IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/10.2105-ajph.69.12.1242_2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Repeat abortions: blaming the victims

Author

Listed:
  • Howe, B.
  • Kaplan, H.R.
  • English, C.

Abstract

A study of 1,505 women obtaining abortions in a freestanding abortion clinic in Western New York state revealed that women having repeat abortions were more likely to be using contraception at the time of conception than women having first abortions. However, nearly one-half the non-contracepting repeaters were not contracepting at the time of the repeat pregnancy. Repeaters who were not contracepting at the time of the repeat pregnancy listed medical contraindications or lack of supplies as the major reasons for not contracepting at the time of the present conception - indicating that they had tried one or more methods since their first abortion. Repeaters were sexually more active than first timers, thus increasing their statistical risk of unwanted pregnancy even as they contracepted more than first timers. The data indicate that both first timers and repeaters overwhelmingly reject the premise that abortion is a primary or even a back-up birth control method. The essential difficulty for repeaters appears to be that they are victims of technological, organizational, and logistical inadequacies as well as statistical probabilities rather than being motivationally deficient or indifferent to the dangers of unprotected sexual intercourse.

Suggested Citation

  • Howe, B. & Kaplan, H.R. & English, C., 1979. "Repeat abortions: blaming the victims," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 69(12), pages 1242-1246.
  • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.69.12.1242_2
    DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.69.12.1242
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2105/AJPH.69.12.1242
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2105/AJPH.69.12.1242?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.69.12.1242_2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.