Notable Abortion Dates in the 20th Century:
Dividing the Century

It's difficult to divide the 20th Century into neat, tidy periods to examine abortion trends. However, three disctinct periods can be observed based on public perception of abortion and the pro-life response to abortionists.

1900 - 1950: Pre-Paradigm Shift
During the early period of the 20th Century, there were three major groups of clients for abortionists: seduced and abandoned young women and girls, prostitutes, and those ideologically devoted to "free love" and the moral relativism this fostered. At the end of the 19th Century, life advocates had developed strategies for addressing the needs of these groups.

Maternity homes and other programs were developed to protect young women vulnerable to seduction and abandonment. These strategies included programs to meet young women as they came to cities and steer them into safe housing and jobs. Women reported that their lives were turned around by these efforts.

Prostitution was addressed in several ways. One was to head off girls vulnerable to recruitment as prostitutes and help them to find safe homes and work. Another was to establish safe homes for women wishing to leave prostitution. Another was to expose and shame the patrons of prostitutes, who were counting on the anonminity of the city to hide their sexual exploits. These efforts helped to reduce prostitution, and together with the vulcanization of rubber (making condoms and diaphragms readily available to prostitutes) did much to reduce the number of pregnancies and abortions among prostitutes.

The "free love" abortions were addressed by trying to educate the public about the health and social dangers of sexual libertinism. Abortion deaths, abortion regrets, and the heartbreak of fractured relationships were publicized. In this way, there was some success in preventing women from being seduced into the unhealthy lifestyle of promiscuous sex.

Life advocates also pushed for more stringent enforcement of abortion laws, and for a tightening of abortion laws. The success of this containment strategy can be seen in the fall of abortion deaths during the first half of the century, before widespread use of antibiotics and blood transfusions.

1950 - 1970: The Transitional Period
During the first half of the century, abortion advocates worked their own programs. While there was some overlap, five distinct groups were fighting abortion laws in their own ways, and had been making little progress. By coming together, these groups produced a major shift in how others saw abortion.

1. Libertines. The sexual libertines needed abortion to maintain their lifestyle of constantly shifting sexual partners without the inconvenience of children. Their arguments for abortion struck the general public as licentious and frankly selfish, and did not gain popular support.

2. Eugenecists and Racists. Elitists who wanted to promote population growth among healthy, rich, intelligent whites and limit population growth among people with disabilities, the poor, those of average or lower intellect, and darker-skinned races, were gaining ground until the Nazi atrocities gave them some extremely bad publicity. They spent the last half of the 1940's trying to undo the damage and distance themselves from the early results of their philosophy, and needed to find a new way to gain ground with the suspicious public.

3. Radical Feminists. In the first half of the century, feminism was sharply divided over abortion. Some considered it just another example of the strong (women) exploiting the weak (unborn children), and also viewed it as capitulation to male-dominated thinking. Others bought into the idea that feminism meant that any idea that came into a woman's head was automatically a good idea, and nothing short of abortion-on-demand would satisfy them. The movement was about to split over this division.

4. Abortionists. These are the folks that make money from abortion, from the folks who actually sell the abortions to "referral" services that get kickbacks or referral fees, and the organizations that they support with abortion dollars. Their motives ranged from pity to greed. They unified behind the theme of abortion as medically indicated for broad reasons and enabled the "woman and her doctor" claims made by abortion advocates to thrive.

5. "Do-Gooders." These were the well-meaning folks who saw the problems that abortion created, and pitied women who were pregnant and distressed. Instead of examining the root causes of the problem, they assumed that if a woman perceives abortion as necessary, then abortion must really be necessary. They postulated that legalization would probably fix things.

During the period from 1950 to 1970, these five groups came together and put aside their differences in the face of a common enemy: abortion laws. They had -- and still have -- many profound disagreements. Do-gooders want careful supervision of abortion to ensure women's safety. Feminists want absolutely no oversight of abortion whatsoever, and their ideal scenario is all abortions being done by feminists in a feminist setting as part of indoctrinating women into feminism. Eugenicists and racists want abortions done on populations of their choosing -- the people they see as inferior races and individuals. Abortionists want to maintain control of the flow of cash without any worries of political/legal entangelements. And the Playboy/Cosmo set just want abortion cheap, readily available, and socially smiled upon. The infighting is tremendous -- feminists attack do-gooders for their "paternalistic" concerns about safety. Eugenicists and feminists don't see eye to eye on forced abortions. Abortionists fight with feminists about home-abortions and the de-medicalization of abortion. Playboy/Cosmo types dislike do-gooders' desire to see abortion contained. Eugenicists balk at abortionists' efforts to skim profits off of population control efforts. And it goes on and on and on. But this fighting takes place behind closed doors. During the transitional period, these groups worked out ways to present a unified front to the public.

