My regular readers have perhaps tired of hearing about the article in last week's CMAJ that indicated that women who terminate pregnancies are 2.6 times more likely to require psychiatric hospitalization than are women who carry to term.
The Canadian Medical Association Journal--the CMAJ--publishes e-letters in response to its articles. Several such e-letters have now been published about the psychiatric-hospitalization-after-abortion article.
Here are two of the letters.
One of them, written by a medical student at UC-Davis, says:
"The article was not properly peer-reviewed, because the CMAJ should have checked Reardon's background and the politics of all the authors."
Uh-huh. Medical journals are supposed to give political litmus tests to authors.
And here's a third letter.
This letter was written by an adult--a member of the psychiatric department at the University of Toronto.
"We already know that women who are mentally ill, under stress and without supports will comprise the group who would most need an abortion because they would not be able to cope with a pregnancy or having a chil but will also have the most difficulty coping with an abortion. The fact that the most common diagnosis for those admitted was a psychotic depression strongly suggests that some of these women had a previous history of mental illness. To relate any admission over the next four years to the abortion without no any other variables is totally incorrect science."
This letter-writer admits that some women will have difficulty coping with an abortion. But without no any other variables, she somehow knows that these very same women would also not have been able to cope with a pregnancy. I think that is, like, totally incorrect science.