Experts: No Evidence Behind “Induced Abortion Is Evidence-Based Medical Care” Argument

Washington, D.C.—A new peer-reviewed article published by Charlotte Lozier Institute (CLI) in Medical Research Archives refutes the inaccurate claim by abortion advocates that induced abortion is an “evidence-based” medical practice.

To claim a medical intervention (in this case, the abortion) is “evidence-based,” scientists have long agreed it must address a specifically defined disease, diagnosis or illness; produce measurable outcomes; and be compared to other available treatments or no treatment at all. To date, there is no published research that has tested each of these points.

Most abortion research has been focused on how the procedure is performed, and which method or approach is safest (for the mother) or most effective in ending the unborn human’s life.

This article’s researchers also point to the following reasons why claims of “evidence-based” induced abortion are unsupported by existing research:

• 96% of induced abortions are not treating disease or illness because they are performed on healthy mothers carrying healthy babies.
• For extremely rare situations involving life-limiting conditions for the unborn baby, risk to the mother’s life, or other dire circumstances, there is no research proving the benefits of abortion compared to other alternative interventions.
• Abortion data reporting in the United States is among the most flawed and inadequate systems in the world. Most pro-abortion organizations that demand abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy fail to provide basic collection and reporting of the information necessary to inform valid science and effective medical practice.

The article’s co-authors Dr. James Studnicki, vice president of data analytics at CLI, and Dr. Ingrid Skop, vice president of medical affairs at CLI, explain:

“The abortion industry prescribes abortion as a ‘cure-all’ to our world’s social, financial and emotional problems and has gotten away with making these claims despite the fact they’re unsupported. While the quality of abortion science in general is quite weak, the term ‘evidence-based practice’ has an explicit and testable meaning which can be supported or unsupported by the data collected through observation or experimentation. Abortion is clearly not evidence-based medical practice, and it’s time we pushed back against claims that it is.”

Charlotte Lozier Institute was launched in 2011 as the education and research arm of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America. CLI is a hub for research and public policy analysis on some of the most pressing issues facing the United States and nations around the world. The Institute is named for a feminist physician known for her commitment to the sanctity of human life and equal career and educational opportunities for women.

###