By Susan Brinkmann, OCDS Staff Writer The credibility of a new report by the American Psychological Association that found no mental health effects of abortion on women is being questioned because the lead author and abortion supporter, Dr. Brenda Major, has refused to allow her data to be analyzed by other researchers. The report, issued yesterday at the organization’s annual conference in Boston, is the result of two years of study in which researchers analyzed almost two decades of peer-reviewed research. They claimed to have found "no credible evidence that a single elective abortion of an unwanted pregnancy in and of itself causes mental health problems for adult women."   “The best scientific evidence published indicates that among adult women who have an unplanned pregnancy, the relative risk of mental health problems is no greater if they have a single elective, first-trimester abortion or deliver that pregnancy,” said Dr. Major, chairwoman of the panel, in a prepared statement. However, experts in the field say they have been trying for years to see Dr. Major’s data in order to reanalyze it but she has refused to share it, which violates APA’s own data sharing rules. David Reardon, Ph.D., founder of The Elliott Institute, has published over a dozen peer-reviewed studies on abortion and mental health, saw some of Dr. Major’s unpublished findings and says she has not honored requests for this data since early in 2000. He also said she denied a request by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for this data even though it was collected under a federal grant, making it federal property. “I know of a number of experts in the field who have requested the data, even within the last six months. But she simply doesn't respond to their calls, emails, or letters,” said Dr. Reardon. "This is very troubling on two counts. First, the APA's own ethics rule, 8.14, requires research psychologists to share their data for verification of findings. Secondly, she is the chair of the APA Abortion Task Force which is, at least in theory, supposed to bring full and clear light to this issue. But how can we trust the objectivity of a report prepared by a task force composed exclusively of pro-choice psychologists, especially when the chair and lead author has a history of withholding data and findings which may undermine her ideological preferences?" According to Reardon the additional details from Major's study released in 2000 actually revealed that a significant number of women interviewed by Major did attribute negative reactions to their abortions, but those findings have never been published. "There is no doubt that she has selectively reported her findings," said Reardon. "We have seen in the unpublished tables details about specific negative reactions which were obscured in her published report by combining them with three to eight other reactions to create watered down, composite scores. Another problem is the obscure wording of the report’s conclusion, that there is “no credible evidence that a single elective abortion of an unwanted pregnancy in and of itself causes mental health problems for adult women…" According to Reardon, this nuanced statement is intended to convey a message that abortion has no mental health risks but those familiar with the literature will see that it actually admits that there is compelling evidence that there are negative effects for: • women who have multiple abortions, which accounts for about half of all abortions); • women who abort a wanted pregnancy because of coercion or pressure to abort from third parties and may account for about 20-60% of all abortions; • minors who have abortions; and • women with preexisting mental health problems in which case abortion may not "in and of itself" be the sole cause of mental health problems but may instead trigger or aggravate preexisting problems. " . . . The report itself identifies a whole host of studies providing such evidence, but it mutes a clear presentation of the findings of these studies by focusing on the limitations of each study's methodology, which all studies have, in order to justify ignoring their clear implications." While Dr. Reardon agrees that the body of the report includes admissions that abortion does negatively impact some women, he is deeply concerned that the summary introduction and conclusion and press releases all fail to emphasize five key points which are clear in the literature and even explicitly or implicitly stated within the 91-page Task Force report.   "By failing to call on therapists to be alert and sensitive to the negative emotional experiences women attribute to their abortions, the Task Force has allowed ideology to trump sensitivity," Dr. Reardon said. "Instead, they are ignoring the reality of how and why abortions take place and are instead focused on drawing conclusions regarding the safety of abortion for an emotionally stable, pro-choice, adult woman who is freely choosing a wanted abortion without any moral qualms. But that doesn't reflect the reality of most abortion situations.” "The fact is that coerced abortions are more common than wanted abortions. Studies show that over 60% of American women are having abortions, often against their moral beliefs, because they feel pressured into it by third parties. These women need therapist and family members to be open to and responsive to their pain, not dismissive of it as an anomaly. Sadly, this is an ideological report that simply ignores the concerns and needs of those women for whom abortion has been a heartache rather than a triumph."   © All Rights Reserved, Living His Life Abundantly/Women of Grace. http://www.womenofgrace.com