It is argued: "Abortion is necessary to prevent, or at least to minimize, the terrible evil of child abuse. Anyone who has ever witnessed the absolute horror of child abuse cannot but wish that such a child had never been born."
As in the previous type of case, we must have the greatest sympathy for a child who is a victim of child abuse. We must do all we can to stop this abomination. But to kill the child before he is born?
First, abortion is not a solution for child abuse, because abortion is itself the ultimate child abuse! Recall what has been continually emphasized, the horror of the methods of abortion, such as saline burning of the skin for one to two hours or cutting the child to pieces, and the pain these methods cause to the child. Even by other "clean and painless" methods, abortion would still be child abuse because all murder is a form of abuse.
Second, abortion is not a solution for child abuse. It is simply false to assume that it is the unwanted child who will be abused while the wanted child will not. That is, abortion for this purpose, even if it were justified, would not be effective. "Many studies have demonstrated that the victim of child abuse is not the 'unwanted child.'" It IS the wanted child. In his study of child abuse, Edward F. Lenoski, M.D., found that "91% of the parents admitted they wanted the child they had abused. The mothers had also donned maternity clothing two months earlier than most expectant mothers."8 Furthermore: "A higher percentage of the abused children were named after one of the parents," indicating that they were wanted.
Third, there is another compelling reason why abortion is not a solution for child abuse. "Instead of reducing the incidence of child abuse, the evidence shows that abortion actually increases child abuse." There are a number of reasons for this:
The abused child is reduced to an object.
The abortion mentality reinforces the attitude of treating children like objects, objects that can be wanted or unwanted according to whether or not "it" satisfies parental needs ... What aborters and abusers have in common. . . is "the assumption that the rights, desires, and ideas of the adult take full precedence over those of the child, and that children are essentially the property of parents who have the right to deal with their offspring as they see fit, without interference."
The abused child is a victim of the result of guilt. "Aborted women frequently feel guilt, and 'guilt is one of the major factors causing battering and infanticide.' This guilt results in 'intolerable feelings of self-hatred, which the parent takes out on the child.’"
The abused child is a victim of the result of lowered self-esteem. "Child abusers almost invariably have a significant lack of self-esteem. Since lowered self-esteem is a well-documented aftermath of abortion, the experience of abortion may help shape an emotional environment which is conducive to the battering of other or later children." Lenoski states that if the mother sees a resemblance of herself in her child. and if "the mother has very little self-esteem, she will see in the baby a reflection of the low self-esteem she feels toward herself," making the child a potential victim of the bad feelings the mother has for herself.
The abused child is a victim of the result of failures in bonding. Dr. Philip C. Ney, an authority on child abuse, explains:
It would appear that those who abort their infants at any stage of pregnancy interrupt a very delicate mechanism and sever the developing bond that is critical for the infant's protection against the mother's carelessness or rage. It is hypothesized that, once bonding is interrupted in the primipara, there are long-lasting psychological changes which make it more difficult for the same bond to develop in subsequent pregnancies. For this reason, it is likely that abortion contributes to bonding failure, an important cause of child battering. Consequently, as rates of abortion increase, rates of battering will increase proportionately.
The abused child is a victim of the results of marital stress.
The marital stress caused by abortion increases family hostilities and thus heightens the possibility of violent outbreaks. If the father felt left out of the abortion decision or only resentfully agreed to the abortion, or if the woman felt pressured into the abortion by her mate, deep feelings of resentment and violation of trust might cause frequent eruption of emotions. In the heat of such parental disputes, children are likely to get caught in the crossfire, objects of release for the pent-up rage of adults.
The abused child is a victim of the results of abortion, because, as Dr. Ney states:
Abortion decreases an individual's instinctual restraint against the occasional rage felt toward those dependent on his or her care. Permissive abortion diminishes the social taboo against aggressing the defenseless. Abortion increases the hostility between generations. Abortion has devalued children, thus diminishing the value of caring for children. That abortion actually increases child abuse is tragically borne out by statistics.
Since Roe v. Wade, child abuse has increased proportionately with the skyrocketing rate of legal abortions. The same pattern of increased child battery following legalization of abortion has also been observed in many other countries, including Canada, Britain, and Japan. During 1975 alone, the rate of child battery in New York increased 18 to 20 percent, leading to estimates that during the 1980s there would be 1.5 million battered children, resulting in 50,000 deaths and 300,000 permanent injuries.
Other sources reveal a similar, or worse, picture of violence against children. Anne H. Cohn, executive director of the National Committee for the Prevention of Child Abuse, speaking at Brown University, March 8, 1989, told the audience that "about 2.25 million child abuse cases were reported last year, half of which required some form of treatment; 1,130 deaths were attributed to child abuse last year; the number of reported cases has risen 50 percent in the last 5 years."
Abortion and child abuse go together. Each represents the loss of reverence for a human person, the willingness to use violence against him. Even when abortion and child abuse are not practiced by the same persons, they are manifestations of the same underlying attitude of loss of respect for human persons, and thus they tend to exist together. Again, abortion is not a solution to the terrible problem of child abuse; it is part of that problem.
It is argued: "Abortion is necessary to prevent, or at least to minimize, the terrible evil of child abuse. Anyone who has ever witnessed the absolute horror of child abuse cannot but wish that such a child had never been born."