Save lives from silent scream.
-
Pregnancy Crisis Service.
Mission : To respond to the needs of those teenagers faced with unwanted pregnancies, and those who are likely to turn to abortion as an easy way out of their predicament.
Our Hot Line
633 99770 -
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Is the embryo really human life?
All doctors and scientists agree that humanbegins at conception, so even though the fertilized egg is still very tiny, a single cell in fact, it has all the genetic information it needs to grow into a baby and it is already growing and developing immediately after conception.
2. Isn't abortion a religious issue?
It is not merely a religious issue but a moral issue affecting all people. Just like stealing and killing is always morally wrong regardless of religion, so too is abortion as it kills a human life.
3. But isn't abortion is legal in many countries?
Yes it is legal but morally it remains wrong. Immoral actions that are legalized remains immoral.
4. Why bring an unwanted baby into the world?
The baby's new life was brought into the world when there was conception. Killing it remains immoral even though the baby is unwanted. We want you to consider other options.
5. I am really not ready to be a mother, what can I do?
We cater to the needs of expectant mothers so please call us (63399770 ) and let us try to help you.
6. How can anyone really help me, besides my parents will kill me if they find out I am pregnant!
No parent in the world has ever killed their daughter because of her unplanned pregnancy. We will discuss with you in upmost confidence the most helpful course of action that is the best solution in the circumstances. We understand how you feel.
7 I am not sure if I am pregnant, but if I am, what are my options?
Call us and we will arrange a confidential pregnancy test, and also discuss your options in confidence. There is an alternative to abortion and we can help you.
8. What are the effects of abortion?
Not merely wanting to scare you but it is found that besides the Post Abortion Distress Syndrome , there is the increased risk of Breast Cancer and Subsequent Premature Delivery, and also other medical risks. -
-
Post Abortion Distress Syndrome or Post-Abortion Grief
By E. Joanne Angelo
Every woman who subjects herself to an induced abortion suffers the death
of her own child. She is at risk not only for the surgical and medical
complications of abortion & uterine rupture, sepsis, infertility, increased
incidence of cancer. She is also at high risk for pathological grief, which
often brings with it severe and long-lasting negative sequelae for herself,
her partner, her surviving children and the whole of society. Grief
following a death in the family is a universally accepted experience. A
period of mourning following the loss of a loved one is a normal
expectation in every culture. It is also generally understood that if this
mourning process is blocked or impacted, there will be negative
consequences. Shakespeare, in his tragedy Macbeth, says, "Give sorrow
words, the grief that does not speak knits up the o'erwrought heart and
bids it break" (Act IV, scene 3). Yet a mother's grief after an induced
abortion has heretofore seldom been acknowledged.
The death of a child is perhaps the most difficult loss to mournÑeven the
death of a premature baby, a stillborn child, or a miscarriage. The medical
literature in recent years has increasingly acknowledged the significance
of perinatal loss for parents. Obstetrical journals describe "perinatal
grief teams" consisting of nurses, doctors, social workers, clergy and
volunteers who help parents cope with the loss of children who die in
neonatal intensive care units. Parents are encouraged to name and hold
their dead baby, and to take photographs. Religious services assist them in
their mourning, and they are encouraged to bury the child with their loved
ones in a family grave which they can visit as often as they wish.
Abortion, whether spontaneous or induced, is part of the same continuum of
perinatal grief. However, grief after elective abortion is uniquely
poignant because it is largely hidden. There are no provisions made to
assist the post-abortion woman in her grievingÑshe has no child to hold, no
photographs, no wake or funeral, and no grave to visit. After an elective
abortion, a woman typically finds herself alone to cope not only with the
loss of the child she will never know, but also with her personal
responsibility in the child's death with its ensuing guilt and shame. She
may have difficulty understanding her ambivalent feelingsÑon the one hand,
relief (often very temporary) that she is no longer pregnant, and, on the
other hand, a profound sense of loss and emptiness. In her book, The
Anatomy of Bereavement, Beverley Raphael explains, "A woman may have
required a high level of defensive denial of her tender feelings for the
baby to allow her to make the decision for termination. This denial often
carries her through the procedure and hours afterward, so that she seems
cheerful, accepting but unwilling to talk at the time when supportive
counseling may be offered by the clinic."2 This may explain why research
into psychiatric sequelae of abortion in the immediate post-abortion period
often yields negative results. -
The Emotional Effects
In the weeks and months after the abortion, feelings of sadness and guilt
often threaten to overwhelm the post-abortion woman, yet society offers her
no assistance in mourningÑshe is expected to be grateful that "her problem
is solved" and to "get on with her life" as though nothing significant had
happened. At the same time, pain and bleeding remind her of the assault on
her body, the sudden endocrine changes cause her to become emotionally
labile or unstable. She is poignantly aware of the date her child would
have been born. Reminders threaten her defensive denial and repression all
too frequently: anniversaries of her abortion, other children of the age
her child would have been, Mother's Day, the omni-present abortion debate
in the media, a visit to the gynecologist, the sound of the suction machine
at the dentist's office, or the sound of a vacuum cleaner at home, a baby
in a television ad, a new pregnancy, a death in the family, a film
depicting prenatal development or abortion, or a pro-life homily. Any of
these may trigger a sudden flood of grief, guilt, anger and even despair,
which in turn, calls forth even more intense defensive responses.
