Unwanted Children
If the antis get their way, these numbers will only increase.
U.S. women of childbearing age who were surveyed in 2002 revealed that 14 percent of their recent births were unwanted at the time of conception, federal researchers said Monday.On my trip to the "red states" this summer, I met many people whose sole mission in life is to overturn Roe v. Wade. None of them have adopted and most refuse to take a position on the pill.
In a similar 1995 survey, only 9 percent were unwanted at the time of conception.
At least one anti-abortion group said the numbers reflect a national "pro-life shift," while others who research reproductive health issues suggested it might mean less access to abortion.
The proportion of unwanted births at time of conceptions was highest among girls under 18 - 25.4 percent. It was lowest among women 30 to 44 - 10.4 percent.
The proportion was higher for black women (26.2 percent) than for Hispanics (16.8 percent) and whites (10.7 percent).
Here are some other highlights from the new federal report:
About 42 percent of women in 2002 said they never married, up from 38 percent in 1995.
About 50 percent of women in 2002 said they had lived with a man in a sexual relationship outside of marriage, up from 41 percent of women in the 1995 survey.
posted by storiesinamerica @ 5:12 PM
13 comments
13 Comments:
"...unwanted at the time of conception"
I wonder how long these "unwanted" numbers hold over time. I have no idea. Any studies/polls on this?
Also, there are many ethnic groups that have strong preferences toward having male children. I wonder if aborting more females might have brought these numbers down...
Much to ponder here.
“None of them have adopted and most refuse to take a position on the pill.”
I have no idea why the people you met had not adopted (though obviously this was not a scientific sampling, and I happen to know many who have), but one possible reason is that there is a shortage of babies for the number of couples wanting to adopt.
Making the point that I suggested earlier…In China “unwanted” baby often means female-baby. They have aborted females at a hugely disproportionate rate, or kill or abandon females shortly after birth, whereas boys were often “transferred” to other families.
A shortage of babies??
In 2002, 134,000 children were in foster care waiting for adoption! I'm sure the numbers have increased by now. I'll look for them later.
http://statistics.adoption.com/information/foster-care-statistics.html
I said shortage of babies, not older children.
http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=19870523&s=19870523pollitt
(scroll down)
Assuming the following are true:
-- There is nothing wrong with abortion.
-- Unwanted babies are a bad thing.
-- Male babies are disproportionately favored over female babies in many parts of the world (often due to ethnic or cultural biases, but sometimes for other reasons as well.)
So, given that the child’s sex might be an influencing factor as to how “wanted” or “unwanted” a child might be -- would it not be a good idea to identify expectant mothers who have predisposed sexual preferences for their children and encourage (perhaps even pay) them to get abortions? Yes, more females will be aborted, but, in the service of reducing the number of “unwanted” babies, would this not be a good thing?
I’m not saying that it would solve the problem, but even if it helped a little, wouldn’t it be worth it?
Of course, the issue will soon be mute anyway. Genetic engineering has advanced to the point that predetermining a child’s sex is already possible. It’s only a matter of time before it becomes cost-efficient, acceptable, and widespread.
And come on people, am I the only one reading Rose’s blog here?! Somebody step on up and kick my ass for god’s sake!
Why do you always post anonymously? i'm usually weary of anonymous posters who link to michelle malkin.
-j
I dunno, seems as good a name as any. That way I don't have to bother to type in a username, which I don't see any use for.
Does it make a difference?
I'm not sure I understand. Is Michelle Malkin evil or something? Have you had bad experiences with people who link to her?
She seems to work pretty hard on her website...pretty good writer...damn good researcher. I dunno, she's someone that googles up for me now and then....
If you want me to come up with some username, I'll be glad to. Pick one out for me.
So Rose, where is everybody? This is starting to feel like one of those private chatrooms I've heard so much about.
Like I said, I used to stop by the site and read the interviews. I always thought you had a good heart and sorta got it into my head that you had some resevations, maybe even some doubts, about "life in the bubble" as you called it. In fact, if there's one thing I wished you would have done more of, I wished you would have had a greater emphasis on your reactions and feelings about how it affected you.
You're pretty far left, I can see that now. Which is all well and good, but it seems like something you could have riffed off of a bit more. I kept wondering where your head was at.
um, I'm not Rose
I just found your site through happyfeminist.typepad.com/ Thank you for posting stories about women that don't get covered.
Generally, there's not a shortage of children; in the USA, there's a shortage of white, healthy, male babies to adopt. Add to that the fact that some children are can be fostered but for various reasons can't be released for adoption...
America increase their popularity in very small percentage.
Nice Post Love Reading Its
Silagra with 50 mg
Post a Comment
<< Home