The discussion surrounding abortion is once again at the forefront of the cultural battles in the United States. A leaked majority opinion from the US Supreme Court signals a potential reversal of the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, which upheld a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy with minimal government intervention. This development has elicited excitement among anti-abortion activists and concern among those advocating for choice. Observers unfamiliar with the past five decades of abortion politics might assume the opposing sides are focused on vastly different issues. On one hand, there’s a push for a woman's reproductive and bodily autonomy, while on the other, there is a moral repudiation of what is perceived as a form of homicide.

Many who identify as "pro-life" equate the termination of a pregnancy with the act of killing a newborn. Their "tactics", including endless debates over when a fetus achieves viability, aim to obscure the differences between abortion and infanticide. This conflation has made many on the pro-choice side hesitant to engage in discussions linking abortion to infanticide.

I contend that exploring this connection—supported by evidence from extensive historical and evolutionary research—leads to the conclusion that abortion, in some cases, represents a more humane option compared to infanticide, thereby bolstering the argument for safe, legal, and accessible abortion for women in need.

Regarding infanticide, researchers Susan Hatters Friedman and Phillip J. Reznick note that “the day during which a person is at greatest risk of homicide is the first day of life.” Neonaticide, or the killing of newborns shortly after birth, may seem like an uncommon act committed by mentally unstable individuals, but the reality is far more unsettling. History shows that across all societies, both contemporary and historical, infants have been killed or left to perish. This is not merely a rare occurrence; estimates suggest that historically, as many as 10 to 15 percent of newborns have been killed.

Before the 1970s, scholars typically interpreted high historical rates of infanticide as functions serving societal needs. Notions like Carthaginian child sacrifice or Plato's eugenic recommendation for substandard Athenian parents to "expose" their newborns to the elements were thought to foster social cohesion. However, the prevalence of neonaticide and infant abandonment predates these philosophical and religious frameworks, as well as the emergence of the very societies that would later construct these ideologies. A more thorough examination of infanticide requires us to first understand the motivations of the individuals who commit these acts.

Key insights emerge from recognizing that mothers are primarily responsible for nearly all instances of neonaticide—defined as the killing of infants within the first 72 hours of life. This phenomenon is not unique to humans; mothering behaviors in various mammalian species also include instances of abandoning or killing certain newborns.

One might expect natural selection to eliminate the behavior of infanticide, yet certain ecological contexts illustrate why it can persist. For instance, in the vast communal burrow systems of black-tailed prairie dogs in North America, mothers invest considerable resources in their pups, providing nutritious milk and defending them from threats. Nevertheless, the challenges of maternal survival, particularly competition from other females during gestation, can diminish the likelihood that a mother will rear her offspring to independence. Faced with such circumstances, some mothers may opt to abandon their pups, allowing them to be preyed upon, thereby cutting their losses at birth. This rationalization can be found across species, especially where survival pressures become particularly acute.

The rationale behind maternal infanticide or abandonment is often grounded in an instinctual assessment of resource availability and reproductive strategy. Faced with the dire realities of their environment, mothers may opt to abandon or eliminate offspring that they perceive as unlikely to survive, thus reallocating their time and energy to future reproductive opportunities. This behavior is neither conscious nor deliberate but stems from an evolutionarily adaptive response to ecological pressures.

Sarah Blaffer Hrdy highlights the complexity of motherhood in her influential work, which challenges romanticized notions of self-sacrificing mothers. Rather, she portrays these mothers as strategic decision-makers weighing the costs and benefits of raising their young against broader ecological and social factors. This perspective supports the understanding of motherhood as a multifaceted role that encompasses nurturing behaviors but is also influenced by survival strategies, social structures, and reproductive success.

In hunter-gatherer societies, the harsh realities of survival sharpen these maternal instincts. Infanticide often arises in response to factors such as maternal health issues, inadequate support systems, or a lack of resources. When a mother faces challenges that could jeopardize her own survival or that of her existing offspring, she might decide to eliminate the least viable or most resource-demanding newborns. In many traditional cultures, the practice of culling one or both twins further illustrates this survival-driven approach to motherhood, as it ensures that the remaining child has a better chance of thriving.