The post-abortion woman's attempts to comply with society's expectations
that she proceed with her life as though she had undergone an innocuous
procedure are bought at great personal expense. She may turn to alcohol or
drugs to get to sleep at night or to deaden the pain of the intrusive
thoughts, which haunt her day and night, "I killed my baby! I killed my
baby! I don't deserve to live!" Flashbacks to the abortion procedure may
occur at any time. She may throw herself into intense activityÑwork, study,
or recreation, or attempt to deal with her feelings of loneliness and
emptiness by binge eating alternating with purging or anorexia, or by
intense efforts to repair intimate relationships or develop new ones
inappropriately, becoming sexually promiscuous, risking sexually
transmitted diseases, and repeating pregnancy and abortion. Complaints of
vague abdominal pain or pain on sexual intercourse may cause her to seek
medical treatment from one physician after another unsuccessfully, and the
very examinations to which she is subjected may cause flashbacks to the
abortion experience. Her life spirals downward as her general health,
personal relationships and job performance become more and more impaired.
Discouragement, despair, clinical depression and suicide attempts often
follow.3 Typically, in presenting symptoms over a period of many years, she
is treated by numerous physicians and mental health professionals without
ever receiving help for the root cause of her problems, her abortion or
abortions. Psychiatric textbooks subsume all of the above symptoms under
the diagnosis of a Pathological Grief Reaction. -
Effects On Marriage And Subsequent Children
Short-term research into the psychiatric sequelae of abortion fails to
document its devastating long-term negative effects on women and on their
forming and sustaining stable spousal relationships, and of caring
appropriately for subsequent children. They may have difficulty bonding
with a new baby, or, conversely, become overprotective and inappropriately
attached to the next child who bears the burden of replacing the aborted
baby. These children are often referred to child psychiatrists because of
separation anxiety, or because they are judged to be at risk for physical
abuse. Couples may be treated for infertility or dysfunctional marriages,
which stem from a previous abortion or abortions. Substance abuse,
"burnout" on the job, psycho-somatic symptoms, eating disorders, chronic
depression and suicide attempts which routinely bring women into
psychiatric care can often be traced to an abortion experience several
years before through a careful and complete history.
In addition to immediate intervention for the presenting problem,
successful treatment of women who have suffered the tragedy of abortion
requires that the underlying traumatic loss be acknowledged and
appropriately grieved. Psychotherapy involves facilitating the work of
mourning which has been so long delayed. Within a therapeutic relationship,
the woman is encouraged to share her traumatic loss and to acknowledge her
role in it. She is helped to share the mental image she has formed of her
child & often one of a baby being torn to pieces or crying out in pain. As
the grief work proceeds, her image is transformed into a less disturbing
picture of her child at peace. She may name the child and arrange for a
religious service to be performed for him or her. She accepts God's
forgiveness and may be able to forgive herself and ask forgiveness of her
child. Eventually she is able to put the child to rest in her mind. Only
then is she free to resume her life productivelyÑto make new relationships
or repair old ones, to work, to play, and to be creative once again.4
With 30 million abortions in this country since Roe v. Wade, and the
continuing rate of 1.5 million abortions per year, we can no longer deny
the public health significance of their psychological and psychophysical
sequelae. Epidemiological studies are urgently needed which are
statistically sound and which follow women and men for at least ten years
postabortion. However, it is axiomatic that the best treatment for any
epidemic is primary prevention. Abortion is an elective surgical procedure
performed on healthy women (pregnancy is not a disease). The immediate
abolition of elective abortion would eradicate the iatrogenic epidemic of
post-abortion pathology and would serve the best interests of women and
society. In Evangelium Vitae (no. 99) John Paul II spells out the pastoral
approach of the church:
The wound in your heart may not yet have healed. Certainly what happened
was and remains terribly wrong. But do not give in to discouragement and do
not lose hope. Try rather to understand what happened and face it honestly.
If you have not already done so, give yourself over with humility and trust
to repentance. The Father of mercies is ready to give you his forgiveness
and his peace in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. You will come to
understand that nothing is definitely lost and you will also be able to ask
forgiveness from your child, who is now living in the Lord. With the
friendly and expert help and advice of other people, and as a result of
your own painful experience, you can be among the most eloquent defenders
of everyone's right to life.
