{"id":314650,"date":"2024-06-27T10:43:06","date_gmt":"2024-06-27T15:43:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=314650"},"modified":"2024-09-20T16:01:34","modified_gmt":"2024-09-20T21:01:34","slug":"study-texas-pro-life-infant-deaths-mislead","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/study-texas-pro-life-infant-deaths-mislead\/","title":{"rendered":"DEBUNKED: Study claiming Texas’ pro-life law caused more infant deaths is meant to mislead"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

A new <\/span>study<\/span><\/a> published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) attempts to connect an increase in Texas\u2019 total number of \u00a0infant mortalities in 2022 to its implementation of <\/span>SB8<\/span><\/a>, also known as the Texas Heartbeat Act, in 2021. Study authors claim that their \u201cfindings suggest that abortion restrictions may have negative spillover effects on infant health.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

Abortion-friendly media outlets reporting on the study have uncritically recycled more or less the same claim. For example, <\/span>USA Today<\/span><\/a> stated: \u201c[Texas\u2019] near-total ban on abortion appears to have triggered an increase in infant deaths[.]\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

But can the inability to kill children in the womb <\/span>really<\/span><\/i> be responsible for an increase in infant deaths outside<\/em> the womb? And what does the big picture in Texas actually look like?<\/span><\/p>\n

Infant Deaths Are Up in Texas \u2026 but So Are Births<\/b><\/p>\n

According to <\/span>JAMA<\/span><\/a>, there were 255 more infant deaths in Texas in 2022 than there were in 2021. However, the study fails to note that this number is dwarfed by the state\u2019s increase in births<\/em> during the same period.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

According to <\/span>analysis<\/span><\/a> published by the University of Houston, there were 16,147 more births in Texas in 2022 than there were the previous year. The same report also notes that, while the overall U.S. fertility rate (defined as births per 1,000 women aged 15-44) fell, Texas\u2019 fertility rate \u201crose in 2022 for the first time since 2014, by 2.0% over 2021[.]\u201d In fact, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention<\/a> (CDC)<\/span>, only three states \u2013 North Dakota, Nebraska, and South Dakota \u2013 can boast 2022 fertility rates higher than that of Texas.<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

What\u2019s more, when one examines Texas\u2019 infant mortality <\/span>rate<\/span><\/i> (the number of infant deaths per 1,000 live births) rather than just the raw number of total deaths, a very different picture emerges.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The CDC<\/a><\/span> reports that Texas\u2019 infant mortality rates in both 2017 and 2014 \u2013 namely, 5.85 deaths per 1,000 births \u2013\u00a0 were actually higher than in 2022, in which the rate was 5.72. CDC statistics also show that Texas\u2019 infant mortality rate for 2016 was identical to that of 2022, and 2015\u2019s rate (5.71) was very nearly identical.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Dr. Michael New, who is an <\/span>assistant professor of practice at the Busch School of Business at the Catholic University of America and a senior associate scholar at the Charlotte Lozier Institute,<\/span> noted<\/span><\/a> that Texas\u2019 infant mortality rate for 2022 was \u201cwell within historical norms\u201d and \u201cnearly identical to the average infant mortality rate in the Lone Star State between 2007 and 2020.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In other words, considered in context, Texas\u2019 infant mortality data reveals that there is actually no controversy here<\/em>, and certainly no legitimate cause for hysteria or hyperbole.<\/span><\/p>\n

JAMA\u2019s Statistical Shell Game<\/b><\/p>\n

According to <\/span>USA Today<\/span><\/a>, the JAMA study concluded that the increase in infant deaths was \u201clikely due to birth defects or genetic problems that wouldn’t have allowed [the babies] to live.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In other words, even JAMA admits that the majority of these children would have died prior to the implementation of the Texas Heartbeat Act \u2013 the only difference is that before the law went into effect, they would have been violently and intentionally killed while still in the womb, whereas afterward, they were permitted to live out the natural course of their lives.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The key change, from a statistical standpoint, is the manner<\/em> in which these deaths are reported. Before SB8, they were reported as abortion statistics, but now, they are reported as infant\/neonatal deaths.<\/span><\/p>\n

JAMA\u2019s suggestion that there has been a material and substantial increase in the number of babies dying in Texas \u2013 and that Texas\u2019 pro-life law is responsible for that increase \u2013 is completely reliant upon a disingenuous statistical shell game.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Better Never to Have Been Born?<\/b>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Both JAMA and the abortion-friendly media outlets reporting on this study have suggested that it would have been better if these children had been homicide victims subjected to <\/span>violent<\/span><\/a> abortion <\/span>procedures<\/span><\/a> rather than be permitted to experience natural deaths after birth.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n