What do you think?
Rate this book
The Turnaway Study: Ten Years, a Thousand Women, and the Consequences of Having―or Being Denied―an Abortion
“If you read only one book about democracy, The Turnaway Study should be it. Why? Because without the power to make decisions about our own bodies, there is no democracy.” —Gloria Steinem
The “remarkable” (The New Yorker) landmark study of the consequences on women’s lives—emotional, physical, financial, professional, personal, and psychological—of receiving versus being denied an abortion that “should be required reading for every judge, member of Congress, and candidate for office—as well as anyone who hopes to better understand this complex and important issue” (Cecile Richards).
What happens when a woman seeking an abortion is turned away? To answer this question, Diana Greene Foster assembled a team of scientists—psychologists, epidemiologists, demographers, nurses, physicians, economists, sociologists, and public health researchers—to conduct a ten-year study. They followed a thousand women from across America, some of whom received abortions, some of whom were turned away. Now, for the first time, Dr. Foster presents the results of this landmark study in one extraordinary, groundbreaking book.
Judges, politicians, and pro-life advocates routinely defend their anti-abortion stance by claiming that abortion is physically risky and leads to depression and remorse. Dr. Foster’s data proves the opposite to be true. Foster documents the outcomes for women who received and were denied an abortion, analyzing the impact on their mental and physical health, their careers, their romantic relationships, and their other children, if they have them. Women who received an abortion were better off by almost every measure than women who did not, and five years after they receive an abortion, 99 percent of women do not regret it.
As the national debate around abortion intensifies, The Turnaway Study offers the first thorough, data-driven examination of the negative consequences for women who cannot get abortions and provides incontrovertible evidence to refute the claim that abortion harms women. Interwoven with the study findings are ten “engaging, in-depth” (Ms. Magazine) first-person narratives. Candid, intimate, and deeply revealing, they bring to life the women and the stories behind the science.
Revelatory, essential, and “particularly relevant now” (HuffPost), this is a must-read for anyone who cares about the impact of abortion and abortion restrictions on people’s lives.
The “remarkable” (The New Yorker) landmark study of the consequences on women’s lives—emotional, physical, financial, professional, personal, and psychological—of receiving versus being denied an abortion that “should be required reading for every judge, member of Congress, and candidate for office—as well as anyone who hopes to better understand this complex and important issue” (Cecile Richards).
What happens when a woman seeking an abortion is turned away? To answer this question, Diana Greene Foster assembled a team of scientists—psychologists, epidemiologists, demographers, nurses, physicians, economists, sociologists, and public health researchers—to conduct a ten-year study. They followed a thousand women from across America, some of whom received abortions, some of whom were turned away. Now, for the first time, Dr. Foster presents the results of this landmark study in one extraordinary, groundbreaking book.
Judges, politicians, and pro-life advocates routinely defend their anti-abortion stance by claiming that abortion is physically risky and leads to depression and remorse. Dr. Foster’s data proves the opposite to be true. Foster documents the outcomes for women who received and were denied an abortion, analyzing the impact on their mental and physical health, their careers, their romantic relationships, and their other children, if they have them. Women who received an abortion were better off by almost every measure than women who did not, and five years after they receive an abortion, 99 percent of women do not regret it.
As the national debate around abortion intensifies, The Turnaway Study offers the first thorough, data-driven examination of the negative consequences for women who cannot get abortions and provides incontrovertible evidence to refute the claim that abortion harms women. Interwoven with the study findings are ten “engaging, in-depth” (Ms. Magazine) first-person narratives. Candid, intimate, and deeply revealing, they bring to life the women and the stories behind the science.
Revelatory, essential, and “particularly relevant now” (HuffPost), this is a must-read for anyone who cares about the impact of abortion and abortion restrictions on people’s lives.
384 pages, Paperback
First published June 2, 2020
554 people are currently reading
12229 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 580 reviews
August 23, 2020
I am adopted, so my “pro choice” stance often baffles people. “How would I feel if my mother aborted me?” (Discusses Below).
This incredible research study shows the affects abortion or not being able to get one has on women. If you believe that abortions hurt women (eg it causes depression) PLEASE READ THIS BOOK.
10-stars for the research, 10-stars for the writing, 10-stars for the narration.
I AM PRO WOMEN.
—
For most of my life, I didn’t have an answer for the question posed to pro-choice adoptees “what if your mom...”
UNTIL I read Freakanomics, which changed my entire perspective and beliefs on abortion. Prior to that book, my Catholic upbringing made me feel bad or guilty around abortion, but secretly I still wanted to know I would have that option if I got pregnant before I was ready.
Then, as I got older and friends had abortions for myriads of reasons I came to the conclusion that My faith or my ethics or my views of morality cannot decide the fate of another adult. That is, my stance on abortion is not a question about my faith or my beliefs unless *I* am the person getting one. I recognized I did/do not want others beliefs to be made or treated as superior than my own nor did I want someone else’s opinion or belief to decide what happens to my body or my future or anything. Plus, I struggle to know the best course of action for me, the person I know more than anyone else—this means no other person, especially not a man, knows what’s better or best for me and equally, I cannot know what’s best for someone else. Science might, though and this book shows that... kind of.
Anyway, FREAKANOMICS changed my opinion on abortions (they reduce crime and poverty) and now this book changed my opinion on adoption (because it shows how abortions help women in numerous ways, if they want one, and that turning a woman away can greatly greatly harm her).
While I am grateful for the sacrifices my biological mother made, I also would be okay with not being born, if it had made her life better. If there was an option to push a button and “revert” I would, even knowing it would end my life.
Thankfully, while the pregnancy was arduous on my mom, and the adoption heart breaking, my adoption was mostly positive FOR HER in that it did what it was supposed to do: my adoption gave her a more promising future; it gave her the chance to finish her education and get married/have kids when she was “ready” (older).
While my childhood was not charmed (and I’m still coming to terms with the abuses I endured living in an alcoholic and narcissist nest + attachment issues) it could have been much worse and without my trials, I wouldn’t be where I am today, right?
Would my life have been better if I was raised by a single teenage mother? I don’t know. I am grateful for my life, her life, and the subsequent lives that came out of my adoption, but I will forever and ever stand on the side that supports women and their right to an abortion. I will also respect every woman who has made that decision and if that is you, I want to say you are incredible. You are strong.
You are resilient. And the choice you made was one choice but it does not define you in my eyes. Love to all you ladies!
This incredible research study shows the affects abortion or not being able to get one has on women. If you believe that abortions hurt women (eg it causes depression) PLEASE READ THIS BOOK.
10-stars for the research, 10-stars for the writing, 10-stars for the narration.
I AM PRO WOMEN.
—
For most of my life, I didn’t have an answer for the question posed to pro-choice adoptees “what if your mom...”
UNTIL I read Freakanomics, which changed my entire perspective and beliefs on abortion. Prior to that book, my Catholic upbringing made me feel bad or guilty around abortion, but secretly I still wanted to know I would have that option if I got pregnant before I was ready.
Then, as I got older and friends had abortions for myriads of reasons I came to the conclusion that My faith or my ethics or my views of morality cannot decide the fate of another adult. That is, my stance on abortion is not a question about my faith or my beliefs unless *I* am the person getting one. I recognized I did/do not want others beliefs to be made or treated as superior than my own nor did I want someone else’s opinion or belief to decide what happens to my body or my future or anything. Plus, I struggle to know the best course of action for me, the person I know more than anyone else—this means no other person, especially not a man, knows what’s better or best for me and equally, I cannot know what’s best for someone else. Science might, though and this book shows that... kind of.
Anyway, FREAKANOMICS changed my opinion on abortions (they reduce crime and poverty) and now this book changed my opinion on adoption (because it shows how abortions help women in numerous ways, if they want one, and that turning a woman away can greatly greatly harm her).
While I am grateful for the sacrifices my biological mother made, I also would be okay with not being born, if it had made her life better. If there was an option to push a button and “revert” I would, even knowing it would end my life.
Thankfully, while the pregnancy was arduous on my mom, and the adoption heart breaking, my adoption was mostly positive FOR HER in that it did what it was supposed to do: my adoption gave her a more promising future; it gave her the chance to finish her education and get married/have kids when she was “ready” (older).
While my childhood was not charmed (and I’m still coming to terms with the abuses I endured living in an alcoholic and narcissist nest + attachment issues) it could have been much worse and without my trials, I wouldn’t be where I am today, right?
Would my life have been better if I was raised by a single teenage mother? I don’t know. I am grateful for my life, her life, and the subsequent lives that came out of my adoption, but I will forever and ever stand on the side that supports women and their right to an abortion. I will also respect every woman who has made that decision and if that is you, I want to say you are incredible. You are strong.
You are resilient. And the choice you made was one choice but it does not define you in my eyes. Love to all you ladies!