Notes
1. Wathen, N.C., "Perinatal Bereavement," British Journal of Obstetrics and
Gynecology 97 [1990]: 759-760.
2. Basic Books: New York, 1983.
3. Speckhard, A. & Rue, V. "Complicated Mourning: Dynamics of Impacted
Post-Abortion Grief," Journal of Pre- and Perinatal Psychology 8 [1993]:
6-12.
4. Angelo, E.J. "The Negative Impact of Abortion on Women and Families," in
Post-Abortion Aftermath, Mannion, M. ed. [Sheed and Ward: Kansas City, MO,
1994].
E. Joanne Angelo, M.D. is Assistant Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at
Tufts University School of Medicine and a psychiatrist in private practice
in Boston. She is a Corresponding Member of the Pontifical Academy for
Life. This article originally appeared in the November 1995 issue of Ethics
& Medics, a monthly publication of the Pope John Center.
© The Human Life Review., The Human Life Foundation, Inc., Editorial
Office, Room 840, 150 E. 35th St., New York, N.Y. 10016.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Peter's Net - Databases - Discussion - News - Highlights -
Membership - Site Ratings - Trinity
-------------------------------------------------------------- -
Women Should Be Told of Abortion Risks
by Dr. Steve Calvin
[Pro-Life Infonet Note: Steve Calvin, of Minneapolis, is a physician.]
As we approach the 29th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, it was instructive to
read excerpts from Justice Harry Blackmun's majority opinion that were
recently reprinted on these pages. In January 1973 I was a college
freshman premed major who thought that the decision legalizing abortion
made sense. Today I am a physician specializing in maternal-fetal medicine
who believes that the opinion was, at best, a judicial, medical and moral
mistake.
Even so, my reading of Blackmun's arguments left me with some room for
optimism. He acknowledged that there are compelling interests which
justify some regulation of what has become a virtually unrestricted right
to abortion. The compelling interests are the health of the pregnant
woman, and the fetus potential for survival outside the womb. My optimism
is based on compelling new medical considerations.
The health argument over this issue has always involved risk calculations.
It is frequently pointed out that abortion in the first trimester is three
times safer for a woman (but not the fetus) than a full-term pregnancy.
Risks of abortion do not, however, end with the procedure. In their
decisionmaking process women should have the right to know about long-term
risks.
What has changed since 1973 is the understanding of some of the medical
consequences of abortion. The two most important are the likelihood of
links between abortion and breast cancer and between abortion and
premature deliveries in subsequent pregnancies. The media and medical
establishment have responded to these possibilities with either
embarrassed silence or vehement denials.
It is widely known that full-term pregnancy followed by breast-feeding
decreases the long-term risk for breast cancer. It makes biological sense
that there is danger in abortion's interruption of the normal breast
changes of pregnancy. Unlike most other cancers, the incidence of breast
cancer has risen since 1973. Most worrisome is the fact that the women who
chose abortion in the 1970s and 1980s are now entering the postmenopausal
years -- when the risk of breast cancer is highest.
Originally skeptical of the proposed link between abortion and breast
cancer, I read the medical literature as well as the arguments pro and
con. I have concluded that a causal connection is likely. The highest risk
seems to be for young women who have a family history of breast cancer --
and young women are the group most frequently offered abortion as a tragic
but risk-free option.
Young women contemplating abortion should also know about a study
published in the October 2001 issue of the British Journal of OB/GYN. An
evaluation of more than 12,000 French women showed that one abortion
increased the risk for subsequent preterm delivery by 40 percent and that
two or more abortions increased the risk by 90 percent. Abortion is
offered to women as a way to plan parenthood. To be completely informed,
they should also be told that abortion will increase their future chances
of delivering a baby who will have to fight his or her way through the
complications of prematurity.
And, speaking of prematurity, since 1973 the gestational age of viability
has undergone dramatic change. Justice Blackmun was told that few babies
below 29 weeks survived. In 2002, babies at 23 and 24 weeks frequently
survive. The dramatic medical progress in the care of tiny preemies makes
it clear that unrestricted abortion is an anachronism begging for
revision.
My willingness to discuss this information is not a condemnation of women
who have chosen abortion in the past. Their decisions were made with the
only information that they had available. Those who deserve criticism are
those whose proabortion ideology drives them to ignore the risks of
abortion and to block any efforts to provide women the information they
need to make a truly informed decision.
During the 2001 legislative session one legislator theatrically derided
the Woman's Right to Know bill as the "Women are Stupid bill." It got some
laughs at the time, but in this year's session prochoice legislators and
Gov. Jesse Ventura should honestly examine both the evidence and their
consciences. If they do, they will see that Justice Blackmun's compelling
interests have arrived and they will support informed consent for this
very serious medical procedure.