Is Abortion more cost effective than birth?

Question

I tend to think so.. $300-$600 for an abortion. vs thousands and thousands of dollars for labor and delivery, not to mention the many more thousands of dollars over a 20 year timeframe.

Many people want to harm me anyways, so it doesn't matter.

Answer 1

However, that only looks at the immediate cost of the "procedure". It neglects to take into account the subsequent cost of the guilt, alcoholism, recurrent pregnancy(s), or destruction of a marriage or relationship (over 95% of all relationships resulting in pregnancy AND abortion end within 6 months).

In addition, it fails to take into account the loss that results from any death. It fails to take into account the lost years of relationship between parent and child. Many women who have their children aborted get pregnant again shortly thereafter in an effort to replace the baby that was killed.

It also fails to take into account the large percentage of women who are rendered barren after an abortion, and the monies they spend to try to conceive again. As well, it fails to take into account the medical and physical problems of women who are injured during an abortion (perforated uterus, for example). Many have had to have a hysterectomy afterwards from the damage done during the abortion. Some women have had their wombs perforated and their colons damaged.

All of the above doesn't even take into account the damage that is done to the father of a baby that is aborted. If he is the one who payed for it or agreed to it, then he feels the guilt of not having saved his child, and he loses the relationship that he thought to save through the abortion. Add to that the sense of loss that is suffered by the grandparents of the baby and you come to one conclusion: No! Abortion is not more cost effective than birth.

Answer 2

Lets start this with your 20 year time frame

The current death rate in the US is 8.26/1000 or close to
80,000 per year Abortion causes the life of 4,000 per day or 1,400,00 per year

This is almost 1,500,000 people that are no longer paying
taxes to support our economy, in 20 years the death/abortion
would be 30,000,000 people

Our birthrate is less than 2.0 births per women and to
maintain our population we need that value to be 2.1
so over time our population would decrease.

If the population decreases the government will need to
increase taxes and cut programs and those that fall into
retirement in the next 20 years will find that there will not
be anything left, actually they are already predicting
this by 2045.

Today, all of the babies that were born shortly after the
end of WWII (me included) are very near retirement age
those that are in todays workforce are the ones that
are going to pay for my social security.

So while the cost may seem to be cheaper, you will
pay for it in the end, especially if you are 30 or under
today.

By the way, doctors and hospitals don't charge a woman
for labor, she suffers that pain alone.

It is far more cost effective to NOT have sex, that costs
0$ and doesn't kill anyone either.

Answer 3

Since we are talking cost effective, and not morality, (yours or mine?) or religion, (yours or mine?) then obviously abortion is far more cost effective. A doctors fee for normal delivery and birth is at least $4500 here, not counting the hospital and nursery. Of course a Cesarean costs more.
If the child is kept by a single mother the costs go up since 42% of single mothers remain in poverty for their lives. If the child goes to adoption, then again, taxpayers fund the difference between the cost of adoption and the money the adoptive couple pays. The difference there is between several thousand and ten thousand dollars depending on your state.
All those little darlings cost us quite a bit. Perhaps those people who wish to have unprepared women have babies should stop pretending that those women are going to stop having sex, and make adequate birth control information a priority instead of sticking to a useless abstinence only education. That's even more cost effective.
The assumption that if you make abortion illegal you will somehow be ending abortion is nonsense, it was illegal before and still done, the rich going abroad and having it done safely and the poor and scared doing it on kitchen tables with knitting needles and ending up with emergency hysterectomies for excessive bleeding or punctures.
That's going to cost too. I wonder if there is ever any chance of real life penetrating the brains of the anti choice bunch.

Answer 4

120 billion saved in educational costs alone per million abortions .
Crime rates among the poor tend to be higher so the number of rapes , murders , and robberies are reduced by a significant amount totaling just over 300 million per year .
This amounts to almost a $1.50 savings per person . or around 4 dollars per tax payer .
On the other hand once working these people would have generated income taxes in excess of $7,000.00 per year . So from a financial stand point we lose money . From a crime stand point we reduce crime .
SO you decide .

Answer 5

you forgot that less money is made with abortion. Like you said the abortionist makes 3 - 600 dollars but the baby would have made hundreds of thousands or millions if it had lived and could have employed million of people too. You cant put a price on human life.

Answer 6

Abortion is counter productive because it fosters untenable social economic problems greater than the monetary cost of raising a child. You must look beyond the narrow cost of an abortion compared to raising a child because abortion creates other costly problems. Easy access to low cost abortion allows women and especially men to escape the consequences of their own selfish decision thus it encourages the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and the likelihood of giving birth to unwanted children. The CDC claims STDs cost us about $17 BILLION a year but their estimates are limited to medical cost and don't include employer cost. The CDC recently announced antibiotics are losing their effectiveness and the monetary cost of this problem is incalculable. SIDs aren't directly responsible for this problem but it certain contributes to the "unnecessary" accelerated loss of antibiotics effectiveness. How many potential Einsteins are aborted by intelligent prosperous couples for strictly selfish reasons and what is the ultimate cost of this loss to society?

President Obama once said "I don’t want my daughters punished with a baby" but like most of his views, he is dead wrong! People should be held responsible for making bad decisions for everyone's sake.

Answer 7

You are morally corrupt, in my opinion, if you equate any number of dollars with a life. That is what a prostitute does with sex. So, how much did your parents waste on you by not having an abortion? While we are at it, why don't you kill off your parents and save the healthcare bills they will have when they get older? I mean, that's what we do with old dogs, right?

Answer 8

yes it is, from a purely economic standpoint. That of course is if you subtract all the money that government officials and special interest groups spend to try and make it illegal. But maybe its evened out by the money that doesn't go into welfare if women who cannot afford more children have abortions.

i agree with you by the way, its just interesting to think about the possible arguments that can be made.

Answer 9

Who cares. Its no longer genuine to tension human beings to violate their ethical values basically in view which you have socialized the expenditures of a difficulty. Forcing human beings to have a maximum of two little ones, or beginning a forced nutrition plan and exercising application for obese human beings may be much greater interior your funds.

Answer 10

Of course. But the matter is seldom determined on grounds of cost alone. Raising a child is a major task, and some people (for any number of reasons) are not in a position to do so.