My home state of Texas has long been scrutinized for its insanely high maternal mortality rates. Concerned partisans have claimed that Texas legislators have cut family planning and other healthcare provisions and implemented tougher abortion restrictions, which has resulted in an increase in maternal deaths and generally inadequate healthcare for new mothers.
But new research has found that the oft-cited maternal mortality statistics rest on inaccurate numbers and bad reporting.
Per a study published Monday in Obstetrics & Gynecology, researchers found that the previously-reported statistics for maternal mortality in Texas were far from the truth. They confirmed 56 maternal deaths –– significantly fewer than the original number that made national headlines, 147.
Apparently, there were several issues with reporting and various actors using bad information to make their claims. In their words, “approximately half of obstetric-coded deaths showed no evidence of pregnancy within 42 days, and a large majority of these incorrectly indicated pregnancy at the time of death.”
“Maternal death, a major marker of the health of a nation or state, is defined as ‘the death of a woman while pregnant or within 42 days of the end of pregnancy…from any cause related to or aggravated by pregnancy…” according to the study. Researchers examined the statistics from 2012, the year Texas had the highest recorded maternal mortality in recent history, and reviewed records to determine whether the state’s mortality count was accurate –– it wasn’t.
But this can’t wipe the false headlines away. In 2016, The Guardian ran the sensational headline “Texas has highest maternal mortality rate in developed world, study finds,” claiming “As the Republican-led state legislature has slashed funding to reproductive healthcare clinics, the maternal mortality rate doubled over just a two-year period.”
One journalist for Slate claimed, “This alarming development [referring to the rise in maternal mortality rate] coincided with the state’s decision to slash its family planning budget by two-thirds in 2011—an attempt to shut down abortion providers that ultimately forced 82 clinics, many of which never performed the controversial procedure, to close.”
Former Texas State Senator Wendy Davis also pegs responsibility for maternal mortality rates, teen pregnancy rates, and growing numbers of self-induced abortions on the Texas legislature’s budget cuts and attack on abortion providers. A Refinery 29 article claims largely the same.
So why does this matter for non-Texans? Because bad statistics, and bad reporting of those numbers, have created plenty of fodder for pro-choicers to belittle the pro-life side, winnowing our position down to “people who support legislation that literally kills women.” After all, the pro-choice side regularly uses absurd, misleading statistics. Ever heard the “abortion only counts for three percent of Planned Parenthood’s services” schtick? According to Washington Post’s calculations, somewhere between 15 and 37 percent of the organization’s total (non-government) revenue comes from abortions, of which there are about 320,000 performed annually. Each individual service is counted equally, in Planned Parenthood’s calculations, so providing a pregnancy test, an STD test, birth control, or an abortion all count as the same (despite the fact that women regularly seek multiple services per visit).
Our use of bad numbers (on both sides) has contributed to our poor ability to understand the scope of the problem –– and regardless of your side in the abortion debate, we all care about creating positive, healthy outcomes for women in need.
I have no doubt that some pro-life politicians have pursued policy that harms women and their ability to seek medical care, get access to birth control, and fully understand how to take care of a child. Abstinence-only education has not been proven to reduce teen pregnancies, and it’s always seemed like an ineffective approach from a libertarian, harm reduction perspective –– some people will do things other people find morally repulsive, but pretending bad things will go away only makes it so they’re done underground, with less information and less of an opportunity to seek help.
As I’ve written for the Houston Chronicle, policies that reduce access to information on potential birth defects hinder parents’ abilities to prepare for challenging medical conditions. And yes, some pro-life policies, such as Texas’ House Bill 2, which placed restrictions on tons of abortion clinics throughout the state (forcing many to shut down) undoubtedly make it so some women seek illegal, self-induced abortions.
But as pragmatic (and skeptical of GOP politicians) as I am, I’m still pro-life, and it pains me to see the pro-choice side using false statistics to argue for greater pro-choice measures. At the end of the day, it’s insane that pro-lifers must violate our consciences and contribute tax dollars toward procedures we find morally reprehensible because the state demands it. We should demand accurate statistics be used in these debates, and should pay attention to potential coding errors like this one.
Understanding the scope of the problem is crucial to creating better solutions for women and children all over.
Liz Wolfe (@lizzywol) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. She is a freelance writer who lives in Austin, Texas.
