase a Patient’s Risk of Subsequent Preterm Birth?

Overwhelming evidence from more than 160 studies over fifty years points to a clear dose-response relationship between surgical induced abortion and subsequent preterm birth

One prior surgical induced abortion is associated with statistically significantly higher odds of subsequent preterm birth, corresponding to a 13-14% risk, compared to the baseline rate of 10% in the United States. Two or more prior surgical induced abortions are associated with significantly higher odds of subsequent preterm birth, corresponding to a 18% risk of subsequent preterm birth, compared to the baseline rate. One prior surgical induced abortion is associated with significantly higher odds of having a subsequent very preterm birth (either 32 or 28 weeks’ gestation), corresponding to a 2.3% risk, compared to the baseline rate of 1.5% in the United States.2351

If an induced chemical abortion fails and requires surgical completion, the risk of preterm birth following surgical completion will be at least as high as a primary surgical induced abortion.

Helping patients understand why preterm birth is to be avoided can be helpful. Preterm birth can have both short-term and long-term health risks for the neonate. Short-term risks include the hurdles in respiratory and digestive function that neonatal intensive care patients deal with daily. In addition, preterm birth leads to an increased risk for some long-term complications, such as cerebral palsy, impaired vision and hearing, behavioral and psychosocial difficulties, and impaired cognitive development.28,29

Q: Is Induced Abortion Safer than Childbirth?

One cannot state that induced abortion is safer than childbirth. To quote Dr. David Reardon, “It is almost impossible to accurately compare deaths related to induced abortion and deaths related to childbirth in the U.S. due to incomplete reporting, definitional incompatibilities, voluntary data collection, research bias, reliance upon estimates, political correctness, inaccurate and/ or incomplete death certificates, incompatibility with maternal mortality statistics, and failing to consider other psychologic causes of death, including suicide.”52 Looking at population research done in other countries,5559 “we see a different conclusion, that women are far more likely to die in the year following an induced abortion than they are following childbirth.” For more information, please refer to AAPLOG’s Top 10 Myths About Abortion, page 28, “Abortion is Safer Than Childbirth.”5260

Q: How much does Induced Abortion Increase a Patient’s Risk of Mental Health Problems?

It may be important for the abortion-vulnerable patient to understand that although many induced abortions are purportedly done to prevent or reduce mental health risks, the medical literature offers no evidence that induced abortion reduces mental health risk.61,62 In fact, while some claim no induced abortion-related mental health risk, there are numerous studies,61100 including a carefully designed meta-analyses in 2011,63 revealing induced abortion as a significant risk factor for mental health problems. Summarizing the medical literature, Dr. Priscilla Coleman has stated, “For a significant number of women, abortion initiates a life trajectory characterized by feelings of grief, loss, alienation from others, and mental health challenges.”101

Some risk factors place women at especially increased risk for mental health complications after induced abortion. These are detailed in  AAPLOG Practice Guideline 7 Abortion and Mental Health. These include:

  1. Perceptions of the inability to cope with the induced abortion.
  2. Low self-esteem.
  3. Difficulty with the decision.
  4. Emotional investment in the pregnancy.
  5. Perceptions of one’s partner, family members, or friends as non- supportive.
  6. Timing during adolescence or being unmarried.
  7. Pre-existing emotional problems or unresolved traumatization.
  8. Involvement in violent relationships. 
  9. Traditional sex-role orientations.
  10. Conservative views of induced abortion and/or religious affiliation.
  11. Pregnancy is intended.
  12. Second trimester.
  13. Pre-abortion ambivalence or decision difficulty.
  14. When women are involved in unstable partner relationships. 
  15. Feelings of being forced into induced abortion by one’s partner, others, or by life circumstances.

For more information, please refer to AAPLOG’s Practice Guideline number 7, Abortion and Mental Health.102

Q: Does Induced Abortion Increase a Patient’s Risk of Breast Cancer?

There exists evidence that induced abortion of a first pregnancy, especially for teens and women over the age of 30, increases breast cancer risk. The mechanism is thought to be stimulation of stem cell breast tissue (Type 1 and 2) in early pregnancy but lack of terminal differentiation which occurs after elaboration of human placental lactogen (HPL) by the placenta after 20 weeks gestation.  HPL is required for terminal differentiation of breast tissue to lactational tissue, which is cancer resistant.  Studies which look at the subset of women who abort prior to carrying a child to term show the strongest association.   Studies which look at women who abort after previous term pregnancies do not show as strong an association.   There is biologic plausibility as well as epidemiologic evidence109128 for a causal association between abortion andbreast cancer. Please see AAPLOG’s Committee Opinion, number 8, Abortion and Breast Cancer.128

Q: What Options are Available for a Patient Who has taken Mifepristone but then Changes her Mind?

For patients who have already taken mifepristone, but not misoprostol, there is as high as 68% chance of saving the pregnancy by following an abortion pill reversal protocol.129 For patients who choose this treatment, she should know that having taken the mifepristone, there is no evidence that her fetus is at increased risk for birth defects.

Utilizing the data from the 2018 Delgado study,129 two protocols can be recommended for women who change their minds after taking mifepristone and want to halt the chemical induced abortion process.