May 10, 2023
An amazing book that details an intensive longitudinal research study exploring health outcomes among women who received an abortion compared to women who were denied an abortion. Diane Green Foster details so many important results from this study, such as how women who receive abortions fare better economically compared to those denied abortions, that the overwhelming majority of women do not regret their abortion, and that there are more health repercussions for women who are forced to carry a child to term compared to women who receive abortions. The research is rigorous, and at the same time Foster writes in an accessible and compelling way. I think the Turnaway study is an excellent example of conducting meaningful science and communicating that science to a general audience. It’s wonderful too that they included several qualitative interviews in this book so that we can hear from women themselves and develop greater empathy and awareness in addition to the quantitative evidence provided.
Thinking about the overturning of Roe v. Wade two years after this book came out… yikes. Not gonna go into it though it’s tremendously sad, angering, and patriarchal, the disdain for and control people want to exert over birthing people.
(I use the term “women” in the first paragraph of this study because it seems like the study’s participants were all cisgender women.)
Thinking about the overturning of Roe v. Wade two years after this book came out… yikes. Not gonna go into it though it’s tremendously sad, angering, and patriarchal, the disdain for and control people want to exert over birthing people.
(I use the term “women” in the first paragraph of this study because it seems like the study’s participants were all cisgender women.)
October 20, 2022
“If you read only one book about democracy, The Turnaway Study should be it. Why? Because without the power to make decisions about our own bodies, there is no democracy." —Gloria Steinem
April 19, 2024
An excellent book: an exploration of a groundbreaking study told in an informative, engaging style, interspersed with narratives from real women. The author led a longitudinal study following about a thousand women who sought abortions, comparing outcomes for those who were denied the abortion for being just past the gestational limit with those who got abortions just under the limit, also compared to those who got early abortions. I put off reading this book with the concern that a focus on politics and women being denied control over their bodies would be rage-inducing, and while it could be if you are prone to outrage, the author’s style is not geared toward stoking emotion but straightforwardly informing the reader of the facts.
Some things I learned:
- An estimated 1/4 to 1/3 of American women have had an abortion, but many don’t talk about it (especially with opponents). Of abortions performed, 90% are in the first trimester and only 1% are after 20 weeks. Of women receiving them, 60% are already mothers.
- Lack of convenient, affordable birth control is a major reason for unwanted pregnancies, as is failure of birth control when it is being used—whether due to incorrect or inconsistent use, or the built-in failure rate (apparently if you are sexually active from age 18 throughout your reproductive years, and use oral contraceptives the entire time, statistically you will have between 0.1-2.0 pregnancies! IUDs have a better success rate, condoms a worse one, withdrawal of course is worse still).
- Most people have more than one reason for seeking an abortion, but top reasons include lack of money to raise the child; not being the right time career-wise, emotionally, etc.; the partner being the wrong person to have a child with; and the need to focus on existing children.
- People seeking late abortions are usually doing so due to a combination of discovering the pregnancy late (due to not having symptoms, already having irregular periods, or simple denial) and trouble getting to a clinic and raising the money to pay. These women are disproportionately poor (57%, as opposed to 40% in the first trimester).
- Women do not generally suffer long-term distress from getting an abortion that they themselves sought out: relief is the most common emotion, 95% subsequently report that it was the right choice for them, and all emotions about the abortion as well as frequency of thinking about it decrease with time. The small number who do later doubt their decision tend to be those whose communities have a strong stigma against it, and those who report that the initial decision was very difficult (though even this last group overwhelmingly report that it was the right decision). These findings are the same for early and late abortions.
- Physically, abortion is extremely safe, with about a 2% complication rate, as opposed to 7% for wisdom tooth extraction and 29% for childbirth—childbirth of course can be very dangerous, and 2 of the women in the study denied abortions died as a result. Women who were denied also had worse overall health over the next 5 years than those who had abortions.
- Women’s reasons for seeking abortions tend to be borne out in the results for those denied. Overwhelmingly, whether they have the babies or not, the relationships in which they were conceived ended (though the women who give birth are somewhat more likely to stay in communication with the father—not great when he is abusive). The women who gave birth also have a lower employment rate, higher use of public assistance, and lower credit scores.
- A woman’s children are also more likely to live in poverty if she’s denied a wanted abortion, and even potentially to have delayed developmental milestones (though as this was based on self-reporting by the mothers, it’s unclear whether their older children were actually delayed, or the mothers just had less time to pay attention to them). Meanwhile, women who get wanted abortions are more likely to later give birth to another child under happier circumstances.
- On the positive side for the initially unwanted babies, only 12% of the mothers still wished they could have had an abortion by the time of birth, down to 4% five years later, and this last number is skewed by those who gave the babies up for adoption. However, I have doubts about generalizing this statistic to all women (more on that below).
- The father is usually involved in the abortion decision (83% of the time), with most in support, uncertain, or leaving it up to her, and 26% wanting the baby carried to term. People pressuring for an abortion are actually more likely to be her parents than her partner.
- Adoption really isn’t the answer, unsurprising to me after other books on the subject. Out of those in the study, only 14% considered it, 9% went through with it, and those who relinquished the babies were more likely to wish they’d had the abortion many years later.
And now a couple of criticisms:
- The study found that women turned away did not suffer mental health effects in the long term (they did have increased anxiety in the short term), winding up in the same place as women who received abortions, and all of them better off 5 years later. However, in this case the sample does not seem representative. First, this study was conducted while Roe v. Wade was good law, and apparently no one in it faced legal barriers other than the pregnancy being too advanced (for instance, being a minor whose parents refused consent). As seekers of late abortions, they seem to have taken a more laissez-faire attitude toward their potential pregnancies than most women, and therefore may not predict the emotional consequences for people who are doing everything they can to keep control over their bodies and are denied. Also, for many of them the birth was still a choice: three of the narratives in the book are from women who gave birth, and two of these upon being denied were told of another state (in one case, the state next door) where they would still be eligible, but chose to give birth instead.
- Relatedly, I would have been interested to see more breakdowns of the data: rather than the average mental health of all the women in the abortion vs. denial groups, or the average credit scores, a percentage of how many went in what direction and by how much.
- The book can be repetitive at times.
Meanwhile, I really enjoyed the stories: it’s interesting because this format is so similar to that of The Girls Who Went Away (about forced relinquishments), but while those voices mostly ran together, this author chose narratives in part for the strength of their voices, and I was not surprised to hear her sister adapted them for stage readings. My favorite was the mother of five who demanded: “Y’all have got to schedule me a tubal. I can’t even fit all my kids in my car!” (The darker side of this story is that Catholic hospitals gave her the runaround for years, pretending to lose her paperwork and the like, when really they just don’t believe in birth control.) It’s interesting to see the diversity of experiences and perspectives, including a couple with a “my abortion is different” attitude (spoiler alert: their abortions are the same. Okay, except for the one whose husband was abusive and imprisoned and who had a serious medical condition brought on and exacerbated by her previous pregnancies. She was worried continuing the pregnancy could end with her dead and her kids in foster care and she might have been right. But the others were just in lousy relationships and financially precarious, like everyone else).
At any rate, this was a very worthwhile and relatively quick read; I appreciated the data and enjoyed the stories. Definitely recommended for anyone interested in myth-busting about women’s reproductive health.
Some things I learned:
- An estimated 1/4 to 1/3 of American women have had an abortion, but many don’t talk about it (especially with opponents). Of abortions performed, 90% are in the first trimester and only 1% are after 20 weeks. Of women receiving them, 60% are already mothers.
- Lack of convenient, affordable birth control is a major reason for unwanted pregnancies, as is failure of birth control when it is being used—whether due to incorrect or inconsistent use, or the built-in failure rate (apparently if you are sexually active from age 18 throughout your reproductive years, and use oral contraceptives the entire time, statistically you will have between 0.1-2.0 pregnancies! IUDs have a better success rate, condoms a worse one, withdrawal of course is worse still).
- Most people have more than one reason for seeking an abortion, but top reasons include lack of money to raise the child; not being the right time career-wise, emotionally, etc.; the partner being the wrong person to have a child with; and the need to focus on existing children.
- People seeking late abortions are usually doing so due to a combination of discovering the pregnancy late (due to not having symptoms, already having irregular periods, or simple denial) and trouble getting to a clinic and raising the money to pay. These women are disproportionately poor (57%, as opposed to 40% in the first trimester).
- Women do not generally suffer long-term distress from getting an abortion that they themselves sought out: relief is the most common emotion, 95% subsequently report that it was the right choice for them, and all emotions about the abortion as well as frequency of thinking about it decrease with time. The small number who do later doubt their decision tend to be those whose communities have a strong stigma against it, and those who report that the initial decision was very difficult (though even this last group overwhelmingly report that it was the right decision). These findings are the same for early and late abortions.
- Physically, abortion is extremely safe, with about a 2% complication rate, as opposed to 7% for wisdom tooth extraction and 29% for childbirth—childbirth of course can be very dangerous, and 2 of the women in the study denied abortions died as a result. Women who were denied also had worse overall health over the next 5 years than those who had abortions.
