The social and psychological impact of terminating the lives of pre-born babies has yet to be fully discovered.
Although it is easy to classify those seeking such terminations as having low morality, there needs to be understanding as to why they make such decisions.
According to a study published in BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (January 2014), women seeking abortions in the UK are six times more likely to have experienced domestic abuse than women seeking antenatal care. In the study carried out in Yorkshire and Hull, it was discovered that 5.8 per cent of women looking to abort their baby were victims of physical abuse in the current relationship, compared to 0.9 per cent of those carrying their pregnancy to full term and attending an antenatal clinic.
The situation was the same for those women experiencing emotional abuse where 9.9 per cent of women who were terminating their pregnancies were victims compared to 1.8 per cent of women in antenatal clinics.
When giving the reason to abort their baby, 5.8 per cent of women were victims of domestic violence with 34 per cent of respondents citing domestic violence as the contributing factor for their decision. However, the most common reason given in the study were financial constraints and worries.
If women do terminate their pregnancies, particularly on multiple occasions, a study has shown that they are 626 per cent more likely to have breast cancer compared to women who carried their pregnancies to full term (Bhadoria A S et al, ‘Reproductive factors and breast cancer: a case-control study in tertiary care hospital in North India,’ Indian Journal of Cancer, 2013; 50: 316 – 2).
The study followed a previous study of meta-analysis of breast cancer studies which stated that there was a 44 per cent increased risk of contracting breast cancer for women who had abortions.
The reason is that having an abortion weakens the breasts’ muscle tissue in a way that makes it more susceptible to cancer.
It is not always the conservative Christians that are concerned about the increase in the loss of life for the pre-born. People who regard themselves as being more morally liberal are now concerned about such terminations on the grounds of gender (‘The liberal dilemma on sex-selective abortion’ by James Mumford, Demos Quarterly issue number 1, Winter 2013/14). The reason is that it puts the issues of gender equality and cultural diversity on course for a head-on collision, two of the bastions that liberals rely on.
The British Pregnancy Advisory Service, the largest abortion provider in the UK, has admitted that the abortion of female pre-borns is widespread in the country, but moreover it is more common among some ethnic communities.
James Mumford concludes his article: ‘perhaps certain moral principles may prove more foundational than the deepest of cultures.’
God’s perspective is that all life is sacrosanct right from the moment of conception (Psalm 139: 13). It harkens back to his words to Noah after the flood: ‘Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has god made man’ (Genesis 9: 6)
God has especial condemnation for the loss of life among those who are unable to defend themselves. An example is the wrath of God poured out on the army of Amon because they ‘ripped open the pregnant women of Gilead.’ (Amos 1: 13)
The sanctity of life begins in the womb – a fact that we need to promote with love and truth (in equal measures) as all participants need to know the grace of God.
Comments