tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8770341086445997547.post2820268100885642176..comments2023-10-07T22:37:49.244+13:00Comments on The Hand Mirror: Abortion stats out today - UPDATEDkatyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15742280289613450293noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8770341086445997547.post-78991018132164258862012-06-20T08:17:35.099+12:002012-06-20T08:17:35.099+12:00@me. Well, they do measure the proportion of known...@me. Well, they do measure the proportion of known pregnancies ending in an abortion, which is the abortion ratio. This: "In 2011, the abortion ratio was 204 abortions per 1,000 known pregnancies. The 2011 ratio is the lowest recorded since 1995 (191 per 1,000), but is similar to 2010 (205 per 1,000). Known pregnancies include live births, stillbirths, and induced abortions combined." I'd recommend taking a look at all the data on the Stats site. There's a lot there, and some useful commentary on it from Stats.Captivernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8770341086445997547.post-60302004400830369192012-06-19T22:06:22.211+12:002012-06-19T22:06:22.211+12:00It might be more useful if they measured abortions...It might be more useful if they measured abortions against the number of pregnancies that culminate in birth. Then you might be able to exclude factors like big life changes in past year which may affect sex life/reproduction (i.e. recession, chch quake, etc)<br /><br />me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8770341086445997547.post-48517666886439676442012-06-19T16:54:44.961+12:002012-06-19T16:54:44.961+12:00An excellent point Julie. Sadly it would be hard ...An excellent point Julie. Sadly it would be hard to think of a way to collect the information that would tell us that without it being intrusive.DPF:TLDRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06372937855256319716noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8770341086445997547.post-52937572201499693742012-06-19T13:35:37.912+12:002012-06-19T13:35:37.912+12:00Okay. This seems like a really strange comment to...Okay. This seems like a really strange comment to make.<br /><br />To be honest when it comes to these stats I don't know if it would be good or bad for them to be going up or down, because we don't know WHY.<br /><br />If they are going down because more people feel scared to seek terminations, or because they simply can't access them, then that's bad.<br /><br />If they are going down because people are having more success with contraception, or having more control over their fertility and bodies generally, then that's good.Juliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08977150346842277994noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8770341086445997547.post-41975677528980577132012-06-19T13:10:32.827+12:002012-06-19T13:10:32.827+12:00This just made me recall the previous year's s...This just made me recall the previous year's stats, which were called "auspicious" by Dr Healey...it seemed a really strange word to use :-/Lily Armstrongnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8770341086445997547.post-80099953969261934932012-06-19T11:50:11.075+12:002012-06-19T11:50:11.075+12:00How so?How so?Juliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08977150346842277994noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8770341086445997547.post-3195197062767647812012-06-19T11:48:48.151+12:002012-06-19T11:48:48.151+12:00Another "auspicious" day, I suppose. Who...Another "auspicious" day, I suppose. Whoop de doo.Lily Armstrongnoreply@blogger.com