  1. High Dose Oral Protocol Progesterone micronized 200 mg capsule two by mouth as soon as possible and continued at a dose of 200 mg capsule two by mouth twice a day for three days, followed by 200 mg capsule two by mouth at bedtime until the end of the first trimester. Oral progesterone should be taken with food to improve absorption. Micronized progesterone should be avoided in women with peanut allergies. 
  2. Intramuscular Protocol Progesterone 200 mg intramuscular as soon as possible and continued at a dose of 200 mg intramuscular once a day on days two and three, then every other day for a total of seven injections. This protocol is suitable for women with peanut allergies.  Some clinicians may choose to continue intramuscular treatment longer since this recommendation is based on relatively small numbers.

For more information, please refer to AAPLOG’s Practice Guideline number 6, The Reversal of the Effects of Mifepristone by Progesterone.130 Also, you may contact the Abortion Pill Rescue Network:  abortionpillrescue.com

Q: What Risks should Patients be Made Aware of Who are Considering Self-Managed Induced Abortion?

Currently, more than 50% of induced abortions in the U.S. are induced abortions with chemical agents131 and self-managed chemical abortion is being actively promoted.132 In addition to the four-fold increased complication risk associated with chemical induced abortion, principally due to hemorrhage,133 self-managed induced abortion carries additional significant dangers for patients. Because errors in gestational age estimation are bound to occur, there is a risk of consuming mifepristone in the second trimester when complication and mortality risk will be much higher. Risk of death from undiagnosed ectopic pregnancy and risk to future pregnancies from Rh incompatibility also present themselves with self-managed induced abortion.132

Summary of Recommendations and Conclusion

The Following Recommendations are Based on Good and Consistent Scientific Evidence (Level A):

  1. Physicians should encourage the patient to gather as much information as possible, take time to make a decision, and to provide significant support.
  2. Patients may be counseled that induced surgical abortion and induced chemical abortions which need to be completed surgically increases risk for preterm birth in subsequent pregnancies.
  3. An ultrasound is required prior to a medical/chemical abortion to document estimated gestational age, viability of embryo/fetus, and intrauterine pregnancy to rule out ectopic pregnancy.

The Following Recommendations are Based on Limited and Inconsistent Scientific Evidence (Level B):

  1. Patients may be counseled that induced abortion causes increased risk for mental health problems, and possibly breast cancer.
  2. For patients who have taken mifepristone, but have not yet taken misoprostol, there is as high as 68% chance of saving the pregnancy by following an abortion pill reversal protocol.
  3. Self-managed induced abortion carries significant additional risks to health.

The Following Recommendations are Based Primarily on Consensus and Expert Opinion (Level C):

  1. Physicians should prepare ahead of time to counsel abortion-vulnerable patients, in particular by studying the literature cited and by forming connections with local organizations that can offer these patients resources.
  2. It is important for physicians counseling abortion-minded patients to listen to the patient and ask her about her own feelings about life, adoption, and induced abortion.
  3. Physicians counseling abortion-vulnerable patients should avoid negativity, marginalizing emotions, and paternalism.
  4. Experience has shown that many women choose to continue their pregnancies when they see their baby on an ultrasound monitor. 
  5. Women whose unborn child is diagnosed with a serious or lethal fetal anomaly should be aware of the availability of perinatal palliative care. 
  6. Pregnancy Care Centers should be used whenever possible. 
  7. Physicians counseling abortion vulnerable patients should be aware of signs of human trafficking.

References

1.

National Center for Health Statistics Updated Methodology to Estimate Overall and Unintended Pregnancy Rates in the United States. Series 2 Number 201 April 2023. Available at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_02/sr02-201.pdf last visited 2024.06.03

2.

Finer LB, Zolna M.R. Declines in Unintended Pregnancy in the United States 2008-2011. N Engl J Med 2016. 374:843-852.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa1506575 at Table 1. Last visited 2024.06.03. PMid:26962904 PMCid:PMC4861155

3.

Stulberg DB, Dude AM, Dahlquist I, Curlin FA. Abortion Provision Among Practicing Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2011: 118:609-14. Available at https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e31822ad973 PMid:21860290 PMCid:PMC3170127  Last visited 2024.06.03.

4.

Finer LB, Frohwirth LF, Dauphinee LA, Singh S and Moore AM. Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2005, 37(3):110-118. Available at: https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/article_files/3711005.pdf Last visited 2024.06.03 PMid:16150658

5.

Focus on the Family Excellence of Care: Standards of Care for providing Sonograms and Other Medical Services in a Pregnancy Medical Clinic. See Appendix. Available at: https://media.focusonthefamily.com/heartlink/pdf/excellence-in-standards-of-care-for-pmcs.pdf Last visited 2024.06.03.

6.

Care Net 2016 Guidelines for Life Advocates: 10 Things Not to do When a Woman Tells You She Wants an Abortion. Available at https://getinvolvedforlife.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/10-Things-Not-To-Do-When-A-Woman-Says-She-Wants-an-Abortion.pdf Last visited 2024.06.03.

7.

Searight HR. Realistic approaches to counseling in the office setting. Am Fam Physician. 2009 Feb 15:79(4):277-84. Available at https://www.aafp.org/pubs/afp/issues/2009/0215/p277.pdf Last visited 2024.06.03.

8.

Searight HR. Efficient counseling techniques for the primary care physician. Prim Care. 2007 Sep;34(3):551-70, vi-vii. Available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pop.2007.05.012 Last visited 2024.06.03. PMid:17868759

9.

Center for Disease Control. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Appendix C: Principles for Providing Quality Counseling April 25, 2014 /63(RR04) 45-46. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr6304a4.htm Last visited 2024.06.03.

