Researcher says pro-life efforts paying dividends

A social scientist at the University of Alabama says pro-life laws at the state level are effectively reducing the number of abortions nationwide among both teens and adults. But his research into the effectiveness of such legislation, he contends, has been virtually ignored by the mainstream media.

University of Alabama professor Michael New says the 20 percent decline in abortions across the U.S. since 1990 is largely the result of progress the pro-life movement has made in enacting pro-life legislation at the state level. Speaking recently at the Family Research Council in Washington, DC, Dr. New discussed his research into the impact that state-level pro-life legislation and advertising have had on abortion rates.

New says he hopes his research will encourage pro-lifers to tout their achievements.

"Superficially a lot of people don't think the pro-life movement has really been very effective because 34 years later we still have not overturned Roe v. Wade," he points out, referring to the 1973 landmark decision that legalized abortion on demand in America. "But we have made a lot of very good incremental gains." And that, he adds, is something that pro-lifers "should be very proud of and … should highlight and should trumpet."

Dr. New says although pro-life parental consent laws often yield success, most researchers would agree that restrictions on public funding are the most effective means of reducing abortion rates. And one of the ways to see that such restrictions are enacted is by electing pro-life advocates to office, he says.

"I also think [pro-lifers] should make the case that voting for a pro-life candidate does result in some solid protections for the unborn," New offers. "It's not wasting your vote; good things will come out of that vote and out of electing that candidate."

Still, he says, his findings linking state-level pro-life legislation and advertising with reduced abortion rates are conveniently dismissed by the New York Times and the Washington Post, noting the latter avoided referencing his research in a 2005 story on declining abortion rates.

"A reporter talked with me for about 20 minutes, but my comments -- and the comments of every other pro-lifer -- were removed from the article," he says, offering his opinion that they were "probably spiked by a senior person" at the Post.

New says he finds it interesting that abortion advocates "never actually come out and say legislation doesn't work" in reducing abortions. Instead, he continues, "they put the emphasis elsewhere -- on contraception, on other factors -- but they never actually pull the trigger and say … these laws don't work."

Evidently that is something in which the researcher takes pride. "In some respects," says New, "I'm kind of flattered by the fact that they don't feel confident in saying that anymore."