This understanding shifts the focus from a solely emotional assessment of motherhood to an evolutionary lens that reveals the complexities underlying maternal decisions. Infanticide may provide an adaptive advantage, enhancing maternal fitness by allowing mothers to allocate their resources to offspring that have a greater chance of survival, ultimately benefiting their lineage. In this way, the decisions of mothers, whether harsh or nurturing, connect deeply to the natural selection processes that have shaped human behavior over time.

The patterns of infanticide in 1970s and 1980s Canada reveal a stark demographic divide among mothers who commit these acts. Young mothers, representing only 14% of new mothers, accounted for a staggering 45% of infant deaths. Unmarried mothers, although just 13% of all new mothers, constituted 60% of infanticide cases. This trend resonates with global data, which suggest that mothers engaging in neonaticide are often young, unmarried, and typically free from psychiatric disorders. Key elements distinguishing these mothers include a lack of experience, limited means, and insufficient support, making the prospect of motherhood unwelcome.

From an evolutionary perspective, this relationship between maternal age and infanticide is rationalized by the reproductive strategies employed by mothers. Young mothers, with their reproductive potential ahead of them, may find it advantageous to postpone motherhood until they are more equipped to provide care. Conversely, older mothers possess fewer reproductive opportunities; hence, losing a child represents a considerable loss to their lifetime reproductive success.

Infanticide is characterized as a measure of last resort, often prompted by dire circumstances. Historical accounts illustrate that throughout human history, mothers have sought alternatives to infanticide whenever possible, such as abandoning infants in hopes that others might take them in. For instance, in ancient Rome, it is estimated that 20 to 40% of children born in the first three centuries of the Common Era were abandoned or "exposed." Infants left in public spaces might be claimed by families willing to adopt them or, in some cases, become enslaved. Unfortunately, many of these abandoned infants did not survive, highlighting the tragic cycle that often accompanied desperate maternal choices under challenging conditions.

Looking back over two millennia, the practice of infant exposure in ancient Rome appears as a grim reflection of societal norms.

Yet, much like today, abandoning an infant stirred moral conflicts, societal condemnation, and deep sorrow among parents. Those babies chosen for exposure were often malnourished or came from families facing economic hardship, unable to support another child.

While the advent of Christianity gradually shifted public sentiment and implemented stricter laws against abandonment, infants continued to be left destitute, particularly during times of economic strain. The Middle Ages witnessed alarming rates of infant abandonment, prompting European churches to establish designated locations where mothers could leave their newborns safely.

Historical records from parishes, municipalities, and healthcare institutions illustrate the harrowing reality of infant abandonment across Europe. In Florence, for instance, between 1500 and the mid-19th century, 10 to 40 percent of baptized infants were noted as foundlings. Unfortunately, the fate of these infants was often grim, with many institutions reporting survival rates of less than one percent in their first year. Although abandoning a child may not carry the same psychological burden as infanticide, the outcomes were tragically similar.

Abandonment typically stemmed from the hardships faced by the mother, often those who were unmarried, widowed, extremely impoverished, or working as domestic servants. These mothers lacked the financial support and stability that a partner or family could provide, rendering the challenges of infant care incompatible with their need to secure a livelihood or find lasting companionship. The recurring theme illustrates how both infanticide and abandonment are deeply rooted in maternal circumstances, reflecting the relentless struggle for survival and the stark realities of social and economic deprivation.

Mothers' reasons for abandoning their children are closely linked to factors that drive infanticide in traditional societies. In many European societies and beyond, while infanticide has waned, child abandonment persists, particularly during economic or social downturns. Thankfully, advancements in care significantly boost survival rates for abandoned infants compared to historical figures.

The narrative often simplifies the complex dynamics of motherhood into “good” mothers who exhaust themselves providing for their children versus the “bad” mothers who neglect or abandon them. Yet, research by Sarah Hrdy illustrates a more nuanced reality, revealing a spectrum of maternal investment behaviors.

This approach highlights how infanticide and abandonment are deeply tied into the concept of maternal commitment, which inherently involves costs. For example, mothers without a reliable partner or support system tend to be less likely to breastfeed. In impoverished areas with unsanitary conditions, the use of formula mixed with contaminated water can lead to severe health issues, including diarrheal diseases that can be fatal. Conversely, mothers who have partners able to provide for them or familial support are more inclined to breastfeed, improving the odds of infant survival.