10.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Ethical Decision Making in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Committee on Ethics, Number 390, December 2007, Reaffirmed 2019 Available at: https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/committee-opinion/articles/2007/12/ethical-decision-making-in-obstetrics-and-gynecology Last visited 2024.06.03.

11.

Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics. 5th ed. New York (NY): Oxford University Press;2001.

12.

Childress JF. Methods in bioethics. In: Steinbock B, editor. The Oxford handbook of bioethics. New York (NY0: Oxford University Press; 20017. P. 15-62.

13.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee Opinion 819. Informed Consent and Shared Decision Making in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Obstetrics and Gynecology 137 (2) 2021 e-34. Available at https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000004247 Last visited 2024.06.04
PMid:33481530

14.

Kelly-Hedrick M, Geller G, Jelin AC, Gross MS. Perceived Value of Prenatal Ultrasound Screening: A Survey of Pregnant Women. Matern Child Health J. 2023 Jan;27(1):101-110. doi: 10.1007/s10995-022-03515-1. Epub 2022 Nov 9. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-022-03515-1 Last visited 2024.06.04.
PMid:36352278 PMCid:PMC9868096

 

15.

Upadhyay UD, Kimport K, Belusa EKO, Johns NE, Laube DW, Roberts SCM. Evaluating the impact of a mandatory pre-abortion ultrasound viewing law: A mixed methods study. PLoS One. 2017 Jul 26;12(7):e0178871. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178871   Last visited 2024.06.04. PMid:28746377 PMCid:PMC5528259

16.

Gatter, Mary MD et al. Relationship Between Ultrasound Viewing and Proceeding to Abortion. Obstetrics & Gynecology 2014. 123(1): 81-87. Available at https://keep.lib.asu.edu/system/files/embryo/pdfs/LitRelationshipBetweenUltrasoundViewingRV.xhtml.pdf Last visited 2024.06.04. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000000053
PMid:24463667

17.

Care Net. Why Ultrasounds Matter for Women Planning Abortion 2014.Available at: https://www.care-net.org/center-insights-blog/why-ultrasounds-matter-for-women-planning-abortion Last visited 2024.06.04.

18.

Sedgmen B, McMahon C, Cairns D, Benzie RJ, Woodfield RL. The impact of two-dimensional versus three-dimensional ultrasound exposure on maternal-fetal attachment and maternal health behavior in pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Mar;27(3):245-51. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.2703  Last visited 2024.06.04. PMid:16482614

19.

McCaffrey M. Lives Worth Living. Issues Law Med. 2017 Fall;32(2):215-224. PMid: 29108144.

20.

AAPLOG Practice Guideline Number 1, Perinatal Palliative Care and Perinatal Hospice, updated in 2021. Available at https://aaplog.org/PB1 Last visited 2024.06.04

21.

Page S. The Neuroanatomy and Physiology of Pain Perception in the Developing Human. Issues Law Med. 2015 Autumn;30(2):227-36. PMid: 26710382.

22.

AAPLOG Practice Guideline Number 2. Fetal Pain. November 2017, updated 2021. Available at https://aaplog.org/PB2 Last visited 0224.06.04

23.

AAPLOG Practice Guideline number 11, A Detailed Examination of the Data on Surgical Abortion and Preterm Birth, November 2021. Available at https://aaplog.org/PB11 Last visited 2024.06.04

24.

McCaffrey MJ. Abortion's Impact on Prematurity: Closing the Knowledge Gap. Issues Law Med. 2017 Spring;32(1):43-52. PMid: 29108163.

25.

Liao H, Wei Q, Duan L, Ge J, Zhou Y, Zeng W. Repeated medical abortions and the risk of preterm birth in the subsequent pregnancy. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011 Sep;284(3):579-86. Epub 2010 Oct 27. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1723-7
PMid:20978775

26.

Swingle HM, Colaizy TT, Zimmerman MB, Morriss FH Jr. Abortion and the risk of subsequent preterm birth: a systematic review with meta-analyses. J Reprod Med. 2009 Feb;54(2):95108. PMid: 19301572.

27.

van Oppenraaij RH, Jauniaux E, Christiansen OB, Horcajadas JA, Farquharson RG, Exalto N; ESHRE Special Interest Group for Early Pregnancy (SIGEP). Predicting adverse obstetric outcome after early pregnancy events and complications: a review. Hum Reprod Update. 2009 Jul-Aug;15(4):409-21.  Epub 2009 Mar 7. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmp009 PMid:19270317

28.

McCaffrey MJ. The Burden of Abortion and the Preterm Birth Crisis. Issues Law Med. 2017 Spring;32(1):73-98. PMid: 29108165.

29.

Hardy G, Benjamin A, Abenhaim HA. Effect of induced abortions on early preterm births and adverse perinatal outcomes. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2013 Feb;35(2):138-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1701-2163(15)31018-5 PMid:23470063

30.

Watson LF, Rayner JA, King J, Jolley D, Forster D, Lumley J. Modelling prior reproductive history to improve prediction of risk for very preterm birth. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2010 Sep;24(5):402-15.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3016.2010.01134.x
PMid:20670221

31.

Watson LF, Rayner JA, King J, Jolley D, Forster D, Lumley J. Modelling sequence of prior pregnancies on subsequent risk of very preterm birth. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2010 Sep;24(5):416-23.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3016.2010.01141.x
PMid:20670222

32.

