Infant mortality rises in US states with abortion bans

[IwantToRetire]

Researchers estimate there were 478 infant deaths across 14 states which have outright bans or heavy restrictions - which they say would not have occurred had the laws not been in place.

The rise comes after the US Supreme Court reversed a ruling in 2022 that made abortion up to foetal viability a national right, allowing individual states to decide on whether to allow the procedure.

Alison Gemmill, co-leader of the study, said "restrictive abortion policies" could be "reversing decades of progress" in reducing infant deaths across the US.

The study, published this week by researchers, external from the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, found an increase in mortality rates for babies born with congenital issues, as well as among groups where death rates already were higher than average.

This included black infants, as well as for babies whose parents were unmarried, younger, did not attend college, and for those living in southern states.

Full article at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8d9z853jndo

The need for abortion is based on women's rights. The need for late term abortion is based, at least for most people, on medical issues with the foetus or mother. It is very hard to think of a reason, except this, for abortions being permitted over 24 weeks gestation.

I might believe that 'as early as possible, as late as necessary' but when we are trying to convince others, medical need is paramount.

Practically, the only late abortions that take place happen because of the severe disability of the foetus, or something life threatening to the mother.

It seems to rest on an assumption that, "Abortion needs to be legal because there are some pregnancies that, objectively, should end in termination."

I cant imagine how you could have read the stats and said that and not seen it as being part of what you later refer to - the right of women to decide when and if she wants to have a child.

It was stated because this so bloomingly obvious as to why many women chose an abortion. Which by the way is far more humanitarian than the old practice where maternity hospitals would effectively allow a child born with servere abnormalities would be "allowed to die" (in much the same way as in the past doctors effectively cared out euthenasia).

What the statistics did show is that in line with other disparities between African American women and white women in maternal care, what the post abortion ban shows is that African American women have a higher rate of infant deaths than pre abotion ban.

One glaring obvious explanation for this is that is that as proportionatelly African American women are poorer they are less likely to have been able to access an abortion in another state than white women.

Most terminations are because of an assessment that when the baby is it will not be able to survive.

Although as PP have said, some women chose an abortion because they know economically they cant afford a(nother) child.

In fact I am surprised that anyone is surprised by the data in this report as it just reflects who has access to better care than others.

Worth noting that in the charts I posted earlier today, the main group of mothers who suffer the worst are women from Indigenous Communities. Unfortunately also true as victims of male violence.

Survive at 24 weeks without any medical intervention and go on to lead a life that is without any significant disabilities or conditions that need ongoing medical care?

I’m sure there are some, but mostly not.

It’s always ‘playing god’ and a baaaad thing when medical intervention is to ease suffering, but applauded and encouraged when it is to prolong an unviable or miserably painful life.

In the US, well parts of it, the majority of black people are poor and have a worse education that their white peers (due to historical zoning).

That means less access to travel out of state.

Less chance of pregnancy care, vitamins, sonograms, black people are more likely to have diabetes than white.

There is also something no one wants to think about and that is that if you are pregnant and don't want to be you might do things in the hope of ending the pregnancy.

All these people who are anti abortion but not properly universal health care, are monsters.

They can call pro-choicers names but it you aren't filling in the gaps behind closing off abortion you are simply creating unnecessary suffering and not saving anyone from anything.

Thanks. The situation in the US is dire, I think.

So you are ill at ease with disability and less than "perfect" lives?
But you're avoiding the question, is it ever right to deliberately kill a baby in utero or just after birth?
I say no.
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/tiniest-patients-fetal-surgery-delivers-big-results-flna890052

Your 'no' leads to women dying; and to women being forced to deliver babies with significant abnormalities who have no hope of survival, let alone any quality of life.

'less than perfect' is a coy way of describing catastrophic abnormalities. These can cause enormous suffering, for the baby and for the family.

These must be the most difficult experiences to go through and it's up to the mother what she wishes to do, supported hopefully by understanding, compassionate, and knowledgeable medics.

Is it ever right to kill a woman because she's pregnant? That's the alternative sometimes, abortion can save the woman's life. Without abortion, mum and baby die. How is that better?!