{"id":279093,"date":"2022-11-08T08:49:28","date_gmt":"2022-11-08T14:49:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=279093"},"modified":"2025-06-20T00:01:54","modified_gmt":"2025-06-20T05:01:54","slug":"pro-lifers-learn-questionable-abortion-estimates","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/pro-lifers-learn-questionable-abortion-estimates\/","title":{"rendered":"What pro-lifers can learn from even questionable abortion estimates"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

A new report<\/a>\u00a0on national abortion trends has been released by the Society of Family Planning (SFP). Although it is based on preliminary, estimated data, and there are legitimate reasons to ask questions about the sources of that data, the data itself is cause for optimism regarding some aspects of the current national abortion situation, and concern about others.<\/p>\n

The Society of Family Planning (SFP), an organization gradually gaining more notoriety, was\u00a0founded<\/a>\u00a0in 2005 thanks to a generous contribution from the Packard Foundation, a donor involved in funding many global abortion efforts. SFP is heavily funded<\/a> by both the Packard and (Warren) Buffett Foundations, which financed abortion pill manufacturer Danco Laboratories in its early days. Since 2009<\/a>, the pro-abortion SFP has also “partnered with Wikipedia Education to train members to improve the quality of abortion and contraception information on Wikipedia,” according to their 2020 annual report<\/a>.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"Image:

Pro-abortion Society of Family Planning partners with Wikipedia<\/p><\/div>\n

SFP recently released a report<\/a>\u00a0which claims that the number of abortions declined by nearly 11,000 (10,670) nationally between June (when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade)<\/em>\u00a0and August. It is important to note that this report is based on\u00a0estimated numbers\u00a0<\/em>provided by abortion facilities, which even SFP itself admits: “[W]e are unable to estimate the number of abortions that occurred outside the formal healthcare system, such as via Aid Access or volunteer ‘accompaniment’ networks in Mexico,” adding, “[t]hus, we are unable to estimate how many pregnant people self-managed their abortions versus carried to term.”<\/p>\n

As Dr. Michael J. New noted<\/a>\u00a0at National Review, “…\u00a0the data used in the #WeCount analysis came from abortion facilities. It did not come from state health departments or government agencies, and so there are legitimate concerns about the accuracy of this data.”<\/p>\n

National data<\/strong><\/p>\n

The SFP report<\/a>\u00a0found that nationally:<\/p>\n