Pro-abortion NGO report contradicts pro-legalization argument

The pro-abortion NGO Instituto Anis has just released a survey according to which 10% of women aged 18 to 39 have already had an abortion in Brazil. But the data are questionable — and, even if they correspond to reality, they show a downward trend and call into question some of the arguments used by defenders of the legalization of abortion.

>> Be part of the Life and Citizenship channel on Telegram

The study, entitled PNA (Pesquisa Nacional de Aborto), is signed by researchers Debora Diniz, from the University of Brasília, Alberto Madeiro, from the State University of Piauí, and Marcelo Medeiros, who is a visiting professor at Columbia University, in the United States. The survey surveyed 2,000 women between the ages of 18 and 39, and included only urban areas—excluding the 17% of women aged 18-39 who live in rural areas.

According to a projection made by the authors, 13% of women have had an abortion by reaching 40 years of age.

There is no official information on abortions performed illegally in Brazil. Data from SUS (Public Health System) on post-abortion care include cases of spontaneous abortion, which is relatively common. A study done in 2020 pointed out that “it is not possible to identify, based on the procedure performed, whether the abortion was spontaneous or induced.” Therefore, all studies on the subject are based on estimates.

In the case of the PNA, the method used may cause confusion in the participants. First, the researchers applied a questionnaire to identify the sociodemographic profile of the participants (age, religion and ethnicity). Afterwards, they delivered a paper form for the participant to read, answer and deposit in an urn. The idea is to avoid embarrassing the participants, who could then hide the fact that they had an abortion. At the same time, adopting the process can cause even more confusion, as many women may mistake miscarriage for miscarriage. “It is not clear that the question clearly distinguishes induced abortion from miscarriage; I have the impression that it is not”, says Lenise Garcia, professor of Biology at the University of Brasília and national coordinator of the Movimento Brasil Sem Aborto. This perhaps explains why, according to the authors of the PNA, less educated women have a higher level of “yes” answers to the question about the history of abortions.

The PNS (National Health Survey), carried out by the IBGE (Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics) in 2013, adopted the traditional method of interviews and found very different data: only 2.1% of women aged between 18 and 49 had had abortions .

Foreign funding of the pro-abortion cause

Another problem in the Anis Institute survey is the conflict of interests. In addition to being a researcher, Debora Diniz is a pro-abortion activist and founder of the Anis Institute, which receives funds from foreign organizations interested in promoting abortion in Brazil.

Since 2006, Anis has received $940,000 from the Ford Foundation. From Open Society, it has been $435,000 since 2016 (earlier figures are not available).

Despite the questionable results and the conflict of interests of Debora Diniz, the PNA ends up being used as a legitimate source of data in the debate on the subject. For Professor Lenise Garcia, it shouldn’t: “Scientific research should be exempt. I don’t think it’s convenient for the same person to be a researcher and an activist for a cause,” she says.

wrong premises

The survey by Instituto Anis is used to support the argument that the number of abortions in Brazil is high and legalization needs to be done to serve this population, since abortion will be done anyway. For Lenise Garcia, this is a fallacious correlation. “Surveys such as the PNA do not support research on the liberation of abortion. Saying that it happens a lot or a little doesn’t make crime stop being a crime,” she says.

But even if the numbers are correct, the use of research to support the pro-abortion argument is not supported by the data. First, because according to data from pro-abortion groups, the number has been falling in Brazil even without any change in the law. The PNA itself shows this: the number of participants who claim to have had an abortion dropped from 15% in 2010 to 13% in 2016 to 10% in 2021. That is: if the idea is that the high number of abortions justifies legalization , this argument is getting weaker.

In addition, data from other countries indicate that the ban does reduce the number of abortions — that is: the thesis that abortions will happen anyway is false.

In an article published in Journal of Human Resources in 2007, three researchers — including an MIT professor — demonstrated that the legalization of abortion in the United States caused a drop in the number of births. As the practice ceased to be illegal at different times according to the state, it was possible to compare the fertility rate before and after. The conclusion is that the legalization of abortion not only postponed motherhood, but caused an increase in the number of women who did not give birth. This means that the prohibition does prevent the number of abortions.

In another survey, published by Journal of Law and Economics in 2004, from researchers at Wellesley College and Darmouth College, concluded that in the United States and Eastern Europe, legalized abortion alone caused a 10% decline in the fertility rate. The authors explicitly reject the thesis that prohibition does not reduce the number of abortions. The reason is simple: People respond to incentives. Making abortion more accessible reduces the costs (including non-financial costs) of having an abortion. This is one of the fundamental premises of economics. “This evidence is consistent with economic models in which the cost of abortion influences the decision to become pregnant as well as the decision to abort,” say the authors.