More abortions, less crime?

[Jezebel]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/416056.stm

More abortions 'mean less crime'

Abortion is now more easily accessible

An increase in the abortion rate among the young and disadvantaged has been linked to a fall in the crime rate in the USA.

Two leading academics argue that the increase in abortions among the poor and women from minority communities could explain up to half the fall in the crime rate in the country.

Steve Levitt, an economist at the University of Chicago, and John Donohue, a professor of law at Stanford University, claim that women whose children would have been most likely to commit crimes as young adults instead chose to have abortions after the practice was legalised across the US in 1973.

Their paper, which has not been submitted for publication in any academic journal, says that states with high abortion rates in the 1970s had bigger drops in crime in the 1990s.

It calculates that each 10% rise in terminations led to a one per cent drop in crime years later.

US Justice Department figures shows that serious violent crimes by 12 to 17-year-olds dropped by 40% between 1993 and 1996.

FBI figures show that the number of youths arrested for murder fell by 39% between 1993 and 1997.

The abortion rate in the US is currently 1.2million a year, down from a peak of 1.4million in 1990.

'Too simplistic'

A spokeswoman for the National Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders (NACRO) said linking abortion to crime rates was "too simplistic".

She said: "You cannot say that by increasing access to abortion for young women that is going to lead to a reduction in crime.

"There are many causes of crime, including exclusion from school, a disruptive family background, poor housing and pressure from friends and peers who are involved in crime."

The best way to cut crime among the children of teenage mothers was to ensure proper support structures such as crèche facilities to enable young women to return to work or education.

"Being a teenage mother should not be a bar to playing an active role in society," she said.

[Jezebel]

Didn't know if I should put this here or in the In The News section. I figured it might spark debate so I put it here. If anyone wants to move it to a better section go right ahead. :good:

[Durga]

I'm not sure if we can go that far and say that an increase in the abortion rate could explain up to half the fall in the crime rate in the country. But for sure (as was seen before in Holland) the bigger access to it means (with a good politics) the smaller rate of surgical interventions. (But only with proper politics!). By the way:how this guys eliminated other factores?I think it's not possible to eliminate completely other social factors that influence crime

[Jezebel]

I'm not sure if we can go that far and say that an increase in the abortion rate could explain up to half the fall in the crime rate in the country. But for sure (as was seen before in Holland) the bigger access to it means (with a good politics) the smaller rate of surgical interventions. (But only with proper politics!). By the way:how this guys eliminated other factores?I think it's not possible to eliminate completely other social factors that influence crime

Those were my reservations too. However, I think that it is probably safe to say that there is a correlation between abortion rates and crime rates that should be looked into further.

[blp]

Unfortunately, this argument's going to be irrelevant to the people who think abortion is a crime (some of whom are prepared to commit crime to prevent it).

[Durga]

Unfortunately, this argument's going to be irrelevant to the people who think abortion is a crime (some of whom are prepared to commit crime to prevent it).
Very good point :(

[Jezebel]

Unfortunately, this argument's going to be irrelevant to the people who think abortion is a crime (some of whom are prepared to commit crime to prevent it).
I never understood that line of reasoning. (the whole, "that's a crime so I'm going to commit a crime to make sure you can't commit a crime")

[Winifred]

What a provocative article! Thanks for posting it, Jezebel. I'd like to see the original study. Taking it in any number of different directions is kind of scary, especially with the gap between rich and poor growing larger in this country. After all, pro-choice ideally means having a real choice.

[jane]

Unfortunately, this argument's going to be irrelevant to the people who think abortion is a crime (some of whom are prepared to commit crime to prevent it).

I agree with Durga, that is a very good point.
Abortion is, in fact, a crime for me and this article sounds inhumane :mad:

[oceanflower]

Steve Levitt, an economist at the University of Chicago, and John Donohue, a professor of law at Stanford University, claim that women whose children would have been most likely to commit crimes as young adults instead chose to have abortions after the practice was legalised across the US in 1973.

I have a real problem with this. How can anyone know that the aborted children would become criminals had they been permitted to live? If the premise is that young women who have abortions are all from crime-ridden areas or something, the so-called study doesn't take into account the option to have these unborn children adopted into families outside of this sort of culture. "Too simplistic?" Yes it is.

[incka]

The thing is most abortions happen when a woman doesn't think she can look after a child. The first few years of a child's life and it's social condition throughout it's childhood influence how it will turn out as an adult. If it's living in poverty with a mother who can't look after it properly it is more likely to turn to crime. Sad but true.

[oceanflower]

The thing is most abortions happen when a woman doesn't think she can look after a child. The first few years of a child's life and it's social condition throughout it's childhood influence how it will turn out as an adult. If it's living in poverty with a mother who can't look after it properly it is more likely to turn to crime. Sad but true.

