A shocking paper on the prevalence of pregnancy due to rape that was touted by opponents of abortion bans has been described as flawed by anti-abortion advocates.
A recent letter published in JAMA Internal Medicine, one of the most prestigious medical journals in the United States, estimated that a total of nearly 65,000 pregnancies occurred due to rape in the 14 states with total or near-total abortion bans.
High-profile abortion rights proponents cited the results as a reason to oppose abortion restrictions. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), for example, shared a lay press article about the JAMA letter on X, saying that is evidence that abortion bans compound trauma for victims of sexual assault.
“Think about it: [approximately] 65,000 women were raped AND found out their rapist got them pregnant AND were denied access to abortions,” wrote Warren. “How many traumas do women have to face before we say, once and for all, NO MORE?”
But critics faulted the premise of the paper, as well as its methodology.
Robin Atkins, a survivor of rape, mental health counselor, and board member of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, told the Washington Examiner that she was “appalled” that JAMA published “a letter exploiting the trauma of rape to push an abortion narrative.”
The authors of the study utilized data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to approximate the total number of vaginal rapes that occurred in the United States since the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case was decided in June 2022. Then, they took the proportion of female rape victims in each of the states with abortion bans as reported in the FBI’s Unified Crime Report to estimate the number of reported and unreported rapes in each state.
Based on these calculations, the authors found that nearly 520,000 vaginal rapes occurred in all 14 states with near-total abortion bans. According to the letter, nearly 475,000 vaginal rapes occurred in the nine states that do not allow for rape or incest exceptions to the abortion bans.
“The authors appeared to have no qualms about using completely theoretical sexual assaults to push a narrative that does not take into account any of the data we actually have regarding treatment of sexual trauma or rape survivors who become pregnant,” Atkins said.
Although there is little empirical data on sexual assault survivors and pregnancy, anti-abortion advocates suggest that between 50-80% of survivors who become pregnant do not choose to obtain an abortion.
A 1996 study estimated the national rape-related pregnancy rate to be 5% annually. Approximately 33% of rape victims did not know they were pregnant until they had already entered the second trimester, with the majority receiving no medical attention immediately after the assault. In this study, only 50% of survivors underwent an abortion, while nearly 33% opted to keep their child, and nearly 6% chose adoption.
Michael New, a business professor at the Catholic University of America, told the Washington Examiner that the study was a “very poorly researched, poorly done piece of just advocacy work.”
The primary author of the study, Samuel Dickman, is the medical director at Planned Parenthood of Montana and disclosed in the JAMA letter that he is currently “a plaintiff in several lawsuits challenging abortion restrictions in Montana,” which attempted to institute a 15-week abortion ban.
The second author, Kari White, is the executive and scientific director of Resound Research for Reproductive Health, who reported in the conflicts of interest disclosure that she has received grant money from several pro-abortion-rights groups during the conduct of the study.
Neither White nor Dickman responded to the Washington Examiner’s request for comment.
New also said that because the piece was published as a letter rather than an article, the content likely did not have a meaningful peer-review process.
“People tend to respect academic journals, and many academic journals do a good job,” New said. “But sadly, there are many [in] public health that are mouthpieces for certain ideological causes, especially abortion.”
The editors of JAMA Internal Medicine also used the letter as an opportunity to advance the policy objective of the American Medical Association, which advocates abortion without restrictions.
In a note along with the publication, the editors of the journal said that “the best solution to this problem is a national law protecting the right of all people to choose to terminate pregnancy.” The note also supported access to abortion drug mifepristone, for which government approval is being reviewed in the Supreme Court this year.
JAMA did not respond to the Washington Examiner’s request for comment.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Atkins said that the JAMA letter and the narrative it perpetuates “ignores the actual available data on whether rape survivors who become pregnant even want an abortion.”
“Women who experience sexual assault deserve the highest quality of care from both the medical and mental health community,” Atkins said. “Exploiting their experiences to support a political agenda does nothing to help them.”