- Women’s reasons for seeking abortions tend to be borne out in the results for those denied. Overwhelmingly, whether they have the babies or not, the relationships in which they were conceived ended (though the women who give birth are somewhat more likely to stay in communication with the father—not great when he is abusive). The women who gave birth also have a lower employment rate, higher use of public assistance, and lower credit scores.
- A woman’s children are also more likely to live in poverty if she’s denied a wanted abortion, and even potentially to have delayed developmental milestones (though as this was based on self-reporting by the mothers, it’s unclear whether their older children were actually delayed, or the mothers just had less time to pay attention to them). Meanwhile, women who get wanted abortions are more likely to later give birth to another child under happier circumstances.
- On the positive side for the initially unwanted babies, only 12% of the mothers still wished they could have had an abortion by the time of birth, down to 4% five years later, and this last number is skewed by those who gave the babies up for adoption. However, I have doubts about generalizing this statistic to all women (more on that below).
- The father is usually involved in the abortion decision (83% of the time), with most in support, uncertain, or leaving it up to her, and 26% wanting the baby carried to term. People pressuring for an abortion are actually more likely to be her parents than her partner.
- Adoption really isn’t the answer, unsurprising to me after other books on the subject. Out of those in the study, only 14% considered it, 9% went through with it, and those who relinquished the babies were more likely to wish they’d had the abortion many years later.
And now a couple of criticisms:
- The study found that women turned away did not suffer mental health effects in the long term (they did have increased anxiety in the short term), winding up in the same place as women who received abortions, and all of them better off 5 years later. However, in this case the sample does not seem representative. First, this study was conducted while Roe v. Wade was good law, and apparently no one in it faced legal barriers other than the pregnancy being too advanced (for instance, being a minor whose parents refused consent). As seekers of late abortions, they seem to have taken a more laissez-faire attitude toward their potential pregnancies than most women, and therefore may not predict the emotional consequences for people who are doing everything they can to keep control over their bodies and are denied. Also, for many of them the birth was still a choice: three of the narratives in the book are from women who gave birth, and two of these upon being denied were told of another state (in one case, the state next door) where they would still be eligible, but chose to give birth instead.
- Relatedly, I would have been interested to see more breakdowns of the data: rather than the average mental health of all the women in the abortion vs. denial groups, or the average credit scores, a percentage of how many went in what direction and by how much.
- The book can be repetitive at times.
Meanwhile, I really enjoyed the stories: it’s interesting because this format is so similar to that of The Girls Who Went Away (about forced relinquishments), but while those voices mostly ran together, this author chose narratives in part for the strength of their voices, and I was not surprised to hear her sister adapted them for stage readings. My favorite was the mother of five who demanded: “Y’all have got to schedule me a tubal. I can’t even fit all my kids in my car!” (The darker side of this story is that Catholic hospitals gave her the runaround for years, pretending to lose her paperwork and the like, when really they just don’t believe in birth control.) It’s interesting to see the diversity of experiences and perspectives, including a couple with a “my abortion is different” attitude (spoiler alert: their abortions are the same. Okay, except for the one whose husband was abusive and imprisoned and who had a serious medical condition brought on and exacerbated by her previous pregnancies. She was worried continuing the pregnancy could end with her dead and her kids in foster care and she might have been right. But the others were just in lousy relationships and financially precarious, like everyone else).
At any rate, this was a very worthwhile and relatively quick read; I appreciated the data and enjoyed the stories. Definitely recommended for anyone interested in myth-busting about women’s reproductive health.
June 2, 2020
Thank you to Scribner for an advanced copy of this book!
THE TURNAWAY STUDY, aka the well-designed, longitudinal abortion research study we all needed. This multi-site, 21-state study directly compared outcomes for three groups of people who needed abortions: first-trimester patients, patients just below the gestational limit, and patients just above the limit. Participants were interviewed twice a year for 5 years about many aspects of their lives: their emotional, mental, and physical health, their feelings about abortion, their finances, their parenting decisions, and their children’s well being.
PURPOSE OF THE BOOK: This book isn’t about moral arguments. It is just directly comparing women’s outcomes in these parallel situations. In a debate that has long depended on gut instincts from the anti-abortion side -- e.g. the incorrect anti-abortion argument that women probably feel long term shame and regret after having an abortion-- it is refreshing to hear facts that can directly disprove these claims. This is evidence that we need for court cases and political decision-making, even if the feminist arguments work for most pro-choice people. Will this change people’s minds if they are on the anti-abortion end of the spectrum? It may depend on why they actually hold those views. I think it is naive to say that statistics like these are enough to dramatically change the tides, especially when we have to consider some of the more fundamental reasons why politicians don’t want people to have abortions (like capitalism).
TARGET AUDIENCE: As a scientist, I really appreciated the research design (so solid!) and discussions of things they wish they did differently (the researchers and I both wish they had included trans and non-binary participants, and people terminating pregnancies because of health risks).
But, the target audience isn’t limited to scientists: the points are made clearly and concisely, and often repeated to ensure that people are able to come away with the key results of this multifaceted study.
NARRATIVE STRUCTURE: This was less impressive than the research design. Between each section of the book, there is a long-form narrative from the POV of somebody in the study who had an abortion or was turned away from an abortion. These were a diverse group of narrators with different ethnic backgrounds, ages, employment statuses, and relationship and family situations, pro- and anti-abortion. I didn’t love that the same quotes were interspersed throughout the research chapters of the book: Foster still had to provide context about their backstories because we hadn’t always gotten to their long-form narrative yet, and it made things seem repetitive at times.
AUTHOR’S PERSONAL ELEMENTS: Since they were limited, I felt like Foster’s own anecdotes and perspectives often felt out of place. There is one line about how we can’t blame “our growing waistline” on our children, an anecdote of waiting for an anti-abortion person to leave a party before sharing personal stories, etc. Near the end of the book, Foster shared stories of abortion from her own family, but this long personal story almost felt like an afterthought, especially in combination with its odd placement in between additional POVs and the concluding research chapters.
I’ll leave you with some key findings from the book that I’ve been telling everybody who will listen:
-No evidence was found that abortion hurts women: in fact, short-term mental health harm came from the denial of abortion services. It was most common to have no emotional long-term response to having had an abortion.
-Women should be trusted: “We find that the reasons women give for wanting an abortion strongly predict the consequences they experience when they are denied that abortion.”
-95% of the women who had abortions said having the abortion was the right decision for them.
-Women who were denied abortion services experienced worse financial outcomes, and throughout the 5 year period, they did not catch back up to those who received an abortion.
-Women who were denied an abortion were more likely to have poor emotional bonding with the child.
-Women who received the abortion experienced a dramatic reduction in the incidence of abuse, unlike those who were turned away.
THE TURNAWAY STUDY, aka the well-designed, longitudinal abortion research study we all needed. This multi-site, 21-state study directly compared outcomes for three groups of people who needed abortions: first-trimester patients, patients just below the gestational limit, and patients just above the limit. Participants were interviewed twice a year for 5 years about many aspects of their lives: their emotional, mental, and physical health, their feelings about abortion, their finances, their parenting decisions, and their children’s well being.
PURPOSE OF THE BOOK: This book isn’t about moral arguments. It is just directly comparing women’s outcomes in these parallel situations. In a debate that has long depended on gut instincts from the anti-abortion side -- e.g. the incorrect anti-abortion argument that women probably feel long term shame and regret after having an abortion-- it is refreshing to hear facts that can directly disprove these claims. This is evidence that we need for court cases and political decision-making, even if the feminist arguments work for most pro-choice people. Will this change people’s minds if they are on the anti-abortion end of the spectrum? It may depend on why they actually hold those views. I think it is naive to say that statistics like these are enough to dramatically change the tides, especially when we have to consider some of the more fundamental reasons why politicians don’t want people to have abortions (like capitalism).
TARGET AUDIENCE: As a scientist, I really appreciated the research design (so solid!) and discussions of things they wish they did differently (the researchers and I both wish they had included trans and non-binary participants, and people terminating pregnancies because of health risks).
But, the target audience isn’t limited to scientists: the points are made clearly and concisely, and often repeated to ensure that people are able to come away with the key results of this multifaceted study.
NARRATIVE STRUCTURE: This was less impressive than the research design. Between each section of the book, there is a long-form narrative from the POV of somebody in the study who had an abortion or was turned away from an abortion. These were a diverse group of narrators with different ethnic backgrounds, ages, employment statuses, and relationship and family situations, pro- and anti-abortion. I didn’t love that the same quotes were interspersed throughout the research chapters of the book: Foster still had to provide context about their backstories because we hadn’t always gotten to their long-form narrative yet, and it made things seem repetitive at times.