Bhattacharya S, Amalraj Raja E, Ruiz Mirazo E, Campbell DM, Lee AJ, Norman JE, Bhattacharya S. Inherited predisposition to spontaneous preterm delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Jun;115(6):1125-1133. Available at https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20502281/ Last visited 2024.06.04. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181dffcdb PMid:20502281

33.

Voigt M, Henrich W, Zygmunt M, Friese K, Straube S, Briese V. Is induced abortion a risk factor in subsequent pregnancy? J Perinat Med. 2009;37(2):144-9. Available at https://core.ac.uk/reader/19418389?utm_source=linkout Last visited 2024.06.04. https://doi.org/10.1515/JPM.2009.001
PMid:18976047

34.

Yuan W, Duffner AM, Chen L, Hunt LP, Sellers SM, Bernal AL. Analysis of preterm deliveries below 35 weeks' gestation in a tertiary referral hospital in the UK. A case-control survey. BMC Res Notes. 2010 Apr 28;3:119. https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-3-119
PMid:20426852 PMCid:PMC2877057

35.

Grote NK, Bridge JA, Gavin AR, Melville JL, Iyengar S, Katon WJ. A meta-analysis of depression during pregnancy and the risk of preterm birth, low birth weight, and intrauterine growth restriction. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2010 Oct;67(10):1012-24. https://doi.org/10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2010.111
PMid:20921117 PMCid:PMC3025772

36.

Anum EA, Brown HL, Strauss JF 3rd. Health disparities in risk for cervical insufficiency. Hum Reprod. 2010 Nov;25(11):2894-900. Epub 2010 Jul 19. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deq177 PMid:20643692 PMCid:PMC2955555

37.

Reime B, Schücking BA, Wenzlaff P. Reproductive outcomes in adolescents who had a previous birth or an induced abortion compared to adolescents' first pregnancies. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2008 Jan 31;8:4. 
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-8-4 PMid:18237387 PMCid:PMC2266899

38.

Freak-Poli R, Chan A, Tucker G, Street J. Previous abortion and risk of pre-term birth: a population study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2009 Jan;22(1):1-7. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767050802531813
PMid:19085629

39.

Calhoun BC, Shadigian E, Rooney B. Cost consequences of induced abortion as an attributable risk for preterm birth and impact on informed consent. J Reprod Med. 2007 Oct;52(10):92937. PMid: 17977168.

40.

Shah PS, Zao J; Knowledge Synthesis Group of Determinants of preterm/LBW births. Induced termination of pregnancy and low birthweight and preterm birth: a systematic review and meta-analyses. BJOG. 2009 Oct;116(11):1425-42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2009.02278.x PMid:19769749

41.

Rooney B and Calhoun C. Induced abortion and risk of later premature birth. Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons 2003 8:(2)46-49 Available at https://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/rooney.pdf Last visited 2024.06.04.

42.

Iams JD, Berghella V. Care for women with prior preterm birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Aug;203(2):89-100. Epub 2010 Apr 24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2010.02.004 PMid:20417491 PMCid:PMC3648852

43.

American Association of Pro Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists Practice Guideline 11 A Detailed Examination of the Data on Surgical Abortion and Preterm Birth. Nov 2021. Available at https://aaplog.org/PB11 Last visited 2024.06.04.

44.

Lumley J. The epidemiology of preterm birth. Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 1993 Sep;7(3):477-98.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3552(05)80445-6
PMid:8252814

45.

Voigt M, Olbertz D, Fusch C, Krafczyk D, Briese V, Schneider KT. The influence of previous pregnancy terminations, miscarriages and still-births on the incidence of babies with low birth weight and premature births as well as a somatic classification of newborns]. Z Obstetrics Neonatol. 2008 Feb;212(1):5-12. German. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1004690 PMid:18293256

46.

Ancel PY, Lelong N, Papiernik E, Saurel-Cubizolles MJ, Kaminski M; EUROPOP. History of induced abortion as a risk factor for preterm birth in European countries: results of the EUROPOP survey. Hum Reprod. 2004 Mar;19(3):734-40.  https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh107 Epub 2004 Jan 29. PMid:14998979

47.

Moreau C, Kaminski M, Ancel PY, Bouyer J, Escande B, Thiriez G, Boulot P, Fresson J, Arnaud C, Subtil D, Marpeau L, Rozé JC, Maillard F, Larroque B; EPIPAGE Group. Previous induced abortions and the risk of very preterm delivery: results of the EPIPAGE study. BJOG. 2005 Apr;112(4):430-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00478.x PMid:15777440

48.

Burguet A, Kaminski M, Abraham-Lerat L, Schaal JP, Cambonie G, Fresson J, Grandjean H, Truffert P, Marpeau L, Voyer M, Rozé JC, Treisser A, Larroque B; EPIPAGE Study Group. The complex relationship between smoking in pregnancy and very preterm delivery. Results of the Epipage study. BJOG. 2004 Mar;111(3):258-65. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1471-0528.2003.00037.x  PMid:14961888

49.

Thorp JM Jr, Hartmann KE, Shadigian E. Long-term physical and psychological health consequences of induced abortion: review of the evidence. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2003 Jan;58(1):67-79.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00006254-200301000-00023 PMid:12544786

50.

Saccone G, Perriera L, Berghella V. Prior uterine evacuation of pregnancy as independent risk factor for preterm birth: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016 May;214(5):572-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.12.044 Epub 2015 Dec 29. PMid:26743506

51.

