Paul Tully, general secretary of SPUC, said: "The Rowntree report
identifies certain factors that increased the likelihood of abortion.
It argues that these factors should be promoted. Politicians who want
to see fewer abortions must recognise the underlying agenda here.
"The report complains that not enough young mothers contemplate
an abortion. It complains that family support led many teenagers to
decide against abortion. However, most parents of today's pregnant
teenagers were themselves brought up under the Abortion Act. In many
cases they have had abortions themselves, or else know close friends or
family members who have had abortions. Many will appreciate the
devastating psychological effects which abortion can have on women, as
well as the physical complications. They are, in fact, well qualified
to appreciate the true nature of abortion."
Mr Tully also pointed out various flaws in the content of the
report and the way in which it had been covered in the media. He said:
"The report cites abortion statistics from 1997, when comprehensive
data is now freely available for 1999. Furthermore, the report does not
assert that young women's decisions on abortion are made hurriedly, as
was claimed. On the contrary, the report states that decisions were
'firmed up during the 7 - 14 week period after the discovery of the
pregnancy.'
"Crucially, the publication of this report coincides with the appointment of 141 government 'teenage pregnancy busters' who have been charged with promoting abortion among school girls. This suggests that the Rowntree Foundation's report, which is both biased and outdated, is part of a wider pro-abortion agenda which is being pushed subtly yet unremittingly by government."