Not all women who have abortions are living in poverty.Women from all classes of society and walks of life avail themsleves of this option. And not all women who choose not to have abortions keep their babies. There is a long waiting list of suitable "parent-hopefuls" who could give a child a healthy, happy upbringing.

[Nesonatalm]

Unfortunately, this argument's going to be irrelevant to the people who think abortion is a crime (some of whom are prepared to commit crime to prevent it).
It just may be a crime no less than what is occasionally done to counter it. But then again, many a destroyer of little ones takes offense at all but himself.

As for the alleged relationship of increased abortions and decreased [other] crimes, we are surrounded by perpetrators of crimes not forced by stress, but freely chosen under the weight of stress, in a moment of moral defeatism, seeking relief in the surest entrance into even weightier lifelong regret. Most people are not noble, but lose their temper at the smallest of things. Not only do some who do not abort their babies commit desparate acts, but some top such acts by despairing of the lives they carry in their wombs, over their own personal stress. Many murders besides these also occur, regardless of how many babies are or are not murdered in the womb. Many of these additional murders are for the same reasons as the abortions of little ones: a person, for fear of personal rejection, for pride, for solitude, for whatever reason, cannot see moving ahead without removing another out of the way.

[alshadai]

From my experience of being a social worker in the worst area of Atlanta I can say truthfully that I believe this study is mostly accurate. Not every baby born there becomes a criminal but an unwanted child is more than likely to be ignored and/or abused and this can lean to problem behaviors that can escalate into crime levels. Those problem behaviors mixed with their surrounding neighborhood environment is an almost surefire trip to crime unless that kid has a role model somewhere and a head on his shoulders.
I'm not saying that all children born in this neighborhood will grow up to be criminals. I have worked with many families that -do- love their children. I have also worked with drug addicts that have no right to be parents for the sake of the child.

I am pro-abortion and I will not ever deny this. After seeing so many children displaced and neglected I believe abortion is a better option to prevent these problems from escalating. We don't have enough homes for foster care in the first place...this sad but true problem would seriously grow quickly out of hand. I hate that abortion being legalized means -everyone- has access to it and is available as easily to the high school girl without a condom as it is to the one who was violently raped. That is another debate, though.

I doubt abortion is the only reason, but I can put all my belief in the fact that it is a major one.

[jane]

The thing is most abortions happen when a woman doesn't think she can look after a child. The first few years of a child's life and it's social condition throughout it's childhood influence how it will turn out as an adult. If it's living in poverty with a mother who can't look after it properly it is more likely to turn to crime. Sad but true.

Life is full of surprises. Angles for human beings are not sound. One cannot rely on anything material during his life time. An earthquake can make a rich woman penniless or it may kill her and makes her dearest an orphan. On the other hand, a very poor couple can have the chance of living in comfort after the birth of their baby. This kind of probabilities may seem a bit unreasonable but not. I belive it- with all my heart; life is full of surprises. There is no constant guarantee for any human being.
There are many secret doors in the life-house and our eyes are too weak to see them in terror moments.

[OneHotPrice]

I believe abortion is a better option to prevent these problems from escalating.

So instead of assailing the problems / societal aspects which manipulate the child's life we should make sure that they aren't born? Sure, we have problems (as a case worker you know better than some, I'm sure) - and the best way to deal with them is to make sure that humans aren't born into them. Isn't it more logical to go about that by removing the problems rather than the people?


We don't have enough homes for foster care in the first place...this sad but true problem would seriously grow quickly out of hand.

Let's figure that out and resolve ourselves towards fixing it; rather than ending human life.


I hate that abortion being legalized means -everyone- has access to it and is available as easily to the high school girl without a condom as it is to the one who was violently raped.

Thanks for bringing that up. How do you guys feel about abortion as a means of contaception? Why do you feel that way?

[Jezebel]

Thanks for bringing that up. How do you guys feel about abortion as a means of contaception? Why do you feel that way?
In my opinion, it shouldn't be the main form of birth control used. First, if you're not using any kind of protection you may catch or spread an STD. However, even if this is not a problem in a known situation, there are still other reasons- medical costs for procedures that would not have been needed if simpler steps were taken, and potential danger to the woman who has had multiple abortions being my main qualms with it. Abortion is abortion; either way you're killing if you believe abortion is killing whether it is as a form of birth control or because of failed bc, incest, rape, or whatever other reason. When discussing murder does motive change the punishment? If a man killed his wife because she cheated on him should he be let off, but if he killed her because he wanted her out of the way he should be thrown in jail? In the case of abortion, I think the lives of the living are more important than the lives of the unborn. I wouldn't recommend abortion as a form of birth control, but I wouldn't recommend it for the reasons I listed above and only those reasons.

[Marlow]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/416056.stm

.

Steve Levitt, an economist at the University of Chicago, and John Donohue, a professor of law at Stanford University, claim that women whose children would have been most likely to commit crimes as young adults instead chose to have abortions after the practice was legalised across the US in 1973.

