Lowest abortion rate since 1995

June 19th, 2013 at 11:02 am by David Farrar

Stats NZ has announced:

The number of abortions performed in New Zealand decreased in 2012, Statistics New Zealand said today. A total of 14,745 induced abortions were performed in New Zealand in 2012, 1,118 fewer than in 2011.

The general rate (abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years) decreased from 17.3 per 1,000 in 2011 to 16.1 in 2012. This rate is the lowest since 1995, when it was also 16.1 per 1,000. The lower rate indicates that the decrease in the number of abortions was due to fewer women having abortions, rather than to changes in the size or age structure of the population.  

This is good. Abortion should be safe, legal and rarer.

The general abortion rate peaked in 2003 at 20.8. It is now 16.1, and has been dropping every year since 2007.

The ration of abortions to live births is 193 per 1,000, down from a peak of 247 in 2003. So it isn’t so much that there are less pregnancies, it is more than there are fewer abortions.

The drop appears to be amongst women having an abortion for the first time. The raw numbers have dropped 25% since 2003. However the numbers for women who have had two or more previous abortions have increased 4% since 2003.

Some differences by age also. The number of abortions for 11 to 14 year olds has dropped 43% since 2003 (from 89 to 51) and for 15 to 19 year olds dropped by 34%. However only a 10% drop for 25 to 29 year olds. This suggests to me that sex education for younger NZers is proving more effective.

Tags:

29 Responses to “Lowest abortion rate since 1995”

  1. Harriet (4,972 comments) says:

    But if we can save just 1 more life then it’s worth it! :cool:

    Why don’t you put a graph up off actual abortions – not the misleading ‘per 1000′ type.

    They’re going up arn’t they?

    Thanks.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    Harriet – it’s almost like you didn’t read the very first paragraph of the post :cool:

    The number of abortions performed in New Zealand decreased in 2012, Statistics New Zealand said today. A total of 14,745 induced abortions were performed in New Zealand in 2012, 1,118 fewer than in 2011.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Harriet (4,972 comments) says:

    “…This suggests to me that sex education for younger NZers is proving more effective….”

    How do you come to that conclusion – abortion isn’t the only indicator.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Don the Kiwi (1,761 comments) says:

    It suggests to me that many women are becoming aware that abortion is, in fact, the taking of an innocent human life.

    I also think that people generally are becoming aware that with widely practiced abortion and artificial contraception, that we are causing a decline in our population, and our eventual demise as a people. Just look at Russia and many of the European countries, who are committing societal suicide.

    The Muslims are watching this with glee !

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. MajorBloodnok (361 comments) says:

    The ration (sic) of abortions to live births is 193

    DPF: Are you saying that there are 193 abortions for every one live birth? (I don’t think so.)

    [DPF: To 1,000 live births sorry]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Harriet (4,972 comments) says:

    RRM#

    “….Harriet – it’s almost like you didn’t read the very first paragraph of the post….”

    Sometimes you are real stupid RRM – “…This rate is the lowest since 1995, when it was also 16.1 per 1,000…”

    Do you REALLY believe there were NO abortions before 1995?

    And why is there then a significant peak between 1995 and 2011?

    They’re talking shit – as usual – and they will never give us all the facts!

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Griff (7,736 comments) says:

    Facts are
    Very few woman are dieing from having knitting needles stuck up their birth canal.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    You’re a special breed of fuckwit aren’t you Harriet?

    Harriet said:

    They’re going up arn’t they?

    – and they will never give us all the facts!

    Statistics NZ said:

    A total of 14,745 induced abortions were performed in New Zealand in 2012, 1,118 fewer than in 2011.

    Does your hobby horse have a seat, or just a seat post? :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Harriet (4,972 comments) says:

    “….This suggests to me that sex education for younger NZers is proving more effective….’

    Why do you think it is due to ‘sex education’ it could be due to people like myself who are maybe more effective[for example]

    Abortion statistics and research in NZ is either piss-poor or the public is NOT being told all the facts!

    Unlike alcohol and smoking! Cheers.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. cha (4,027 comments) says:

    .

    http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/06/17/texas-congressman-masturbating-fetuses-prove-need-for-abortion-ban/

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    20% of pregnancies are aborted? holy shit thats high!

    I thought it would have been about 5.

    Dime is pro-choice but dam.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    Why do you think it is due to ‘sex education’ it could be due to people like myself who are maybe more effective[for example]

    Yes, Harriet. It could be that.

    :lol: LOL

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Harriet (4,972 comments) says:

    “…You’re a special breed of fuckwit aren’t you Harriet?…”

    No I’m not.

    I can’t see why we can’t have all the research on abortion put out in the public domain for discussion.

    As DPF and Tony Abbott have both now said “safe legal and rar[er]“.

    Women by law need to be FULLY informed about abortion – why are there highs and lows in abortion RATES is one question that needs to be adressed publicly!

    You and the Health dept ‘officials’ would be the ‘types of fuckwits’[as you put it] who would answer that question with:

    “last year many more condoms broke – and the world cup was on and more kiwi girls were pissed” – the mysoginists answer – eh? :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    Perhaps THIS little corner of the public domain would be of interest to you Harriet?

    http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/health/abortion/abortion-trends.aspx

    You probably should download and save the pdf document quick, before the liberal/gay/atheist/muslim conspiracy to end western civilisation suppresses it :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Harriet (4,972 comments) says:

    RRM#

    Thanks but i’d already looked.

    But it is still ‘very poorly explained’ data. E.g. Abortion rates are differant in some areas due to there being no hospital in the town ect. gestation periods when abortion is performed ect.