AUTHOR’S PERSONAL ELEMENTS: Since they were limited, I felt like Foster’s own anecdotes and perspectives often felt out of place. There is one line about how we can’t blame “our growing waistline” on our children, an anecdote of waiting for an anti-abortion person to leave a party before sharing personal stories, etc. Near the end of the book, Foster shared stories of abortion from her own family, but this long personal story almost felt like an afterthought, especially in combination with its odd placement in between additional POVs and the concluding research chapters.
I’ll leave you with some key findings from the book that I’ve been telling everybody who will listen:
-No evidence was found that abortion hurts women: in fact, short-term mental health harm came from the denial of abortion services. It was most common to have no emotional long-term response to having had an abortion.
-Women should be trusted: “We find that the reasons women give for wanting an abortion strongly predict the consequences they experience when they are denied that abortion.”
-95% of the women who had abortions said having the abortion was the right decision for them.
-Women who were denied abortion services experienced worse financial outcomes, and throughout the 5 year period, they did not catch back up to those who received an abortion.
-Women who were denied an abortion were more likely to have poor emotional bonding with the child.
-Women who received the abortion experienced a dramatic reduction in the incidence of abuse, unlike those who were turned away.
July 10, 2022
Can we agree that the results of a scientific research study are more pertinent than anything written by a 17th century judge who was sentencing women to be hanged as witches?
July 27, 2020
Politicians and activists both pro and anti-abortion present many gory looks at the impacts of abortion. The anti-choice crowd crows on about potential health and mental traumas a woman aborting faces. While the pro-choice crowd points to the high mortality rate that old-school, do it yourself abortion methods, like inserting coat hangers into uteruses, used to cause and the high mortality rates of those procedures.
None of those, though, is grounded in reality. Diana Greene Foster's THE TURNAWAY STUDY, however, is. Foster was the lead researcher on a deceptively simple, decade's long eponymous study performed by San Francisco University's medical school to study the impact of abortion on women's physical and psychological health.
Here's what Foster's team did. They surveyed two groups of women entering several abortion clinics throughout the US, hoping to receive a late-term abortion. One group was just before the clinics' cutoff, and were granted an abortion. The second group was too late and were thus "turned away," leading to the study's "turnaway" name. And they followed up with these women for a decade with a long, involved questionnaire.
The findings were stark. They present a much stronger, compelling case for allowing a woman power over her body than activists using hyperbolic "coathanger" tactics. Becasue abortion, it turns out, is better for the mother, better for her pre-existing children, and better for tax-payers since they consume fewer resources like SNAP benefits.
Here are a few highlights, there are many others in the book, all of which were statistically significant:
— Women receiving abortions fared better economically over the ten years based on objective data, like income and credit scores.
— Women forced to give birth often stayed in abusive, physically dangerous relationships out of financial necessity, while women who received an abortion were able to free themselves, more often than not finding a better life-companion.
— Women giving birth had a HIGHER RISK OF MORTALITY of serious physical injury due to childbirth when compared to women who received an abortion.
— The already-born children of women who received an abortion were better fed, clothed and educated than the preexisting children of women forced to give birth.
— The women receiving an abortion were not psychologically damaged, but were better off psychologically than were the women turned away.
— Over 90% of the women who were pregnant practiced contraception, which failed.
These facts are amazing. Like all scientific studies, they beg to be replicated, but as it stands there is a stark, rational case that abortions are not as dangerous as crazy anti-choice advocates like Project Rescue would have you believe. And lest you think the data would be dull, the science is peppered with several accounts of women, given in their own voices. Some were given abortions, others were turned away. All place real, human faces on those dry numbers, which is a huge part of what makes this book so captivating.
Five stars for popularizing such an insightful, creative, and important study. While I doubt this will silence the blow-hards on either side, it places the debate on a solid empirical footing.
None of those, though, is grounded in reality. Diana Greene Foster's THE TURNAWAY STUDY, however, is. Foster was the lead researcher on a deceptively simple, decade's long eponymous study performed by San Francisco University's medical school to study the impact of abortion on women's physical and psychological health.
Here's what Foster's team did. They surveyed two groups of women entering several abortion clinics throughout the US, hoping to receive a late-term abortion. One group was just before the clinics' cutoff, and were granted an abortion. The second group was too late and were thus "turned away," leading to the study's "turnaway" name. And they followed up with these women for a decade with a long, involved questionnaire.
The findings were stark. They present a much stronger, compelling case for allowing a woman power over her body than activists using hyperbolic "coathanger" tactics. Becasue abortion, it turns out, is better for the mother, better for her pre-existing children, and better for tax-payers since they consume fewer resources like SNAP benefits.
Here are a few highlights, there are many others in the book, all of which were statistically significant:
— Women receiving abortions fared better economically over the ten years based on objective data, like income and credit scores.
— Women forced to give birth often stayed in abusive, physically dangerous relationships out of financial necessity, while women who received an abortion were able to free themselves, more often than not finding a better life-companion.
— Women giving birth had a HIGHER RISK OF MORTALITY of serious physical injury due to childbirth when compared to women who received an abortion.
— The already-born children of women who received an abortion were better fed, clothed and educated than the preexisting children of women forced to give birth.
— The women receiving an abortion were not psychologically damaged, but were better off psychologically than were the women turned away.
— Over 90% of the women who were pregnant practiced contraception, which failed.
These facts are amazing. Like all scientific studies, they beg to be replicated, but as it stands there is a stark, rational case that abortions are not as dangerous as crazy anti-choice advocates like Project Rescue would have you believe. And lest you think the data would be dull, the science is peppered with several accounts of women, given in their own voices. Some were given abortions, others were turned away. All place real, human faces on those dry numbers, which is a huge part of what makes this book so captivating.
Five stars for popularizing such an insightful, creative, and important study. While I doubt this will silence the blow-hards on either side, it places the debate on a solid empirical footing.
December 31, 2021
An excellent, important read. Foster Greene led a multiyear, multidisciplinary research study that tracked approximately 1000 American women who sought abortions, with a particular focus on those who did so in the second trimester and either received the abortion sought or were turned away as too late. The project yielded about 50 academic journal articles, but also this clearly and accessibly written distillation of the results of the research. I have huge respect for scientists and academics who seek to bring their findings to the wider public - so admirable. Among other things, the research explores whether there is a negative mental health impact to having an abortion (no) or being turned away from one (interestingly, the negative mental health impact is relatively brief and women are resilient), reasons for seeking a second trimester abortion (most often, delay in realizing one is pregnant), the impact on finances (more financial difficulty for those denied abortions), education (women in both groups achieved their educational goals, though those denied abortions often had scaled back plans), romantic relationships (longer exposure to domestic violence for those denied abortions), and childrearing of each path.
The author intersperses the findings with chapters describing the experiences of some of the women who participated in the study, in their own words. She also with some exasperation explores how those on both sides of the political debate misstate the evidence. There are spots where it’s a little dry or repetitive, but for the most part it’s easy to read, sometimes surprising, and always thought-provoking - a great lesson in the importance of evidence and nuance. 4.5.
The author intersperses the findings with chapters describing the experiences of some of the women who participated in the study, in their own words. She also with some exasperation explores how those on both sides of the political debate misstate the evidence. There are spots where it’s a little dry or repetitive, but for the most part it’s easy to read, sometimes surprising, and always thought-provoking - a great lesson in the importance of evidence and nuance. 4.5.
May 3, 2022
I truly think that everyone needs to read this.
I say that a lot, I think, but it's really true for this book. This book carefully, critically, and logically takes down every argument against abortion. It changed my perspective on the issue, and has made me think more philosophically about research.
This book has 11 chapters, and between each chapter is a real account of a woman who had an abortion or was denied an abortion. These interviews were eye-opening to read.
The main idea of this book is that abortion does not affect women in adverse ways. Rather, having a child does. It can significantly impact one's physical health and financial status. However, something to keep in mind is that mental health did not differ between the two groups: abortion regret, as certain lawmakers like to worry about, is not a significant issue.
Guys, I just can't recommend this enough. Especially if you love research and data, this book is honestly life-changing.
I say that a lot, I think, but it's really true for this book. This book carefully, critically, and logically takes down every argument against abortion. It changed my perspective on the issue, and has made me think more philosophically about research.
This book has 11 chapters, and between each chapter is a real account of a woman who had an abortion or was denied an abortion. These interviews were eye-opening to read.
The main idea of this book is that abortion does not affect women in adverse ways. Rather, having a child does. It can significantly impact one's physical health and financial status. However, something to keep in mind is that mental health did not differ between the two groups: abortion regret, as certain lawmakers like to worry about, is not a significant issue.
Guys, I just can't recommend this enough. Especially if you love research and data, this book is honestly life-changing.
March 4, 2022
I hate to do this but 3 stars :/ The science writer in me is crying at the wasted potential here.
