The author Stephen J. Dubner collaborated with the economist Steven D. Levitt to produce the intensely fascinating book, Freakonomics, with the appropriate subtitle “A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything.” There was one section that was particularly thought-provoking…
Levitt and Dubner point out the occurrence of crime dropping significantly during the 1990s, and question how that particular occurrence may have been tied to the legalization of abortion. Studies of crime-prevention strategies were carried out, such as increasing the number of police officers on duty, as well as issuing stricter rules regarding gun control; however, none of these strategies or policies were statistically shown to attribute to the significant drop in crime. Ironically, researchers predicted that the 1990’s would be seeped in crime, but a strange factor was found to be somehow correlated to the exact opposite of the prediction that was made. Researchers theorized the controversial concept of abortion leading to lower crime rates.
Through several studies researchers found that in the past women who wished for an abortion, but were denied, would often fail to provide their child the necessary objects and environment for the child to grow into a healthy individual. It was then theorized that those children, raised in a crime-ridden and unstable environment, would more than likely become criminals with the same standard of living their parent possessed. Furthermore, the authors’ also include the idea that the correlation between abortion and lower crime rates are still in need of assessment, especially with regards to the moral implications that this theory may carry. However, the authors’ also conclude that the ultimate link between the two factors consists of the woman’s decision (to undergo the abortion or not) being dependant on her knowledge of whether or not she would be capable of taking care of a child; generally, it was found that a woman usually knows if she will be capable, in the emotional and especially the socioeconomic sense, of raising the child or being able to provide the child with a good home.
Any thoughts?
Say we decided to electrocute everyone convicted of a felony in the United States. Would that reduce crime rates, probably.
Or, we could statistically look at what types of people commit crimes, and then liquadate them, before they do anything.
Just because abortion may reduce crime rates does not make it a morally acceptable action for society to endorse.
Plus, it destroys population growth, which destroys the economy, which destroys the nation.
Yes, you have many good points. I don't think the authors of the book were in any way implying that abortion could be used as an acceptable method of lowering crime rates, but rather pointed out that a link existed between the two. Some people may find it acceptable, but I think the majority of individuals find the theory a bit difficult to swallow because of the moral implications involved.