Lemmers M, Verschoor MA, Hooker AB, Opmeer BC, Limpens J, Huirne JA, Ankum WM, Mol BW. Dilatation and curettage increases the risk of subsequent preterm birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2016 Jan;31(1):34-45. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dev274 Epub 2015 Nov 2. 
PMid:26534897

52.

Skop I. Top 10 Myths About Abortion. See page 28, "Abortion is Safer Than Childbirth." Available at https://aaplog.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/MFL-FRC-Top-Ten-Myths.pdf Last visited 2024.06.05.

53.

Calhoun B. The Maternal Mortality Myth in the Context of Legalized Abortion. Linacre Q. 2013 Aug;80(3):264-276. https://doi.org/10.1179/2050854913Y.0000000004 Epub 2013 Aug 1. 
PMid:30083002 PMCid:PMC6027002

54.

Calhoun BC. The Myth That Abortion is Safer Than Childbirth: Through the Looking Glass. Issues Law Med. 2015 Autumn;30(2):209-15. PMid: 26710380.

55.

Coleman PK, Reardon DC, Calhoun BC. Reproductive history patterns and long-term mortality rates: a Danish, population-based record linkage study. Eur J Public Health. 2013 Aug;23(4):569-74. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cks107 Epub 2012 Sep 5. PMid:22954474

56.

Reardon DC, Coleman PK. Short and long term mortality rates associated with first pregnancy outcome: population register based study for Denmark 1980-2004. Med Sci Monit. 2012 Sep;18(9):PH71-6. https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.883338  PMid:22936199 PMCid:PMC3560645

57.

Klemetti R, Gissler M, Niinimäki M, Hemminki E. Birth outcomes after induced abortion: a nationwide register-based study of first births in Finland. Hum Reprod. 2012 Nov;27(11):331520. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/des294 Epub 2012 Aug 29. PMid:22933527

58.

Gissler M, Berg C, Bouvier-Colle MH, Buekens P. Pregnancy-associated mortality after birth, spontaneous abortion, or induced abortion in Finland, 1987-2000. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Feb;190(2):422-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2003.08.044 PMid:14981384

59.

Gissler M, Kauppila R, Meriläinen J, Toukomaa H, Hemminki E. Pregnancy-associated deaths in Finland 1987-1994--definition problems and benefits of record linkage. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1997 Aug;76(7):651-7. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016349709024605 PMid:9292639. Last visited 2024.06.05.

 

60.

Univ Minnesota Extension Service Extension Center for Youth Development, April 6, 2018 Research Adolescent Stress and Depression. Available at https://conservancy.umn.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/1da2023c-4e1d-42d4-b362-4d4aaacb531a/content Last visited 2024.06.05

61.

Fergusson DM, Horwood LJ, Boden JM. Does abortion reduce the mental health risks of unwanted or unintended pregnancy? A re-appraisal of the evidence. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2013 Sep;47(9):819-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004867413484597 Epub 2013 Apr 3. PMid:23553240

62.

Mota NP, Burnett M, Sareen J. Associations between abortion, mental disorders, and suicidal behaviour in a nationally representative sample. Can J Psychiatry. 2010 Apr;55(4):239-47. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674371005500407 PMid:20416147

63.

Coleman PK. Abortion and mental health: quantitative synthesis and analysis of research published 1995-2009. Br J Psychiatry. 2011 Sep;199(3):180-6. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.110.077230 PMid:21881096

64.

American Association of Pro Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists Practice Guideline 7 Abortion and Mental Health available at https://aaplog.org/PB7 Last visited 2024.06.05.

65.

Reardon DC, Cougle JR, Rue VM, Shuping MW, Coleman PK, Ney PG. Psychiatric admissions of low-income women following abortion and childbirth. CMAJ. 2003 May 13;168(10):12536. PMid: 12743066 PMCID: PMC154179. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC154179/pdf/20030513s00022p1253.pdf Last visited 2024.06.05.

66.

Fergusson DM, Horwood LJ, Boden JM. Abortion and mental health disorders: evidence from a 30-year longitudinal study. Br J Psychiatry. 2008 Dec;193(6):444-51.  https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.108.056499 PMid:19043144

67.

Pedersen W. Abortion and depression: a population-based longitudinal study of young women. Scand J Public Health. 2008 Jun;36(4):424-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494807088449 PMid:18539697

68.

Dingle K, Alati R, Clavarino A, Najman JM, Williams GM. Pregnancy loss and psychiatric disorders in young women: an Australian birth cohort study. Br J Psychiatry. 2008 Dec;193(6):455-60.
https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.108.055079
PMid:19043146

69.

Rees DI, Sabia JJ. The relationship between abortion and depression: new evidence from the fragile families and child wellbeing study. Med Sci Monit. 2007 Oct;13(10):CR430-6. https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.502357 PMid:17901849

70.

Fergusson DM, Horwood LJ, Ridder EM. Abortion in young women and subsequent mental health. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2006 Jan;47(1):16-24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2005.01538.x PMid:16405636

71.

Coleman, P, Induced Abortion and Increased Risk of Substance Abuse: a Review of the Evidence. Current Women's Health Reviews, 2005, Vol 1,21-34 https://doi.org/10.2174/1573404052950311 Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228349449_Induced_Abortion_and_Increased_Risk_of_Substance_Abuse_A_Review_of_the_Evidence

72.

Coleman PK, Reardon DC, Cougle JR. Substance use among pregnant women in the context of previous reproductive loss and desire for current pregnancy. Br J Health Psychol. 2005 May;10(Pt 2):255-68.
https://doi.org/10.1348/135910705X25499
PMid:15969853

73.