4.5 stars for amazing social science!!! 1.5 stars for this being written like one long repetitive academic article. The author had the opportunity to get incredible narratives from any number of 1,000 women. Instead we get 10 minutes at the end of each chapter barely scratching the surface of 10 different women who we know little about. The rest of this very long book is just the same statistics, repeated again and again across chapters, lengthening the book and rendering it dull. This is truly an unfortunate way to write a book that follows from such a powerful study. Very grateful for the work that Dr. Foster is doing, and I’m hopeful her work can help change the narrative around abortion. However, I surmise that few people (aside from experts in the field) will eagerly read beyond the first few chapters of this book.
4.5 stars for amazing social science!!! 1.5 stars for this being written like one long repetitive academic article. The author had the opportunity to get incredible narratives from any number of 1,000 women. Instead we get 10 minutes at the end of each chapter barely scratching the surface of 10 different women who we know little about. The rest of this very long book is just the same statistics, repeated again and again across chapters, lengthening the book and rendering it dull. This is truly an unfortunate way to write a book that follows from such a powerful study. Very grateful for the work that Dr. Foster is doing, and I’m hopeful her work can help change the narrative around abortion. However, I surmise that few people (aside from experts in the field) will eagerly read beyond the first few chapters of this book.
August 18, 2022
4.5. I finished listening to this earlier this week but forgot to "finish" on Goodreads. Today, when Roe V. Wade has been overturned by the most hypocritical court in all the land, this book and this study is very important. Though not the most perfect study (and they admit some of its minor faults), it is a detailed and human study about women who were able to get an abortion when they chose to, and those who were denied one. These women are from all walks of life and have their many different reasons for seeking out an abortion, and that is why it's so important. There is no "one reason" women seek out abortions, there are at times and infinite amount of reasons why.
Sigh. This day is so heavy.
Sigh. This day is so heavy.
February 21, 2022
This book provides research over 10 years.
So much to say…..
If you are against abortion, I hope you will read this book to gain knowledge of this critical health issue.
Most women seeking abortion are already mothers, 60%
The quote on the cover rings true….”there is no freedom and justice without reproductive freedom and justice”.
Why are we only talking about whether abortion harms women and not whether lack of abortion harms women and children?
This issue is not for a government to dictate
The decision to get or not get an abortion is deeply personal and no one should be judged for it
Trust women
So much to say…..
If you are against abortion, I hope you will read this book to gain knowledge of this critical health issue.
Most women seeking abortion are already mothers, 60%
The quote on the cover rings true….”there is no freedom and justice without reproductive freedom and justice”.
Why are we only talking about whether abortion harms women and not whether lack of abortion harms women and children?
This issue is not for a government to dictate
The decision to get or not get an abortion is deeply personal and no one should be judged for it
Trust women
February 19, 2021
Wow this book made me want to be a scientist. I want to be a grad student in Dr. Foster's lab. The findings in this book are so freaking important, and it served as a reminder for me about why I care so much about women's reproductive rights. A woman's ability to decide whether or not to have children is a fundamental right that influences the rest of her life.
I learned so much from this book; I could truly go on and on. Though it was super scientific, I couldn't put it down, and the profiles of different women between each chapter made the findings feel even more personal.
One of the major myths that was debunked for me was, "Making abortion illegal doesn't stop it from happening. It only makes it unsafe." No no no no no! "Just making abortion unaffordable stops it from happening for many women. Probably as many as a quarter of women who want an abortion but can't afford it carry the pregnancy to term." Also, just because an abortion is illegal doesn't mean it's unsafe. This myth was a great example of how, even for individuals who are pro-choice, misinformation spread by conservatives has infected the discourse around reproductive rights.
Abortions are not unsafe. They are safer than getting your wisdom teeth removed, and much safer than giving birth. Women delay getting an abortion typically for one of two reasons: they don't know they are pregnant or they don't have the financial resources. 95% of women who get an abortion do not regret their decision one week after the procedure; that percentage only gets higher as time passes. All kinds of women get abortions, and about 1 in 3 women get an abortion at least once in their lifetime. Unplanned pregnancy happens to people of all races, socioeconomic statuses, religions, etc. It could happen to me.
If you are "pro-life" because you think that life begins at conception, then there is nothing that will change your mind in this text. That is not what this book is about. This book is about how getting an abortion or being denied an abortion affects every facet of a woman's life. So, if you are "pro-life" under the mistaken assumption that you are protecting women (from the right to make their own choices in life) then you need to educate yourself, and this is the book to do it. If you are pro-choice, you probably have a lot of mistaken assumptions or gaps in your knowledge like I did, and I would recommend this to you, too.
I learned so much from this book; I could truly go on and on. Though it was super scientific, I couldn't put it down, and the profiles of different women between each chapter made the findings feel even more personal.
One of the major myths that was debunked for me was, "Making abortion illegal doesn't stop it from happening. It only makes it unsafe." No no no no no! "Just making abortion unaffordable stops it from happening for many women. Probably as many as a quarter of women who want an abortion but can't afford it carry the pregnancy to term." Also, just because an abortion is illegal doesn't mean it's unsafe. This myth was a great example of how, even for individuals who are pro-choice, misinformation spread by conservatives has infected the discourse around reproductive rights.
Abortions are not unsafe. They are safer than getting your wisdom teeth removed, and much safer than giving birth. Women delay getting an abortion typically for one of two reasons: they don't know they are pregnant or they don't have the financial resources. 95% of women who get an abortion do not regret their decision one week after the procedure; that percentage only gets higher as time passes. All kinds of women get abortions, and about 1 in 3 women get an abortion at least once in their lifetime. Unplanned pregnancy happens to people of all races, socioeconomic statuses, religions, etc. It could happen to me.
If you are "pro-life" because you think that life begins at conception, then there is nothing that will change your mind in this text. That is not what this book is about. This book is about how getting an abortion or being denied an abortion affects every facet of a woman's life. So, if you are "pro-life" under the mistaken assumption that you are protecting women (from the right to make their own choices in life) then you need to educate yourself, and this is the book to do it. If you are pro-choice, you probably have a lot of mistaken assumptions or gaps in your knowledge like I did, and I would recommend this to you, too.
February 2, 2022
If U2 can download their album to every iphone user, can we immediately get this book downloaded into every politicians head? Once again, data and science save the day. The data collected by Dr. Diana Greene Foster conclusively pushes away all the myths and fantasies that abortions hurt women.
November 17, 2025
I love women!! And I love abortions!!
September 12, 2020
So I absolutely love the topic and content of this book, but found the author to be a little confused about her audience. The book was written like a very long academic article, which I don’t think was necessarily the right approach. As an epidemiologist, I appreciate her wanting to cover the survey and statistical methods, but some of it I found to be too detailed for this type of book. It also vaguely felt like she just concatenated all the published articles. Some of the same findings were repeated in several chapters, which made it felt like she potentially just rehashed the discussion sections of her sequential articles.
February 13, 2021
I never thought I would think of abortion this way... now I listen to the facts and know better:
“Abortion does not harm women’s mental health “
“95 % of women who had an abortion felt it was right for them. “
The author “is not trying to engage in a moral or political argument... it is important for our opinions to be grounded in an accurate understanding of reality. “
Trust women
1 in 4 women have had an abortion. If you don’t know someone with an abortion, then they are talking about it when you are not in the room... these are every day women.
“Abortion does not harm women’s mental health “
“95 % of women who had an abortion felt it was right for them. “
The author “is not trying to engage in a moral or political argument... it is important for our opinions to be grounded in an accurate understanding of reality. “
Trust women
1 in 4 women have had an abortion. If you don’t know someone with an abortion, then they are talking about it when you are not in the room... these are every day women.
February 15, 2021
This book and study are brilliant. I love science! I love research that proves such a beautiful and important point in the fight to give women the right over their own bodies and trajectory of their lives. Trust women.
October 30, 2022
Added quotes.
Really fantastic data and presentation of the conclusions comparing women who wanted an abortion and got one to women who wanted one and were turned away.
I fully accept that no one who opposes abortion because they think it is murder will be swayed.
But many of the side arguments regarding why women want abortions are debunked with excellent data, and I felt inspired to work harder to protect a woman’s right to choose her life’s direction for more reasons than I had before.
“Let’s talk about a concern frequently raised by many who are supportive of abortion rights but worry that such a right will be overused—that women might be using abortion as their primary method of family planning. Well, if a woman wanted to use abortion as a regular method of family planning from first sex to menopause, she would need to have about 30 first-trimester abortions or 25 second-trimester abortions over her lifetime. That is what using abortion as a method of birth control would entail. If you are talking about someone who has had fewer than ten abortions, consider them an unlucky or perhaps an inconsistent contraceptive user, not a user of abortion as their sole method of family planning.”
”The likelihood of conception per each act is about 3% if a woman doesn’t know where she is in her menstrual cycle. If the sexual act falls within the six-day period leading up to ovulation, the likelihood is about 10% and then 0% for the rest of the month.”
