The Rise of Child Abuse as a Result of Abortion
Before I get to today's blog, I need to clarify something that causes confusion. Periodically someone runs across something written by "Randy Alcorn" and assumes that could only be me. But there are other Randy Alcorns, and one of them is a columnist for The Daily Sound in Santa Barbara, California. I've read a few of his articles I agree with and others I definitely don't.
Recently "the other Randy Alcorn, writer" produced a column entitled "Abortion is pro-life." The logic is twisted, to say the least. Those who oppose abortion are made out NOT to be prolife; those who support it are the ones who are REALLY prolife. Huh? He appeals to the tired old overpopulation argument on which pro-abortion people attempt to assume the moral high ground. Yeah, tell that to the babies whose bodies are torn apart. How noble of us to do that to helpless children. How prolife of us.
I'm sure the other writing Randy Alcorn must sometimes hate the fact that people will think that he wrote those evangelical Christian books, including a couple that are explicitly prolife! (I mean, how many Randy Alcorns can there be, much less who are professional writers?) Anyway, I wish him the best (and congratulate him for living in Santa Barbara, what a place), but hope he doesn't succeed in convincing people to justify killing children.
Years ago I got a letter from a Randy Alcorn in Virginia, who told me a great story. He went into a bookstore not looking for anything in particular, but asking God to lead him to a specific book to read, and to make it clear to him which one. As he scanned the shelf his eyes fell upon a book by....Randy Alcorn. He thought he was the only one, and God definitely got his attention, so he bought and read the book and said some kind things about it. But to top if off, he told me his wife's name is Nancy (same spelling as my Nanci's legal name).
On to the main blog: my recent post on the killing of abortionist George Tiller got me thinking about a related topic I wanted to address, on the rise of child abuse as a result of abortion. My belief is that when people believe it’s okay to kill a child before he’s born, because an adult has rights over his life, then inevitably it will become more acceptable to beat him up once he's born.
In 1973, when abortion was first legalized, United States child abuse cases were estimated at 167,000 annually. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, approximately 903,000 children were victims of abuse during 2001, a number more than five times greater.
The increase in child abuse is even more dramatic, since the 45 million American children killed by surgical abortions (and an unknown number by chemical abortions) aren’t counted as victims of child abuse. Yet abortion is the earliest child abuse, and no other is more deadly. The argument that aborting a child prevents child abuse is true only in the same sense that killing a wife prevents wife abuse. Dead people can no longer be abused... but preventing their abuse by killing them is convoluted logic.
Why have children been abused far more since abortion was legalized? Because abortion has changed the way we think about children.
“Having more unwanted children results in more child abuse,” pro-choicers argue. Studies, however, disagree.
University of Southern California professor Edward Lenoski conducted a landmark study of 674 abused children. He discovered that 91 percent of the parents admitted they wanted the child they had abused. The pro-choice argument that it is unwanted children who are destined for abuse may sound logical, but the best study done to date demonstrates it is false.
“Studies indicate that child abuse is more frequent among mothers who have previously had an abortion.” Dr. Philip Ney’s studies indicate that this is partially due to the guilt and depression caused by abortion, which hinders the mother’s ability to bond with future children. He documents that having an abortion decreases a parent’s natural restraint against feelings of rage toward small children.
Both mother and father override their natural impulse to care for a helpless child when they choose abortion. Having suppressed that preserving instinct, it may become less effective in holding back rage against a newborn’s helplessness, a toddler’s crying, or a preschooler’s defiance.
The attitude that results in abortion is exactly the same attitude that results in child abuse. Furthermore, if she doesn’t abort, the mother can look at her difficult three-year-old and think, “I had the right to abort you.” The child owes her everything; she owes the child nothing. This causes resentment of demands requiring parental sacrifice. Even if subconscious, the logic is inescapable: If it was all right to kill the same child before birth, surely it’s all right to slap him around now.
Of the five thousand American children murdered every year (the figure doesn’t include abortions), 95 percent are killed by one or both of their parents. There’s a pervasive notion that children belong to their parents. Adults think they have the same right to dispose of their children that society assured them they had before the children were born. Once the child-abuse mentality grips a society, it doesn’t restrict itself to only one age group. If preborn children aren’t safe, no children are safe.
Peter Singer says, "There [is a] lack of any clear boundary between the newborn infant, who is clearly not a person in the ethically relevant sense, and the young child who is. In our book, Should the Baby Live?, my colleague Helga Kuhse and I suggested that a period of twenty-eight days after birth might be allowed before an infant is accepted as having the same right to life as others."
Children granted a right to life at twenty-eight days after birth? Why not wait until six months? Or six years? Killing a five-, ten-, or fifteen-year-old child is really just a postnatal abortion, isn’t it? As Singer has demonstrated, once you establish it’s all right to kill a person, logically the door is wide open to killing the same person at a variety of ages, for a variety of reasons.
The solution to battered children outside the womb is not battered children inside the womb.
The solution to child abuse isn’t doing the abusing earlier. It’s not doing it at all.