Interestingly, some women who previously bottle-fed and lost children due to illness may later choose to breastfeed when their circumstances improve, leading to stronger attachments to their subsequent infants. This adaptable nature of maternal investment underscores the profound impact of environmental and social conditions on the choices mothers make regarding their children.

Evolution has shaped human mothers to act as strategic investors, carefully evaluating their child's survival prospects alongside their own ability to provide long-term care. In affluent societies today, this investment story is optimistic, as more infants are born to mothers who can offer necessary resources than ever before. This increase trends back to improved methods of family planning, such as safe and legal abortion.

Historically, abortion isn't a recent development. Various botanical abortifacients existed in ancient societies, and women in traditional cultures employed methods to terminate pregnancies. However, these methods often proved unsafe, making neonaticide—a practice of killing newborns—appear relatively safer for desperate mothers. As Sarah Hrdy notes, most traditional infanticides occur shortly after birth and resemble late-stage abortions, often influenced by the risks associated with maternal safety.

In contrast, the advancement of Western medicine has rendered early-stage abortion safer than childbirth for mothers, thus minimizing the inclination towards infanticide. Ultimately, the availability of safe abortion services today represents a modern solution to historical issues of neonaticide and infant abandonment. The factors that influence the rates of abortion now mirror those that led past mothers to take desperate actions with their newborns, highlighting the persistent interplay between societal conditions and maternal choices throughout human history.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) highlights that unintended pregnancies account for an overwhelming number of abortions, particularly among younger demographics. Teenagers, especially, demonstrate the highest abortion ratios compared to live births, indicating the substantial gap between desired family planning and actual circumstances.

In 2019, the stark statistics showed that those under 15 had an abortion ratio of 873 per 1,000 live births, while the 15-19 age bracket had a ratio of 348 per 1,000. Conversely, this trend declines with age, with only 132 abortions per 1,000 live births in the 30-34 age group. This progression suggests that younger women are more vulnerable and less prepared for the responsibilities of motherhood, highlighting a pressing societal need for support systems and informed reproductive choices.

Typically, young girls, especially those around 13 years old, are ill-equipped for motherhood, both psychologically and physically. In hunter-gatherer societies, pregnancy at such a young age is rare due to the nutritional and physiological demands of fertility. Modern age-of-consent laws reflect a growing societal acknowledgment of this reality, balancing parental and legal considerations against the well-being of young women.

Children born to very young mothers often face dire prospects, lacking the stability and resources more mature mothers can typically provide. The research indicates that single, unmarried women are at a higher risk of both terminating a pregnancy and experiencing poorer outcomes for their children, underlining the vital role of social support and relationship stability in parenting outcomes.

Thus, it becomes imperative to confront the uncomfortable truth surrounding unintended pregnancies—many women in all societies, past and present, face unplanned circumstances. In the U.S., nearly half of all pregnancies are classified as unintended, underscoring the critical importance of effective family planning, access to reproductive health services, and comprehensive education to address these issues and support those affected.

Lifting the ban on abortion led to a drastic change, as families finally had the choice to control their reproductive health, resulting in a significant decrease in child abandonment rates.

Globally, the implications of restricting access to safe and legal abortion services are profound. In many developing regions, women face dire consequences when denied the ability to make autonomous reproductive choices, perpetuating cycles of poverty and exacerbating healthcare disparities. The intersection of unplanned pregnancies often correlates with socio-economic challenges, limited access to education, and inadequate support structures.

Research consistently shows that access to abortion correlates with improved outcomes not only for the women involved but also for their existing children. Studies indicate that when women can choose when and if to have children, their overall health, economic status, and the well-being of their children improve significantly. Conversely, unwanted pregnancies can lead to maternal neglect, where children suffer from physical and emotional scarcities.

Additionally, safe and legal abortion services align closely with public health initiatives aimed at reducing maternal and neonatal mortality. Historical data, particularly from the United States post-Roe vs. Wade, illustrates a marked decrease in neonatal deaths, attributed to the legalization of abortion and the accompanying healthcare advancements.

The narrative is starkly different in countries where reproductive rights are heavily restricted. The example of Romania under Ceaușescu highlights the potential for systemic societal failure when reproductive health options are limited. The abandonment of children and overcrowded institutions showcased the detrimental impacts of enforced reproductive policies and the lack of family planning resources.

