Results: Medical journals refused to publish pro-abortion researcher's study linking abortion and depression

The study revealed that 42% of women who had undergone abortions within the previous four years suffered from depression at more than double the rate of women who hadn't had abortions and higher than the rate of those who had given birth. The study also found higher rates of substance abuse, anxiety, and suicidal behavior in women who had undergone abortions. Have you - or do you know anyone who - previously had a recent abortion that struggles with depression?

However, it seems that abortion advocates are attempting to hide the truth. According to Fergusson, many of the medical journals he approached refused to publish the study. He explained, "We went to four journals, which is very unusual for us – we normally get accepted the first time." This makes it clear that the scientific and medical community is biased against research that shows the risks of abortion (author opinion). Do you find it odd - as Fergusson does - that medical journals would refuse to publish his findings that expose and seem to shed a poor light on the psychological after-effects of abortion?

One pro-choice organization, the Abortion Supervisory Committee, tried to pressure Fergusson not to publish the study. They said that publishing the results in an "unclarified state" would cause it to become "a political football." They clearly worried that the study would compromise the pro-choice claim that abortion doesn't cause mental health problems and hurt the pro-abortion movement (author opinion). Does it bother you that some organizations are more concerned with sticking to their political leanings than in making sure the truth is made known - despite what it reveals?

Fergusson said it would be "scientifically irresponsible" not to publish the study and compared it to a study that found an adverse reaction to a medication. He said at the time: "It verges on scandalous that a surgical procedure that is performed on over one in 10 women [in New Zealand] has been so poorly researched and evaluated, given the debates about the psychological consequences of abortion." Do you agree with Fergusson that this information should be made known - so women can make a better-informed decision when contemplating abortion?

He said no one can accuse him of pro-life bias, adding, "I'm pro-choice but I've produced results which, if anything, favor a pro-life viewpoint." Fergusson also said that when he and the researchers set out to do the study, they expected to find that abortion doesn't lead to higher rates of mental illness. However, the conclusion they came to was the opposite of this. Fortunately, they had the integrity to publish the study anyway, despite multiple journals turning it down and pressure from at least one pro-choice group. Do you respect Fergusson for publishing his results even though they went against what he expected (and hoped) the research would show?

Would you be more likely to encourage someone NOT to get an abortion, knowing that they will be at significantly higher likelihood of suffering from depression, substance abuse, suicidal thoughts, etc. after having the procedure?