Frankly this is a crock. Crime is down because more criminals are being locked up and not let out. Check the jail occupancy over the last several decades and you will see the correlation. And I've heard this arguement before and frankly it has tinges of racism.

[Jezebel]

How is it racist?

[Marlow]

How is it racist?
I have heard arguments by some that black abortions have kept crime down and that if abortion were illegal than there would be more blacks born.

[Jezebel]

There would be more blacks born, thus more crime- I assume is what you mean? Hm, that would be interesting, but I don't think we have any proof yet whether it is certain races or social classes are more predisposed to crime. It would be interesting to figure out which is the actual cause, if either. Unfortunately, I don't think we'll ever know. At least not in American PC society. What if it were found that race, and not economic class or social pressures etc, predisposed people to certain behaviors (including criminal tendencies)? Would that be racist, or factual? It seems it would be strange for race not to have an affect on the brain and behavior, separate from socialization, considering all of the physical differences between races (hair, eyes, skin, height, facial features, diseases, etc). This seems to be a different debate I'm digressing into, however. Back on track though, do they argue that there would be less black people, and therefore less crime because black people are prone to crime- regardless of class? Or do they argue that black people tend to be poorer, and therefore less poor people who happen to be black results in less crime?

[one_raven]

From my experience of being a social worker in the worst area of Atlanta I can say truthfully that I believe this study is mostly accurate. Not every baby born there becomes a criminal but an unwanted child is more than likely to be ignored and/or abused and this can lean to problem behaviors that can escalate into crime levels. Those problem behaviors mixed with their surrounding neighborhood environment is an almost surefire trip to crime unless that kid has a role model somewhere and a head on his shoulders.
I'm not saying that all children born in this neighborhood will grow up to be criminals. I have worked with many families that -do- love their children. I have also worked with drug addicts that have no right to be parents for the sake of the child.
Exactly!

I find it odd that this seems surprising to some people.

The connection is clear as day, and frankly thought that most (if not all) people took the correlation as a given.



Life is full of surprises. Angles for human beings are not sound. One cannot rely on anything material during his life time. An earthquake can make a rich woman penniless or it may kill her and makes her dearest an orphan. On the other hand, a very poor couple can have the chance of living in comfort after the birth of their baby. This kind of probabilities may seem a bit unreasonable but not. I belive it- with all my heart; life is full of surprises. There is no constant guarantee for any human being.
There are many secret doors in the life-house and our eyes are too weak to see them in terror moments.
That is a wondeful sentiment and a very sweet ideal.
I can't fault you for that.

Unfortunately, it means precious little to most kids growing up in the inner city, with parents either not in the picture, or simply too damned busy working three jobs and too damned poor to afford their "right" to an equal education and worried day in and day out that they may not make it home alive fom school.

I always strive to look for the possibilities, as opposed to the probablities, in life.
It is a good, healthy outlook to have.
When you start focusing on what is possible, even if very unlikely, you will set your sights and goals higher and will be less likely to settle for much less.
But that's only when it comes to MY life and what I see as possible.
When you look at the lives of others it is simply not the same thing.
If you look at kids growing up in, say Hunt's Point in the Bronx, and you realize that the average annual income PER FAMILY is less than $8,000 and a child being raised there is exraordinarily more likely to be killed before high school graduation age, and very few that do live through High School will actually graduate, and they are much more likely than almost anywhere else in the country to become a junkie and die of an overdose...
To look at that kid and say, well, you know, Rosie Perez grew up in the Bronx and SHE is a success... That simply borders on cruel.
And to ignore the effects of this environment on children means you can not address them properly, and this IS downright cruel.

If you have a 10% chance at success it is very healthy to focus on the 10% as opposed to the 90%.
If someone else has a 10% chance of success it is very unhealthy and unfair to focus on the 10% as opposed to the 90%.

The difference between an Idealist and Ideologue is whether your apply your lofty visions to your own life, or attempt to force others to apply it to theirs from the outside.
It is a thin line to walk.

[alshadai]

So instead of assailing the problems / societal aspects which manipulate the child's life we should make sure that they aren't born? Sure, we have problems (as a case worker you know better than some, I'm sure) - and the best way to deal with them is to make sure that humans aren't born into them. Isn't it more logical to go about that by removing the problems rather than the people?

We can't fix those problems. If we could have then they would have been fixed a long time ago.
I'm not going to debate my proabortion status. It is a waste of time, I will not change anyones mind, and I respect those who are antiabortion as well :)

[Marlow]

Back on track though, do they argue that there would be less black people, and therefore less crime because black people are prone to crime- regardless of class? Or do they argue that black people tend to be poorer, and therefore less poor people who happen to be black results in less crime?
Who knows? Racists will harp on anything to rationalize.

[Jezebel]

I assumed that you would know, considering you said you've heard people argue that.