No, children who would be born into poverty are not better off aborted

Many pro-choice activists claim that it is a form of “compassion” to end a child’s life in an abortion instead of allowing that child to be born into poverty. What is not often brought up in these assertions is the views of mothers who are experiencing poverty. The bottom line is there is nothing “pro-choice” about coercing vulnerable mothers into abortion. Instead of assuming we know what women need, it is time our society listened to them.

More than four decades of legal elective abortion in our country has led to a society that is not more equal but less. Even the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute acknowledges that three-quarters of women seeking elective abortion are considered low income, with almost half living at less than the federal poverty level. Disturbingly, it is increasingly common to hear people suggest that these statistics should not upset us. The implication is that children who would be born into poverty are better off killed in abortion.

The experience of women pressured into abortion due to poverty tells a very different story than this callous and inhumane calculus for the worth of human life. The reality on the ground is that most people still view children as a gift, not a burden. Researchers who spent years living in some of the poorest communities in our nation report that poor women saw abortion as “abandoning hope.”  Click here for more.