Reardon DC, Coleman PK, Cougle JR. Substance use associated with unintended pregnancy outcomes in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2004 May;30(2):369-83.
https://doi.org/10.1081/ADA-120037383
PMid:15230081

74.

Reardon DC, Cougle JR, Rue VM, Shuping MW, Coleman PK, Ney PG. Psychiatric admissions of low-income women following abortion and childbirth. CMAJ. 2003 May 13;168(10):12536. PMid: 12743066 PMCID: PMC154179. Available at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC154179/pdf/20030513s00022p1253.pdf Last visited 2024.06.05

75.

Coleman PK, Reardon DC, Rue VM, Cougle J. A history of induced abortion in relation to substance use during subsequent pregnancies carried to term. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Dec;187(6):1673-8. 
https://doi.org/10.1067/mob.2002.127602 PMid:12501082

76.

American Association of Pro Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists Practice Guideline 7 Abortion and Mental Health at p 3-4. available at https://aaplog.org/PB7 Last visited 2024.06.05.

77.

Biggs MA, Upadhyay UD, McCulloch CE, Foster DG. Women's Mental Health and Well-being 5 Years After Receiving or Being Denied an Abortion: A Prospective, Longitudinal Cohort Study. JAMA Psychiatry. 2017 Feb 1;74(2):169-178. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.3478 Erratum in: JAMA Psychiatry. 2017 Mar 1;74(3):303.PMid:27973641

78.

Horvath S, Schreiber CA. Unintended Pregnancy, Induced Abortion, and Mental Health. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2017 Sep 14;19(11):77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-017-0832-4 PMid:28905259

79.

Daugirdaitè V, van den Akker O, Purewal S. Posttraumatic stress and posttraumatic stress disorder after termination of pregnancy and reproductive loss: a systematic review. J Pregnancy. 2015;2015:646345. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/646345 Epub 2015 Feb 5. PMid:25734016 PMCid:PMC4334933

80.

Toffol E, Pohjoranta E, Suhonen S, Hurskainen R, Partonen T, Mentula M, Heikinheimo O. Anxiety and quality of life after first-trimester termination of pregnancy: a prospective study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016 Oct;95(10):1171-80. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.12959 PMID: 27500660. Available at https://obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aogs.12959 Last visited 2024.06.05
PMid:27500660

81.

Korenromp MJ, Christiaens GC, van den Bout J, Mulder EJ, Hunfeld JA, Bilardo CM, Offermans JP, Visser GH. Long-term psychological consequences of pregnancy termination for fetal abnormality: a cross-sectional study. Prenat Diagn. 2005 Mar;25(3):253-60. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.1127 PMid:15791682

82.

Henshaw R, Naji S, Russell I, Templeton A. Psychological responses following medical abortion (using mifepristone and gemeprost) and surgical vacuum aspiration. A patient-centered, partially randomised prospective study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1994 Nov;73(10):8128. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016349409072511 PMid:7817735

83.

Bellieni CV, Buonocore G. Abortion and subsequent mental health: Review of the literature. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2013 Jul;67(5):301-10. https://doi.org/10.1111/pcn.12067  PMid:23859662 Last visited 2024.06.05.

84.

Bradshaw Z, Slade P. The effects of induced abortion on emotional experiences and relationships: a critical review of the literature. Clin Psychol Rev. 2003 Dec;23(7):929-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2003.09.001 PMid:14624822

85.

Broen AN, Moum T, Bödtker AS, Ekeberg O. Psychological impact on women of miscarriage versus induced abortion: a 2-year follow-up study. Psychosom Med. 2004 MarApr;66(2):265-71. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.psy.0000118028.32507.9d PMid:15039513

86.

Broen AN, Moum T, Bödtker AS, Ekeberg O. Reasons for induced abortion and their relation to women's emotional distress: a prospective, two-year follow-up study. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2005 Jan-Feb;27(1):36-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2004.09.009 PMid:15694217

87.

Coleman, P. K. (2006). Resolution of unwanted pregnancy during adolescence through abortion versus childbirth: Individual and family predictors and psychological consequences. The Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 35, 903- 911. Available at https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/resolution-unwanted-pregnancy-during-adolescence-through-abortion Last visited 2024.06.05.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-006-9094-x

88.

Coleman PK, Reardon DC, Rue VM, Cougle J. State-funded abortions versus deliveries: a comparison of outpatient mental health claims over 4 years. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 2002 Jan;72(1):141-52.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0002-9432.72.1.1410155
PMid:14964603

89.

Coleman, P. K., Reardon, D. C., Strahan †, T., & Cougle, J. R. (2005). The psychology of abortion: A review and suggestions for future research. Psychology & Health, 20(2), 237-271.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0887044042000272921

90.

Cougle JR, Reardon DC, Coleman PK. Depression associated with abortion and childbirth: a long-term analysis of the NLSY cohort. Med Sci Monit. 2003 Apr;9(4):CR105-12. PMID: 12709667.

91.

Cougle JR, Reardon DC, Coleman PK. Generalized anxiety following unintended pregnancies resolved through childbirth and abortion: a cohort study of the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth. J Anxiety Disord. 2005;19(1):137-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2003.12.003 PMid:15488373

92.

Dingle K, Alati R, Clavarino A, Najman JM, Williams GM. Pregnancy loss and psychiatric disorders in young women: an Australian birth cohort study. Br J Psychiatry. 2008 Dec;193(6):455-60. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.108.055079 PMid:19043146

93.

