WASHINGTON (ABP) — A controversial study suggesting the abortion rate has increased since President Bush took office was off the mark, its author now admits. But he also says new figures vindicate some of his contentions.
A recent study of the abortion rates in several states since President Bush took office revealed figures slightly different from those seminary professor Glen Stassen found in a study of a smaller number of states last fall.
Stassen, a Christian-ethics professor at Fuller Theological Seminary near Los Angeles, originally extrapolated data from 16 states to suggest the national abortion rate has risen slightly since Bush took office in 2001 after falling for several years under his predecessors.
Prominent Democrats have cited Stassen's figures as recently as mid-May in criticizing Bush. Partially in response, the Alan Guttmacher Institute released its own study of abortion rates May 18. The group, affiliated with Planned Parenthood, tracks abortion statistics, which are only released every 10 years on the national level.
The Guttmacher study found that, while the abortion rate hasn't increased under Bush, it also has declined more slowly under his presidency than under predecessor Bill Clinton, who unlike Bush favors abortion rights.
“Between 1992 and 1996, the annualized decline was 3.4 percent per year, while between 1996 and 2000, it was 1.2 percent per year,” the Guttmacher study read. “The annualized decline between 2000 and 2002 was 0.9 percent.”
The authors of the Guttmacher study noted it is “subject to some limitations and should be considered provisional.”
Stassen, who published his original findings in an opinion piece that appeared in Sojourners magazine as well as several other news outlets, defended his work by saying his resources were limited when he did the study. He noted some states had not made their most recent abortion statistics available at the time he conducted the study. The Guttmacher study, however, extrapolated a national abortion rate from figures in 44 of the 50 states.
Groups that oppose abortion rights have long accused Stassen's study of being flawed. Family Research Council President Tony Perkins criticized Democrats, such as New York Sen. Hillary Clinton and former presidential candidate John Kerry, for using the figures “to attack President Bush and to promote condom use.”
“Professor Stassen also used wrong figures in several states — old, dated statistics,” Perkins said in the May 27 edition of his daily e-mail newsletter to supporters. “In some cases the absent-minded professor used birth rates when he meant to cite abortion rates.”
Stassen disputed Perkins' claim, telling an Associated Baptist Press reporter that it was “simply untrue.” Stassen, however, has previously admitted mistakenly reporting increases in the 2002 abortion rates in two states that actually showed decreases.
He said the public's response to the findings about abortion rates “separate those who want to reduce abortions from people who want to defend this Republican administration.”
“If I am right that the rate of reduction has stalled, that puts pressure on the administration to do more to support mothers and babies and reduce abortions,” he continued. “Pro-life people like me should cheer on the pressure this generates.”
Sharon Camp, the Guttmacher Institute's president, had a different perspective. “It takes time for political decisions to be reflected in statistical data, so it is too soon to tell what the impact of Bush administration policies will be on U.S. abortion rates,” she said in a statement.
Stassen said June 7 that Bush's presidency may not have reversed the historic decline in abortion rates, but the apparent near-stall in their decline may reflect economic factors that are connected to the president's policy decisions.
He pointed to studies suggesting the abortion rate has paralleled the unemployment rate since the Supreme Court legalized abortion nationwide more than 30 years ago. He said 21 percent of women who had abortions in the United States cited financial problems as the top reason for their choice.
He also said his wife endured a difficult pregnancy, and their ability to provide financial support for their disabled son had an impact on their decision not to abort.
Calls to White House and the Family Research Council requesting comment for this story were not immediately returned.
— With additional reporting by Robert Marus