Ultimately, the debate surrounding abortion is multifaceted, rooted in health, ethics, and socio-economic stability. It underscores the necessity for accessible reproductive healthcare and the fundamental importance of women’s autonomy in deciding their paths, ultimately fostering healthier societies.

20,000 women, the Contraceptive CHOICE Project demonstrated the effectiveness of comprehensive contraception access in preventing unintended pregnancies.

The evidence is clear: when women have access to safe, legal abortions, along with comprehensive sex education and reliable contraceptive options, the rates of unintended pregnancies and related tragedies decline sharply. Anti-abortion advocates often neglect this vital link, focusing solely on the moral implications of abortion without considering the broader societal context.

When considering historical cases, such as Romania under Ceaușescu, the negative consequences of banning abortion—such as a rise in neonaticide and infant neglect—become evident. The lifting of the abortion ban led to a significant decrease in infant abandonment, reaffirming the critical importance of reproductive rights.

In regions lacking safe legal abortion and comprehensive contraceptive access, women frequently resort to unsafe methods, leading to alarming rates of preventable maternal deaths and health complications. The World Health Organization estimates around 68,000 deaths annually from unsafe abortions, underscoring the urgent need for policy change focused on women’s health and autonomy.

To effectively reduce abortion rates and address the root issues surrounding unwanted pregnancies, society must invest in education and healthcare that prioritize women's rights. Empowerment through informed choices is essential to fostering environments where families can thrive and where the cycle of neglect and abandonment can be broken.

Contraceptive access, informed education, and supportive healthcare systems together create a cohesive strategy that respects women's autonomy while addressing the societal challenges linked to unintended pregnancies. Ultimately, the focus should be on preventive measures and comprehensive support, moving beyond polarized debates to champion solutions that enhance the well-being of all individuals involved.

The impact of comprehensive reproductive health initiatives like the CHOICE project is profound, evidenced by a significant 20 percent decline in abortions in St. Louis after reaching around 10,000 at-risk women. In comparison, Kansas City, with similar demographics, experienced stable abortion rates, highlighting the success of targeted interventions.

Over a three-year period, CHOICE is credited with preventing 6,794 abortions. The effectiveness of evidence-based counseling that emphasizes reliable contraceptive methods, alongside the provision of free reversible contraception, stands out as the most effective strategy for reducing abortion rates. This data should be celebrated by anti-abortion advocates, yet the response is often silence or avoidance.

When journalist Emily Bazelon confronted Charmaine Yoest, the then-president of Americans United for Life, regarding CHOICE, Yoest chose to dismiss the relevance of this impactful study. Her reluctance to embrace a proven method to reduce unplanned pregnancies reflects a resistance to collaborate with family planning advocates, prioritizing ideological framing over tangible solutions.

Such responses raise critical questions about the motivations of the American pro-life movement. If the aim is truly to prevent abortions, why is there not a stronger push to support family planning and contraceptive services? The sustained effort to undermine organizations like Planned Parenthood suggests that the focus may extend beyond abortion alone, encompassing a broader discomfort with the sexual behaviors that lead to unwanted pregnancies.

The core issue appears to be the societal struggle to reconcile reproductive rights with a narrative surrounding sexual autonomy and responsibility. By fostering a discourse that emphasizes education and access to contraception, it is possible to address the root causes of unintended pregnancies while promoting women's health and agency. Ultimately, this approach could pave the way for collaborative efforts that prioritize both the reduction of abortions and the empowerment of women.

The intertwining of abortion and sexuality within cultural conflicts creates a complex and challenging dynamic. The debate surrounding abortion extends beyond the act itself, encompassing broader societal attitudes towards sex, autonomy, and reproductive rights. This intricacy complicates discussions and solutions, as differing views on sexuality heavily influence positions on abortion.

The cultural wars frame these issues not only in terms of legal rights but also in the moral and ethical realms. People often bring their personal beliefs about sex into the conversation, making it difficult to find common ground. As a result, the discourse tends to shift away from evidence-based approaches to reproductive health. Addressing unwanted pregnancies effectively requires acknowledging and challenging ingrained social attitudes towards sexuality.

The challenge lies in navigating this tangled web of beliefs, values, and policies. A constructive dialogue that respects differing viewpoints while prioritizing women's health and reproductive rights is crucial. Ultimately, breaking down these complex cultural narratives may lead to more compassionate and effective solutions regarding abortion and the larger context of sexual health.