Reclaiming Our Children: A Blog About Healing After Abortion

So states an article in the NY Times yesterday http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/13/health/research/13brfs-ABORTIONDOES_BRF.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=abortion&st=cse&oref=slogin
which quotes Brenda Major , one of the pro abortion members of the task force assigned to look into post abortion stress.
No big surprise here, and of course, the thing that prompted Luminas February letter to the APA, which was completely ignored.(see post below "Reports of Adverse Reaction to Abortion")

They want evidence…I say they should come to Lumina http://www.postabortionhelp.org, or Operation outcry http://www/operationoutcry.org , or Silent No More www.silentnomoreawareness.org, or Entering Canaan http://flrl.org/EnteringCanaan.htm or Rachels Vineyard http://www.rachelsvineyard.org/ or a  Forgiven and Set Free or any other of the countless resources for post abortion which the APA says does not exist…you get the picture….come and talk to those of us who have had the experience..use us for your data instead of continuing to ignore we exist.

A very sad day and a day of great injustice day for those post abortive, but as I said, not one which surprises me….

I did receive this from Rachel M. MacNair, Ph.D.  who is at the APA conference:
Friends —
 
The APA Council took up the question of whether or not to
receive the Report of the Task Force on Mental Health and Abortion at about
10:45 today (Wednesday, August 13, 2008). There were six people who spoke on the
Report. Four were for it and talked about how very much it was the best of
psychologists, and we needn't worry that it included researchers reviewing their
own work because the specific individuals did not review their own specific work
for the Task Force. One speaker said that while he thought it should be
accepted, we really had ought to watch out for the appearance problem that comes
from having researchers reviewing their own work. Mine was the lone voice of
dissent; I approached the mike and got permission to speak as a
non-Councilmember — but only briefly, so what I could say was minimal. And
apparently irrelevant.
 
The vote was a show of hands that included
almost everyone. I thought I saw a few hands for "no" votes, but a journalist I
spoke to afterward thought those were all absentions; he counted 6.
 
One
of the speakers did make reference to the letters all Council had received, the
response to which was basically a smirk on the part of the group. At this point,
of course, we're beyond the issue of abortion itself into the issue of the
competence of APA itself, which is an additional problem in being convincing.

 
The reporter who flagged me down afterward said he was from the
National Psychologist, a publication for practitioners. He said that
perhaps I could have been more convincing if I had been given more time. Whether
that's true or not, it says something about what he was thinking. I spoke with
him for about 15-20 minutes.
 
The Report is now received, and the vote
was not anywhere near close enough to make me feel bad that I didn't do more
lobbying. The press release concerning it has already gone out. The report is
now up on the web, and the new position will presumably go up there soon as
well. I have no information about plans for journal publication.
 
Please
feel free to forward this on to interested people.
 
— Rachel M.
MacNair, Ph.D.  

I would like to thank Dr MacNair for her courage in speaking out in what was obviously a one sided room.
I also want to thank Dave Reardon http://www.afterabortion.org/for his perserverence and never failing light to this issue and Warren Throckmorton. http://wthrockmorton.com/
It is not over..the truth will prevail…