Strategies for presenting a unified front include denying the reality of forced abortions, downplaying the radical feminist home-abortion mentality, sugar-coating racist and eugenics drives to increase abortion among those deemed "undesirable," painting abortion as a "women's rights" issue, presenting abortionists as noble public servants, covering up atrocities, and using the do-gooders as the primary spokespersons. Keeping the do-gooders in the dark about the real agendas and activities of the other four groups is part and parcel of the strategy. Most behind-the-scenes work in abortion promotion is aimed at manipulating the do-gooders and allowing them to present the sanitized abortion agenda to the public. This is why we see phenomena like Taussig's bogus figures being earnestly put forward by pro choice advocates, who are fed these numbers by feminists, racists, abortionists, and libertines who know that they're false but cling to them because they're useful.

A boon to the unity of the various abortion advocacy factions was the Thalidomide tragedy. All five groups grabbed onto public prejudices against people with disabilities. Libertines were able to dress their push for legalization as a concern for women and hapless children who would be born with deformities. Eugenicists were able to paint eugenics abortions as doing the target populations a favor, sparing them a life not worth living. (Never mind that the Nazis had already tried this; the Nazis started by targeting people who were visible -- the new move would start with the invisible victims still in utero.) Feminists were able to dress late abortions as a mercy instead of as infanticide. Abortionists were able to paint themselves as healers relieving unbearable suffering. And do-gooders got swept along, never questioning whether these abortions were really such a good idea.

Life advocates allowed themselves to be sucked into the public presentations of abortion advocates, rather than addressing the behind-the-scenes machinations. In this way, abortion proponents were able to gain a foothold.

1970 - 1999: The Post-Legalization Era
The real turning point in abortion advocacy wasn't Roe v. Wade. Roe was a bolt from the blue, a gift from the gods, as it were. The real turning point came in 1970, when it became clear that legislators and judges were buying into the united front, especially the "woman and her doctor" myth about abortion decisions being primarily medical decisions. Once abortion advocates learned that their strategy was working, the tactic changed from developing a working strategy to maintaining unity.

The hardest task of maintaining unity is keeping the do-gooders in the dark. The primary strategy for this is creating and maintaining apparently neutral "scientific" and "sociological" sources of disinformation. These sources include the Alan Guttmacher Institute and the Population Council (for eugenicists); the National Abortion Federation and the Centers for Disease Control (for abortionists); and the National Organization for Women (for feminists).

One of the most popular techniques for disseminating disinformation is for members of various abortion promotion factions to release the disinformation through non-abortion organizations. This is done by joining and becoming active in groups as diverse as the YWCA, the AMA, the National Education Association, and the American Association of University Women. The abortion advocate then releases disinformation via these groups, giving the appearance of neutrality. A most ingenious example of this machination is the infamous "Koop Report," which was a product of the Alan Guttmacher Institute released under the signature of abortion opponent C. Everett Koop during his tenure as Surgeon General.

Life advocates during this time assumed a two-pronged approach: continuing the startegies that had been effective in containing abortion during the 19th Century, and reacting to public behavior of abortion advocates. However, innovative stragegies were developed as spies uncovered the infighting within the abortion advocacy movement. There is hope that this infighting can be exposed and addressed. National Right to Life has exposed the development of D&X abortion, the Elliot Institute is working to expose fraudulent abortion practices, Life Dynamics is addressing abortion industry atrocities, and other groups and individuals are refining old strategies and developing new ones. There is hope that in the coming century, life advocates will be able to break up the abortion advocacy movement and gain public sympathy for vulnerable women and children.

Related Links
Abortionists of the 20th Century
Abortion's Roots in America
The Changing Face of Abortion in the 20th Century
Evolution of the Abortion Debate