“Half of all women seeking abortion in the U.S. live below the federal poverty level, which is about $12,000 a year for a woman living alone and $25,000 for a family of four.”
“So next time someone says, ‘Banning abortion doesn’t stop abortion,’ you can say, ‘Actually, just making abortions unaffordable stops a significant fraction of people from having them.’”
“Fifty-nine percent of women having later abortions were younger than 25…”
“ But the quiet truth about abortion between 20 and 24 weeks is that it is often a problem of late recognition of pregnancy followed by real obstacles—financial, travel-related, and legal—to getting an abortion. Making abortion more difficult to access does not mean that only the morally deserving get their abortions. It means that only adult women who don’t have any physical or mental health issues and who have money and social support get their abortions.”
“Approximately one in five women seeking abortion in the Turnaway Study thought abortion was morally wrong or should be illegal.3 Some women reconcile their anti-abortion views by characterizing their own abortions as moral given their particular circumstances.”
“That is, women who received later abortions had the same frequency of depression, anxiety symptoms and cases, self-esteem, and life satisfaction as women in the first-trimester group.”
“One in six women die after having an abortion—that is, if the abortion occurs on television.”
“One woman in 160,000 dies as a consequence of receiving an abortion, while one woman in 11,300 dies from childbirth. A woman in the United States is 14 times more likely to die from carrying a pregnancy to term than from having an abortion.“
“Abortion is not just about a woman’s rights versus an embryo’s or fetus’s rights; it’s also about whether women get to have children when they are ready to care for them.”
“60% of women seeking abortions are already mothers.”
“The study I led at one large clinic in the Midwest showed that when young women report being pressured into having an abortion, it is much more often a parent than a boyfriend who is doing the pressuring.“
“Forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term is not, it turns out, a good strategy for producing strong relationships and families.”
“95% of women who have abortions felt their decision was right for them, a fact known only because of the Turnaway Study.”
“90% of abortions occur in the first 13 weeks of pregnancy and only 1.3% occur after 20 weeks.”
“The man said he raped her because she was “already no good.” This idea that she was spoiled or tainted and so had lost all claims over her own body is a theme that one hears regarding unwanted pregnancy as well—that if a woman became pregnant without intending to, she loses all say over what happens to her body.”
“‘Legalize abortion because otherwise, women will die of illegal abortions’ comes from a public health rationale. ‘Fund contraception and abortion to lower population growth’ is a demographic argument. ‘Every dollar spent on family planning reduces public expenditures on medical care for unwanted pregnancies’ is a fiscal argument. ‘Legalize abortion to reduce carbon emissions’ is an environmental argument. Note that none of these were mentioned as reasons for wanting an abortion by the women in our study.“
“Yes. Women are emotionally resilient. But emotional resilience does not pay rent.”
“People aren’t entirely consistent with either their face masks or contraceptives, perhaps for similar reasons. Both offer uncertain protection against an unknown level of risk.… And yet, at least when it comes to the coronavirus, I think we can agree that everyone, no matter how carefully they socially distanced or wore a mask, deserves access to medical care if they become sick. I wish the same spirit of generosity were granted to those who experience an unwanted pregnancy.”
Really fantastic data and presentation of the conclusions comparing women who wanted an abortion and got one to women who wanted one and were turned away.
I fully accept that no one who opposes abortion because they think it is murder will be swayed.
But many of the side arguments regarding why women want abortions are debunked with excellent data, and I felt inspired to work harder to protect a woman’s right to choose her life’s direction for more reasons than I had before.
“Let’s talk about a concern frequently raised by many who are supportive of abortion rights but worry that such a right will be overused—that women might be using abortion as their primary method of family planning. Well, if a woman wanted to use abortion as a regular method of family planning from first sex to menopause, she would need to have about 30 first-trimester abortions or 25 second-trimester abortions over her lifetime. That is what using abortion as a method of birth control would entail. If you are talking about someone who has had fewer than ten abortions, consider them an unlucky or perhaps an inconsistent contraceptive user, not a user of abortion as their sole method of family planning.”
”The likelihood of conception per each act is about 3% if a woman doesn’t know where she is in her menstrual cycle. If the sexual act falls within the six-day period leading up to ovulation, the likelihood is about 10% and then 0% for the rest of the month.”
“Half of all women seeking abortion in the U.S. live below the federal poverty level, which is about $12,000 a year for a woman living alone and $25,000 for a family of four.”
“So next time someone says, ‘Banning abortion doesn’t stop abortion,’ you can say, ‘Actually, just making abortions unaffordable stops a significant fraction of people from having them.’”
“Fifty-nine percent of women having later abortions were younger than 25…”
“ But the quiet truth about abortion between 20 and 24 weeks is that it is often a problem of late recognition of pregnancy followed by real obstacles—financial, travel-related, and legal—to getting an abortion. Making abortion more difficult to access does not mean that only the morally deserving get their abortions. It means that only adult women who don’t have any physical or mental health issues and who have money and social support get their abortions.”
“Approximately one in five women seeking abortion in the Turnaway Study thought abortion was morally wrong or should be illegal.3 Some women reconcile their anti-abortion views by characterizing their own abortions as moral given their particular circumstances.”
“That is, women who received later abortions had the same frequency of depression, anxiety symptoms and cases, self-esteem, and life satisfaction as women in the first-trimester group.”
“One in six women die after having an abortion—that is, if the abortion occurs on television.”
“One woman in 160,000 dies as a consequence of receiving an abortion, while one woman in 11,300 dies from childbirth. A woman in the United States is 14 times more likely to die from carrying a pregnancy to term than from having an abortion.“
“Abortion is not just about a woman’s rights versus an embryo’s or fetus’s rights; it’s also about whether women get to have children when they are ready to care for them.”
“60% of women seeking abortions are already mothers.”
“The study I led at one large clinic in the Midwest showed that when young women report being pressured into having an abortion, it is much more often a parent than a boyfriend who is doing the pressuring.“
“Forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term is not, it turns out, a good strategy for producing strong relationships and families.”
“95% of women who have abortions felt their decision was right for them, a fact known only because of the Turnaway Study.”
“90% of abortions occur in the first 13 weeks of pregnancy and only 1.3% occur after 20 weeks.”
“The man said he raped her because she was “already no good.” This idea that she was spoiled or tainted and so had lost all claims over her own body is a theme that one hears regarding unwanted pregnancy as well—that if a woman became pregnant without intending to, she loses all say over what happens to her body.”
“‘Legalize abortion because otherwise, women will die of illegal abortions’ comes from a public health rationale. ‘Fund contraception and abortion to lower population growth’ is a demographic argument. ‘Every dollar spent on family planning reduces public expenditures on medical care for unwanted pregnancies’ is a fiscal argument. ‘Legalize abortion to reduce carbon emissions’ is an environmental argument. Note that none of these were mentioned as reasons for wanting an abortion by the women in our study.“
“Yes. Women are emotionally resilient. But emotional resilience does not pay rent.”
“People aren’t entirely consistent with either their face masks or contraceptives, perhaps for similar reasons. Both offer uncertain protection against an unknown level of risk.… And yet, at least when it comes to the coronavirus, I think we can agree that everyone, no matter how carefully they socially distanced or wore a mask, deserves access to medical care if they become sick. I wish the same spirit of generosity were granted to those who experience an unwanted pregnancy.”
March 11, 2025
What this book is NOT: a religious, political, or scientific debate on if abortion is murder. What this book IS: an examination into why women seek out early and late (after 20 weeks) term abortions, how their lives are impacted if they do or don’t receive treatment, personal stories from real women, and chalk full of data to back up the authors investigations. Truly such a good book that reminds us that women are resilient, level-headed, and can be trusted to make decisions on their bodily autonomy. The findings can be summarized in saying: receiving an abortion does not harm the health and wellbeing of a woman, and being denied an abortion leads to significant long term economic hardship, poorer health outcomes, weaker relationships, and challenges in career goals.
March 20, 2025
3.5 I tore through half of this book and then got bored and picked / skimmed through the rest.
The data that Dr Foster and her colleagues amassed from the Turnaway study, a well controlled study of characteristics of women seeking abortion, and a comparison of how they did emotionally and financially after successfully having - or being turned away - has been published in multiple scientific articles. This book turns the data, and these papers, into a largely readable book. And it's the data that we all know is true - women get abortions because they are not in a place where a child is wanted - either their home life (many with terrible men involved), their financial life or their educational life, or the lives of their current children, would be diminished if they had another mouth to feed (e.g., they weren't getting help from the fathers...). If the women successfully terminate pregnancies, they largely go on to achieve their personal goals. If they are turned away, their socioeconomic status drops.
None of this matters to the men and the truly nutty women who are against abortion, nor the conservative supreme court that overturned Roe v Wade. Such is life in this strange - and getting stranger every day - country.
For reading purposes, the book is a bit of a slog. Glad I picked it up, glad I put it down.
