Why is the Guttmacher Institute opposed to tracking accurate abortion statistics?

The Guttmacher Institute, formerly the research arm and “special affiliate” of Planned Parenthood, released a policy analysis arguing that states should stop requiring abortion statistics to be reported — further illustrating that the abortion industry complains about not being treated like legitimate health care providers while also demanding special treatment.

Written by Guttmacher VP for Public Policy Kelly Baden, and Director of US Communications Joerg Dreweke, the pro-abortion organization officially claimed that giving the public accurate information about abortion in the United States has become “dangerous” due to the enactment of certain state laws protecting preborn children.

“Data on abortion incidence and trends are critical for understanding changes in the abortion access landscape and, in turn, can be vital in shaping public policies to improve reproductive health access and outcomes,” they wrote. “However, the current climate has escalated the risk of mandated data collection being used to stigmatize, harass, or even prosecute abortion patients and providers—including in situations where abortion care is provided and obtained legally.”

Pro-life state laws do not currently allow for women who obtain abortions to be prosecuted; some abortionists, however, have found themselves in legal trouble, including for sending the abortion pill into states where it is restricted, like the case of a New York abortionist who mailed the abortion pill regimen to Louisiana and Texas, with both women subsequently experiencing complications from the drugs.

Abortion Doctors Share How The Most Common Abortion Procedures Take Place

However, the collection of aggregate data with no identifying information does not likely put anyone at risk.

It is already difficult to ascertain the full scope of abortion in the United States; there is no federal requirement for abortions to be reported, though 46 states, along with the District of Columbia, do have some form of state reporting requirement. Over half of U.S. states, however, do not require the reporting of abortion complications, whether or not the preborn child survived the procedure, whether parental consent requirements were met, or other pertinent information.

Nationwide, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) releases an abortion surveillance report, but many areas choose not to report to the CDC at all, as information is given on a voluntary basis. Some states, like California, which are known abortion havens, do not report abortions to the agency.

This is problematic, as Lozier Associate Scholar Dr. Michael New pointed out (emphasis added):

[I]n a post-Dobbs world, accurate abortion data take greater importance. That is because many women have been able to circumvent state pro-life laws by obtaining abortions in other states or by obtaining chemical abortion pills through the mail.

Furthermore, regardless of the legal status of abortion, accurate abortion data can provide valuable information about the impact of contraception programs, sex education curricula, and various pro-life policies.

Abortionists frequently portray abortion as a routine medical procedure, yet on the other hand, they are insistent on trying to keep information about it from the public. One could claim HIPAA requires this, but other medical procedures are voluntarily self-reported; consider, for example, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, and how detailed their annual reports are.

Like the majority of plastic surgeries, induced abortion is elective — the targeted, intentional killing of a preborn child is not medically necessary — and unlike plastic surgery, abortion involves intentionally ending a human life.

As Americans weigh their support for this violent procedure, they should at the very least be well-informed about it. Yet as illustrated by the Guttmacher Institute, the abortion industry continues to do all it can to keep abortion shrouded in secrecy and euphemism.