Gissler M, Berg C, Bouvier-Colle MH, Buekens P. Injury deaths, suicides and homicides associated with pregnancy, Finland 1987-2000. Eur J Public Health. 2005 Oct;15(5):459-63. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cki042 Epub 2005 Jul 28. PMid:16051655

94.

Gissler M, Karalis E, Ulander VM. Decreased suicide rate after induced abortion, after the Current Care Guidelines in Finland 1987-2012. Scand J Public Health. 2015 Feb;43(1):99-101. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494814560844 Epub 2014 Nov 24. PMid:25420710

95.

Gong X, Hao J, Tao F, Zhang J, Wang H, Xu R. Pregnancy loss and anxiety and depression during subsequent pregnancies: data from the C-ABC study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013 Jan;166(1):30-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.09.024. Epub 2012 Nov 10. PMID: 23146315.

96.

McCarthy FP, Moss-Morris R, Khashan AS, North RA, Baker PN, Dekker G, Poston L, McCowan L, Walker JJ, Kenny LC, O'Donoghue K. Previous pregnancy loss has an adverse impact on distress and behaviour in subsequent pregnancy. BJOG. 2015 Dec;122(13):1757-64. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.13233 Epub 2015 Jan 6. PMid:25565431 

97.

Mota NP, Burnett M, Sareen J. Associations between abortion, mental disorders, and suicidal behaviour in a nationally representative sample. Can J Psychiatry. 2010 Apr;55(4):239-47. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674371005500407
PMid:20416147

98.

Pedersen W. Childbirth, abortion and subsequent substance use in young women: a population-based longitudinal study. Addiction. 2007 Dec;102(12):1971-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2007.02040.x
PMid:18031432

99.

Söderberg H, Janzon L, Sjöberg NO. Emotional distress following induced abortion: a study of its incidence and determinants among abortees in Malmö, Sweden. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1998 Aug;79(2):173-8.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-2115(98)00084-0 PMid:9720837

100.

Sullins DP. Abortion, substance abuse and mental health in early adulthood: Thirteen-year longitudinal evidence from the United States. SAGE Open Med. 2016 Sep 23;4:2050312116665997.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2050312116665997
PMid:27781096 PMCid:PMC5066584

101.

Coleman, P. Personal communication

102.

American Association of Pro Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists Practice Guideline 7 Abortion and Mental Health at p 3-4. available at https://aaplog.org/PB7 Last visited 2024.06.05.

103.

Howe HL, Senie RT, Bzduch H, Herzfeld P. Early abortion and breast cancer risk among women under age 40. Int J Epidemiol. 1989 Jun;18(2):300-4. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/18.2.300 PMid:2767842

104.

Brind J, Chinchilli VM, Severs WB, Summy-Long J. Induced abortion as an independent risk factor for breast cancer: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1996 Oct;50(5):481-96. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.50.5.481 PMid:8944853 PMCid:PMC1060338

105.

Guo J, Huang Y, Yang L, Xie Z, Song S, Yin J, Kuang L, Qin W. Association between abortion and breast cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis based on prospective studies. Cancer Causes Control. 2015 Jun;26(6):811-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-015-0536-1 Epub 2015 Mar 17. PMid:25779378

106.

Deng Y, Xu H, Zeng X. Induced abortion and breast cancer: An updated meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Jan;97(3):e9613. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000009613 PMid:29504989 PMCid:PMC5779758

107.

Innes KE, Byers TE. First pregnancy characteristics and subsequent breast cancer risk among young women. Int J Cancer. 2004 Nov 1;112(2):306-11. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.20402 PMid:15352044

108.

American College of Pediatrics - December 2013. Information for the Adolescent Woman and Her Parents: Abortion and the Risk of Breast Cancer. Issues Law Med. 2017 Spring;32(1):99-104. PMID: 29108166.

109.

Lecarpentier J, Noguès C, Mouret-Fourme E, Gauthier-Villars M, Lasset C, Fricker JP, Caron O, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Berthet P, Faivre L, Bonadona V, Buecher B, Coupier I, Gladieff L, Gesta P, Eisinger F, Frénay M, Luporsi E, Lortholary A, Colas C, Dugast C, Longy M, Pujol P, Tinat J; GENEPSO; Lidereau R, Andrieu N. Variation in breast cancer risk associated with factors related to pregnancies according to truncating mutation location, in the French National BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations carrier cohort (GENEPSO). Breast Cancer Res. 2012 Jul 3;14(4):R99. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3680948/pdf/bcr3218.pdf Last visited 2024.06.05.
https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr3218 PMid:22762150 PMCid:PMC3680948

110.

Dolle JM, Daling JR, White E, Brinton LA, Doody DR, Porter PL, Malone KE. Risk factors for triple-negative breast cancer in women under the age of 45 years. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009 Apr;18(4):1157-66. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-1005. Epub 2009 Mar 31. PMid:19336554 PMCid:PMC2754710

111.

Daling JR, Malone KE, Voigt LF, White E, Weiss NS. Risk of breast cancer among young women: relationship to induced abortion. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1994 Nov 2;86(21):1584-92. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/86.21.1584 PMid:7932822

112.

American Association of Pro Life Obsetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion 8 Abortion and Breast Cancer. 2020. Available at https://aaplog.org/CO8 Last visited 2024.06.05.

113.

Brind J. Abortion-breast cancer link: review of recent evidence from Asia. Issues Law Med. 2017 Fall;32(2):325-334. PMID: 29108156.

114.

Brind J; (Winter 2005) Induced Abortion as an Independent Risk Factor for Breast Cancer: A Critical Review of Recent Studies Based on Prospective Data J.Amer Physicians & Surgeons; Vol 10, #4. P. 105-110 Available at https://www.jpands.org/vol10no4/brind.pdf Last visited 2024.06.05.

115.

Brind J, (Sum 07) Induced Abortion and Breast Cancer Risk: A Critical Analysis of the Report of the Harvard Nurses Study II; J Amer P&S; Vol 12,#2 Available at https://www.jpands.org/vol12no2/brind.pdf Last visited 2024.06.05.

116.

Segi M, et al. AN EPIDEMIOLOGICAL study on cancer in Japan; the report of the Committee for Epidemiological Study on Cancer, sponsored by the Ministry of Welfare and Public Health (Chairman: Dr. Tomosaburo Ogata). Gan. 1957 Apr;48(Suppl):1-63. PMID: 13462062.

117.

Watanabe H, Hirayama T. [Epidemiology and clinical aspects of breast cancer]. Nihon Rinsho. 1968 Aug;26(8):1843-9. Japanese. PMID: 5752668.

118.

Dvoyrin VV, et al. Role of women's reproductive status in the development of breast cancer. Methods and Progress in Breast cancer Epidemiology Research Tallin 1978; 53-63.

119.

Pike MC, Henderson BE, Casagrande JT, Rosario I, Gray GE. Oral contraceptive use and early abortion as risk factors for breast cancer in young women. Br J Cancer. 1981 Jan;43(1):726. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1981.10 PMid:7459241 PMCid:PMC2010485

120.

Nishhiyama, F. The epidemiology of breast cancer in Tokushima prefecture. Shikoku Ichi 1982; 38:333-43 (in Japanese).

121.

Brinton LA, Hoover R, Fraumeni JF Jr. Reproductive factors in the aetiology of breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 1983 Jun;47(6):757-62. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1983.128 PMid:6860545 PMCid:PMC2011348

122.

Hirohata T, Shigematsu T, Nomura AM, Nomura Y, Horie A, Hirohata I. Occurrence of breast cancer in relation to diet and reproductive history: a case-control study in Fukuoka, Japan. Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1985 Dec;69:187-90. PMid: 3834330.

123.

La Vecchia C, Decarli A, Parazzini F, Gentile A, Negri E, Cecchetti G, Franceschi S. General epidemiology of breast cancer in northern Italy. Int J Epidemiol. 1987 Sep;16(3):347-55. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/16.3.347
PMid:3667030

124.

Ewertz M, Duffy SW. Risk of breast cancer in relation to reproductive factors in Denmark. Br J Cancer. 1988 Jul;58(1):99-104. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1988.172 PMid:3166899 PMCid:PMC2246500

125.

Andrieu N, Duffy SW, Rohan TE, Lê MG, Luporsi E, Gerber M, Renaud R, Zaridze DG, Lifanova Y, Day NE. Familial risk, abortion and their interactive effect on the risk of breast cancer--a combined analysis of six case-control studies. Br J Cancer. 1995 Sep;72(3):744-51. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1995.404 PMid:7669588 PMCid:PMC2033867

126.

Lanfranchi A. Induced Abortion and Breast Cancer. Issues Law Med. 2015 Autumn;30(2):143-51. PMID: 26710372.

127.

Brind J. Abortion and Breast Cancer: Recent Evidence Confirms a Robust Link. Issues Law Med. 2015 Autumn;30(2):153-7. PMID: 26710373.

128.

Brind J, Condly SJ, Lanfranchi A, Rooney B. Induced abortion as an independent risk factor for breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on south asian women. Issues Law Med. 2018 Spring;33(1):32-54. PMid: 30831018.

129.

American Association of Pro Life Obsetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion 8 Abortion and Breast Cancer. 2020. Available at https://aaplog.org/CO8 Last visited 2024.06.05

130.

Delgado G, Condly SJ, Davenport M, Tinnakornsrisuphap T, Mack J, Khauv V, Zhou PS. A case series detailing the successful reversal of the effects of mifepristone using progesterone. Issues Law Med. 2018 Spring;33(1):21-31. PMid: 30831017. Available at https://www.researchgate. net/publication/327249344_A_case_series_detailing_the_successful_reversal_of_the_ effects_of_mifepristone_using_progesterone . Last visited 2024.06.05.

131.

American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists Practice Guideline 6, The Reversal of the Effects of Mifepristone by Progesterone, November, 2022. Available at https://aaplog.org/PB6 Last visited 2024.06.05.

132.

Jones R, Philbin J. (Guttmacher Institute) Medication Abortion Now Accounts for More Than Half of All US Abortions. Available at https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2022/02/medication-abortion-now-accounts-more-half-all-us-abortions Last visited 2024.06.05.

133.

Cirucci CA. Self-Managed Medication Abortion: Implications for Clinical Practice. Linacre Q. 2023 Aug;90(3):273-289. https://doi.org/10.1177/00243639221128389 Epub 2022 Dec 12. PMid:37841380 PMCid:PMC10566489

134.

American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists Practice Guideline 8 Medication Abortion. Available at https://aaplog.org/PB8 Last visited 2024.06.05.

Share Article
No data was found
Search