    It doesn’t say why the trend has gone up over the years and why it is going down.

    Where’s that data and research?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. tristanb (1,127 comments) says:

    Harriet. An abortion is not taking a life. I’m not sure why Christians even teach this, it’s not as if embryology is understood well by priests.

    It’s a few cells, that is not a life, anymore than phlegm you cough up is a life. It can’t survive by itself and it doesn’t think.

    It may have value to the mother, and is a potential life. But it is really just another part of the mother, and she should be able to get rid of it if she wants to.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Muzza M (291 comments) says:

    Less abortions, more young women on the DPB ?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. scrubone (3,099 comments) says:

    An abortion is not taking a life. I’m not sure why Christians even teach this, it’s not as if embryology is understood well by priests.

    But as you yourself admit, it is a potential life. So we agree there. I’m sure we also agree that children should not be killed after they are born. Most people also are sickened by partial birth abortion.

    So the question is, where do we draw the line. It’s not an embryology debate, it’s an ethical one.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Nukuleka (327 comments) says:

    NZ embraces a death culture that condones the killing of the most innocent in society through abortion. This lack of regard for human life is endemic and is reflected in our shamefully high rates of child abuse. Remember the clarion call of the pro-abortion lobby? ‘Every child a wanted child’. What a hollow and cynical ring that has to it.

    Of course this won’t deflect those wanting to move in on to the other end of life’s spectrum, euthanasing the elderly and incapacitated. Kill ‘em off when they’re in the womb, batter them when they’re babies and do them in before they become a burden on our caring society.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Kovac (29 comments) says:

    scrubone: Your comment on the importance of potential life brings this Monty Python sketch to mind.

    Every sperm is sacred,
    Every sperm is great.
    If a sperm is wasted,
    God gets quite irate.

    Embryology seems like an important part of the debate if you are trying to establish where that line sits. Otherwise why shouldn’t we go the whole way and push it all the way back to conception and ban contraception, since letting that potential life fail to come into fruition is a sin?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. seanmaitland (501 comments) says:

    @dime – its 16.1% – 193/1193 = 16.1%.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    sean – true #mathsfail

    #whendiddimebecomeanassholethatuseshashtags?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. ciaron (1,434 comments) says:

    But it is really just another part of the mother, a

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. PaulL (5,986 comments) says:

    So, not sure that it tells us that sex education is working. If the pregnancy rate for those under 20 were reducing, that would potentially tell us that sex education was working (either that or male NZers are getting less attractive). That the absolute number of abortions is reducing in that younger cohort could tell us that more are choosing to keep their babies. Unlikely, but possible.

    @Harriet, I’m pretty sure there’s not a conspiracy to suppress the reasons why the abortion rate changes in individual geographical or demographic groups. I’d guess that we don’t actually know, other than people pontificating on blogs about why it might be. And if those people actually cared, they’d either commission some research themselves, or do some research themselves.

    For my 5c, I’d say it’s a combination of young people having less uncontrolled sex (probably fewer of them ridiculously drunk given changes in alcohol consumption plus sex education plus a bit of a more mature view of the current generation towards sex), plus I think a change in beliefs about abortion amongst a portion of the 20-40 population – I feel like more people see it as a bigger choice than it used to be, and therefore perhaps more people keep the baby. I also wonder whether the morning after pill is perhaps not counted as abortion, and maybe becoming more commonly used?

    And, by the way, the pedant in me wants to tell some of you that it’s fewer abortions, not less. Fewer is used for individually identifiable items (which some of you clearly believe abortions are), less is used for continuous quantities. Less petrol, fewer boxes of weetbix.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. big bruv (13,906 comments) says:

    Given the number of Kids being born to feral parents I would suggest that the abortion rates are not nearly high enough.

    We should be encouraging feral females and those on benefits to be having more early terminations.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    Women by law need to be FULLY informed about abortion

    That might be true, but what they don’t NEED is men telling them what they should do with their own bodies.

    Until the embryo is viable, it is in my opinion part of the woman’s body.

    Harriet – you are against abortion – how many kids do you foster each year? How much of the social and economic cost of children born into families that are not able to care for them, are you willing to be responsible for?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Rufus (667 comments) says:

    @Judith “Until the embryo is viable, it is in my opinion part of the woman’s body.”

    Define “viable”.

    Most children aren’t can’t stand on their own two feet until they’re 18 or so….and some never manage it, which is why we have to pay them money every Thursday, give them houses to live in, wipe their noses, feed their kids at school, etc.

    “part of the woman’s body” – yet it is a self-contained little unit growing inside a woman’s body. Part of her, but at the same time its own little being.

    @DPF – if abortions are no big deal, why do you desire to reduce them?

    How many abortions is “rare” enough, and why? Why is it ok to snuff out X number of lives, but not X+1 or X+2?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Rufus (667 comments) says:

    @Judith That might be true, but what they don’t NEED is men telling them what they should do with their own bodies. “

    Since men helped create women’s little “problem” and will end up paying disproportionately for the costs of both its murder or its nurture, men have the right to take part in the women’s decision.

    But then it’s only your opinion, and opinions mean squat, a dime a dozen…

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. BlairM (2,339 comments) says:

    An abortion is not taking a life.

    You can argue about the moral value of a foetus, but saying that a foetus isn’t a living creature is even more ridiculous than saying they masturbate. Of course it is, and an abortion takes life. The real question is what value does that life have. If you do think it has value, as I do, then you cannot morally support the decision to terminate that life.

    I’m pleased the rate is going down. The ideal number of abortions in New Zealand should be zero. I’m of the belief that people can and should work towards that goal, without resorting to criminalizing first trimester procedures.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote