fbpx
Skip to content
News, Statements

Strong AUL arguments in Illinois Parental Notice case draw reaction from APA

In the March 4 edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) Psychiatric News, the APA announced that it had joined an amicus curiae brief filed in an Illinois state court, opposing the state’s parental notification law and attempting to directly counter an earlier brief filed by Americans United for Life (AUL).

It seems that AUL’s brief hit a nerve with the APA, drawing the pro-abortion organization to not only join an opposing brief, but to also publicly acknowledge that it is specifically responding to AUL’s brief. That brief, filed last fall on behalf of a number of Illinois legislators, argued that parental involvement laws (requiring either parental consent or parental notification) decrease both abortion and birth rates of minors.  AUL also argued that parental involvement laws protect minors from the physical and psychological harms inherent in abortion, as well as from the harms of sexual exploitation.

The APA did not hide its abortion bias when filing its opposing brief. In the Psychiatric News, the APA acknowledged that it was “continuing APA’s tradition of support for women’s reproductive rights”; that the APA “has a very strong position on women having access to abortion”; and that the APA’s official position is to oppose “all constitutional amendments, legislation, and regulations curtailing… abortion services to any segment of the population.”

Opposing all regulation of abortion, to any segment of society, is a clear indicator that the APA is going to put its pro-abortion agenda above the health and wellbeing of young women. While numerous peer-reviewed studies demonstrate that abortion can cause harm to women and particularly minors, the APA cannot even bring itself to acknowledge that abortion can hurt some women in some circumstances. Its sweeping support of abortion in all circumstances completely undermines its position as a respectable psychiatric organization.

For example, one of the leading studies on the psychological harm caused by abortion (led by a pro-abortion researcher, no less) found that minors who became pregnant and carried to term had a 35.7 percent chance of experiencing major depression, but minors who aborted had an astonishing 78.6 percent chance of experiencing major depression. The same study found that 27 percent of women who aborted reported experiencing suicide ideation, with as many as 50 percent of minors experiencing suicide or suicide ideation.

And that is just one of the many peer-reviewed studies highlighted by AUL in its brief. In fact, AUL’s brief contained such strong evidence of physical and psychological harm following abortion that it drew the attention of the Washington Times, which relayed that AUL “made mincemeat” of the plaintiffs’ contrary claims in the case.

Unfortunately, the APA fails to give any weight to these peer-reviewed medical studies. Its agenda gets in the way and blinds the organization to the fact that abortion hurts young women.

To view AUL’s brief in the case, Hope Clinic for Women v. Adams, click here.