The data that Dr Foster and her colleagues amassed from the Turnaway study, a well controlled study of characteristics of women seeking abortion, and a comparison of how they did emotionally and financially after successfully having - or being turned away - has been published in multiple scientific articles. This book turns the data, and these papers, into a largely readable book. And it's the data that we all know is true - women get abortions because they are not in a place where a child is wanted - either their home life (many with terrible men involved), their financial life or their educational life, or the lives of their current children, would be diminished if they had another mouth to feed (e.g., they weren't getting help from the fathers...). If the women successfully terminate pregnancies, they largely go on to achieve their personal goals. If they are turned away, their socioeconomic status drops.
None of this matters to the men and the truly nutty women who are against abortion, nor the conservative supreme court that overturned Roe v Wade. Such is life in this strange - and getting stranger every day - country.
For reading purposes, the book is a bit of a slog. Glad I picked it up, glad I put it down.
February 21, 2021
This is one of my favorite non-fiction books to date. I am so glad I read this, had the opportunity to discuss this with Pop Culture Book club, and have a zoom discussion with Dr. Green Foster!
Honestly, this book should be required reading for any lawmaker that makes laws or policies related to abortion. This study set out to find out what happens to women who have unwanted pregnancies and whether they are able to end the pregnancy or are turned away from the abortion clinic. This book is a compilation of many scientific journal articles and the stories of 10 women from this story.
I loved the way the data was presented. It was very easy to digest and see how the study was designed and conducted. Each chapter ends with the story of a woman and what happened to here after her unwanted pregnancy. I didn't find anything in this book super shocking, but it did reaffirm my belief that every woman, nonbinary person and trans man should have a choice about what happens to their body. Anyone who can become pregnant deserves the choice and bodily autonomy to decide what happens no matter what the government thinks.
The stories from the women in this study are diverse but all have a common thread. The pregnancy was not wanted for a multitude of reasons: it wasn't the right time, they didn't have financial security, they were in an unsafe relationship, they wanted to care for the children they already had being some of the most common.
Highly recommend this book and I'm really curious to see what will come from Dr. Greene Foster's future research. She told us she was pursuing similar studies in Nepal and other countries around the world.
Honestly, this book should be required reading for any lawmaker that makes laws or policies related to abortion. This study set out to find out what happens to women who have unwanted pregnancies and whether they are able to end the pregnancy or are turned away from the abortion clinic. This book is a compilation of many scientific journal articles and the stories of 10 women from this story.
I loved the way the data was presented. It was very easy to digest and see how the study was designed and conducted. Each chapter ends with the story of a woman and what happened to here after her unwanted pregnancy. I didn't find anything in this book super shocking, but it did reaffirm my belief that every woman, nonbinary person and trans man should have a choice about what happens to their body. Anyone who can become pregnant deserves the choice and bodily autonomy to decide what happens no matter what the government thinks.
The stories from the women in this study are diverse but all have a common thread. The pregnancy was not wanted for a multitude of reasons: it wasn't the right time, they didn't have financial security, they were in an unsafe relationship, they wanted to care for the children they already had being some of the most common.
Highly recommend this book and I'm really curious to see what will come from Dr. Greene Foster's future research. She told us she was pursuing similar studies in Nepal and other countries around the world.
August 6, 2020
This was a really interesting book, and I think the fact that this research was done is incredibly important. However, reading it all from cover to cover (which is I know not a mandatory way to read a non-fiction text, of course) it did get somewhat repetitive at times.
May 7, 2022
Everyone, regardless of stance on abortion, should read this. Even as a pro-choice advocate, I learned a lot about *why* women get abortions and the aftermath compared to those who are unable to. So much mainstream info is wrong or misleading
September 23, 2025
Първо трябва да си разясним едно нещо, "аборт" е евфемизъм, затова от тук нататък тази дума няма да намери място в този текст, правилният термин за нарочното прекратяване на живота на човек в най-ранния стадий на неговото развитие е комбинация от две думички, които всички познаваме много добре -- 'човек в най-ранния стадий на неговото развитие' е дете, а 'нарочното прекратяване на живот' е убийство. Терминът е детеубийство, но тъй като много хора обичат да говорят на латински, когато се говори по тази тема, защото фетус няма етимология, просто е няква чужда и удобна думичка, нека и ние ползваме латинския -- терминът е инфантицид.
Та, сега като хората, които и без това не четат нито про нито анти на такива теми, а просто се носят по удобното море на обществото ни, са се махнали, можем да поговорим малко за това 'изследване'.
Думата 'изследване' заедно с думата 'наука' отдавна са формирали нова религия в модерното общество, когато нещо е 'изследване' то почти се взима като свещенно писание, особено ако отговаря на личните ни възгледи. Изследванията обаче трябва всъщност да бъдат изследвания, демек да представляват някаква обикновена част от популацията и да са проведени по някакви обективни стандарти, това 'изследване' не спазва нито едно от тези неща. Само около 1/3 от попитаните жени решават да участват в това изследване, демек към 1000 от 3000, от тях около половината дори не приключват петгодишния му срок. Петгодишният срок сам по себе си е малко абсурден за "дългосрочно" изследване, но и самото подбиране е проблем, защото жените, които никога не търсят инфантицид просто не съществуват, което е удобно обяснено от авторките със статистиката, че всяка трета жена ще потърси инфантицид в живота си в САЩ (източник? един приятел на братовчед ми го видя в съня си)
Едно изследване, което е пропито с идеология, въпреки че се упоменава как това не е така (ако го кажем следователно няма да бъде, разбираш ли) с цитати като "Sometimes, I use the word 'women' rather than the more inclusive 'people who need [infanticide]' to highlight the misogyny and root cause of the problem." Знам, знам, Мат Уолш го изтърка тоя номер, но сериозно ли ще припишем какъвто и да е авторитет на 'учени' които правят изследване на жени, но не могат да ти кажат аджеба какво е жена?
Най-лошото е, че мога да си изхабя целия квот на думички тук в гудрийдс за да опиша как про-инфантицид аргументите са малоумни от биологическа гледна точка и в най-добрия случай крайно неморално от морална такавам, мога да се впусна в това как, особено в САЩ, хората са толкова малоумни, че противозачатъчните методи се смятат за нещо глупаво и ненужно, щото накрая просто можеш да си убиеш детето. (Малък тангент, идеята, че презервативите са само 98% ефективни идва от аргумент подобен на този: Чадърът е само 98% ефективен в това да ме пази от дъжда, защото понякога забравям да го ползвам, толкова за другите 'статистики' около темата)
Най-лошото е, че най-силният аргумент за инфантицида -- утилитарния, е точно аргументът, който най-много трябва да се оборва. Аз (макар и белобрад старец) съм от поколението Gen Z, от което 1/3 е жертва на инфантицид. Помислете си за момент какво означава това в контекста на днешния свят, в който популационната пирамида е обърната на главата си сякаш извънземните са се върнали да си вземат пумпалите от Гиза. Признавам, че голяма част от причината за инфантицид е икономическа, и някак си решението на този проблем е повече ифантицид? Във Франция пенсионерите взимат по-висока пенсия от средния доход на младите, ЧИИТО ДАНЪЦИ ГИ ИЗПЛАЩАТ. И тези пенсионери, през целия си живот, вместо да се борят да подобрят живота на младите за да гарантират своята старост, ни сипват инфантицида като решение на нашите проблеми и импортират +безброй индийци, защото на тях не им пука, за тях пенсиите ЩЕ стигнат, после НИЕ ще го ядем хуя на 'мултикултурния експеримент'. Но няма страшно, евентуално ще се реши и нашия проблем с набъбващата вълна от подкрепа за евтаназия -- аз няма да мога да жертвам внуците на Gen Z за личното си удобство, тъй като повечето ми връстници надали въобще ще могат да имат деца, вместо това ще мога спокойно да се самоубия, или, още по-добре, да бъда самоубит на сила, след като Здравната Каса реши, че в старата си възраст аз не съм достатъчно важен или продуктивен, за да бъда лекуван с нещо друго освен евтина смъртоносна инжекция, приложена от доктор-инженер Гопта Гупта :)
На фона на всичко това, харпии и демони, каквито са всичките про-инфантицид активисти, да пишат книги, в които се преструват, че са си направили труда да покажат нещо научно в упрек на анти-инфантиц движението, щеше да е смешно, ако не беше трагично, а реално трябва да е наказуемо.
Най-големият показател, че всичко това е фарс: САМАТА КНИГА признава, че след като им е отказан инфантицид, 96% от жените НЕ СЪЖАЛЯВАТ, ЧЕ НЕ СА УБИЛИ ДЕЦАТА СИ (но пък са малко по-бедни от другите жени, които ходят на яки почивки!). Но това го няма по статиите и резюметата, щото дядо ти трябва да цоцка от пенсията, а ако държавата трябва да помогне на теб да имаш дете, няма да има парички за него :)))))))
Докато инфантицидът не стане немислим, моето поколение и нашата цивилизация няма бъдеще. Нищо друго не може да бъде решено, докато 'решението' на всички икономически и социални проблеми са 1) убий детето си или 2) убий себе си. В момента даже не сме видели второто, но ако си мислите, че няма да ни удари като товарен влак в следващите 10-15 години, сте по-заблудени от жените, които са писали тази книга, а това е висока летва.
Та, сега като хората, които и без това не четат нито про нито анти на такива теми, а просто се носят по удобното море на обществото ни, са се махнали, можем да поговорим малко за това 'изследване'.
Думата 'изследване' заедно с думата 'наука' отдавна са формирали нова религия в модерното общество, когато нещо е 'изследване' то почти се взима като свещенно писание, особено ако отговаря на личните ни възгледи. Изследванията обаче трябва всъщност да бъдат изследвания, демек да представляват някаква обикновена част от популацията и да са проведени по някакви обективни стандарти, това 'изследване' не спазва нито едно от тези неща. Само около 1/3 от попитаните жени решават да участват в това изследване, демек към 1000 от 3000, от тях около половината дори не приключват петгодишния му срок. Петгодишният срок сам по себе си е малко абсурден за "дългосрочно" изследване, но и самото подбиране е проблем, защото жените, които никога не търсят инфантицид просто не съществуват, което е удобно обяснено от авторките със статистиката, че всяка трета жена ще потърси инфантицид в живота си в САЩ (източник? един приятел на братовчед ми го видя в съня си)
Едно изследване, което е пропито с идеология, въпреки че се упоменава как това не е така (ако го кажем следователно няма да бъде, разбираш ли) с цитати като "Sometimes, I use the word 'women' rather than the more inclusive 'people who need [infanticide]' to highlight the misogyny and root cause of the problem." Знам, знам, Мат Уолш го изтърка тоя номер, но сериозно ли ще припишем какъвто и да е авторитет на 'учени' които правят изследване на жени, но не могат да ти кажат аджеба какво е жена?
Най-лошото е, че мога да си изхабя целия квот на думички тук в гудрийдс за да опиша как про-инфантицид аргументите са малоумни от биологическа гледна точка и в най-добрия случай крайно неморално от морална такавам, мога да се впусна в това как, особено в САЩ, хората са толкова малоумни, че противозачатъчните методи се смятат за нещо глупаво и ненужно, щото накрая просто можеш да си убиеш детето. (Малък тангент, идеята, че презервативите са само 98% ефективни идва от аргумент подобен на този: Чадърът е само 98% ефективен в това да ме пази от дъжда, защото понякога забравям да го ползвам, толкова за другите 'статистики' около темата)
Най-лошото е, че най-силният аргумент за инфантицида -- утилитарния, е точно аргументът, който най-много трябва да се оборва. Аз (макар и белобрад старец) съм от поколението Gen Z, от което 1/3 е жертва на инфантицид. Помислете си за момент какво означава това в контекста на днешния свят, в който популационната пирамида е обърната на главата си сякаш извънземните са се върнали да си вземат пумпалите от Гиза. Признавам, че голяма част от причината за инфантицид е икономическа, и някак си решението на този проблем е повече ифантицид? Във Франция пенсионерите взимат по-висока пенсия от средния доход на младите, ЧИИТО ДАНЪЦИ ГИ ИЗПЛАЩАТ. И тези пенсионери, през целия си живот, вместо да се борят да подобрят живота на младите за да гарантират своята старост, ни сипват инфантицида като решение на нашите проблеми и импортират +безброй индийци, защото на тях не им пука, за тях пенсиите ЩЕ стигнат, после НИЕ ще го ядем хуя на 'мултикултурния експеримент'. Но няма страшно, евентуално ще се реши и нашия проблем с набъбващата вълна от подкрепа за евтаназия -- аз няма да мога да жертвам внуците на Gen Z за личното си удобство, тъй като повечето ми връстници надали въобще ще могат да имат деца, вместо това ще мога спокойно да се самоубия, или, още по-добре, да бъда самоубит на сила, след като Здравната Каса реши, че в старата си възраст аз не съм достатъчно важен или продуктивен, за да бъда лекуван с нещо друго освен евтина смъртоносна инжекция, приложена от доктор-инженер Гопта Гупта :)
На фона на всичко това, харпии и демони, каквито са всичките про-инфантицид активисти, да пишат книги, в които се преструват, че са си направили труда да покажат нещо научно в упрек на анти-инфантиц движението, щеше да е смешно, ако не беше трагично, а реално трябва да е наказуемо.
Най-големият показател, че всичко това е фарс: САМАТА КНИГА признава, че след като им е отказан инфантицид, 96% от жените НЕ СЪЖАЛЯВАТ, ЧЕ НЕ СА УБИЛИ ДЕЦАТА СИ (но пък са малко по-бедни от другите жени, които ходят на яки почивки!). Но това го няма по статиите и резюметата, щото дядо ти трябва да цоцка от пенсията, а ако държавата трябва да помогне на теб да имаш дете, няма да има парички за него :)))))))
Докато инфантицидът не стане немислим, моето поколение и нашата цивилизация няма бъдеще. Нищо друго не може да бъде решено, докато 'решението' на всички икономически и социални проблеми са 1) убий детето си или 2) убий себе си. В момента даже не сме видели второто, но ако си мислите, че няма да ни удари като товарен влак в следващите 10-15 години, сте по-заблудени от жените, които са писали тази книга, а това е висока летва.
September 30, 2023
This is great! So interesting: I said "wow" out loud, to myself, multiple times while reading this. I loved the narratives throughout the book, to center participants' experiences and to help the reader apply the study stats to actual people's lives. I also liked the author sharing her family's experiences with abortion (including experiences not getting an abortion) at the end of the book, and the final summary and afterword brought the book to a close really nicely. Overall, this was just a consistently well-written, interesting, complete accounting of this huge study. The format of the book is thoughtful and easy to follow.
Awesome example of a researcher writing about research for the public; I would recommend this for anyone interested in learning about abortion (with the disclaimer that the author describes herself as being pro-choice even before the study, which is off-putting for some), as well as anyone more broadly interested in good examples of science communication/nonfiction writing, and anyone learning about social science research processes.
Awesome example of a researcher writing about research for the public; I would recommend this for anyone interested in learning about abortion (with the disclaimer that the author describes herself as being pro-choice even before the study, which is off-putting for some), as well as anyone more broadly interested in good examples of science communication/nonfiction writing, and anyone learning about social science research processes.
August 2, 2022
I’m glad I read this, although it was very dry at times (it’s the results of a study, so not the most thrilling but super important). I liked the sections with women’s stories and the author’s takeaways at the end.
A couple of quotes I liked: “trusting women is the take-home message from the Turnaway Study. Our study produced strong evidence that women are able to make thoughtful and deliberate decisions about their bodies, their families, and their lives.”
“If we can see these women as people and their decisions as valid, maybe we can resist the temptation to think that the government can make their decisions for them.”
“We are so focused on the question of whether women should be allowed to get an abortion, we have missed the question of why they would want to and what the consequences are when they cannot.”
A couple of quotes I liked: “trusting women is the take-home message from the Turnaway Study. Our study produced strong evidence that women are able to make thoughtful and deliberate decisions about their bodies, their families, and their lives.”
“If we can see these women as people and their decisions as valid, maybe we can resist the temptation to think that the government can make their decisions for them.”
“We are so focused on the question of whether women should be allowed to get an abortion, we have missed the question of why they would want to and what the consequences are when they cannot.”
December 13, 2024
5 star research, 5 star analysis. she really illustrates how this study comparing outcomes for unwanted pregnancies for women who were both able and unable to receive an abortion fills a gap in the literature especially when pro-life politicians cite (with no evidence) that abortion harms women. the narrative choice to have women’s own stories in between each chapter was so well done. trust women.
December 31, 2024
For a book that relies so much on data and science (two things I don’t normally like to read about) Greene Foster does an amazing job keeping her work incredibly human. Her emphasis on the potential power of this research is almost painful to read in a post- Dobbs world, but her detailed analysis of both accessing abortion and being denied abortion reminds you of what could be.
November 19, 2022
A brilliant study that I'm glad was published as a book and I'm especially thankful to my book club for reading, even though I missed the discussion!
One of the many takeaways from this book for me was the granularity of "late term abortions" (20 weeks+) vs third trimester (24 weeks+). This reminded me of when so many people learned what "6 weeks pregnant" means and what the measurement starts from. I hope this study (/book published in 2020) has an update post-Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.
One of the many takeaways from this book for me was the granularity of "late term abortions" (20 weeks+) vs third trimester (24 weeks+). This reminded me of when so many people learned what "6 weeks pregnant" means and what the measurement starts from. I hope this study (/book published in 2020) has an update post-Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 580 reviews