Abortion and Crime: Are they related?
A crime expert reviews the studies and offers his opinion
By Jim Maloney

Since Roe v Wade, the impact of legalized abortion has been the focus of much debate. One study, "The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime" by John Donohue and Steven Levitt (2001), found that abortion has resulted in less crime. Another study, "Abortion and Crime: Unwanted Children and Out-of-Wedlock Births" by John Lott and John Whitley (2001), found the opposite to be true. The purpose of this article is to briefly review both of these studies and to offer a third opinion.

During the past decade, crime in America, especially violent crime, has been decreasing (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1973-2000). Donohue and Levitt have stated that this drop in crime was due to the legalization of abortion in 1973. In short, they said that abortion has resulted in less unwanted and high risk children, and it is unwanted children who generally commit crime. The authors underscore their argument by showing that the five states which legalized abortion in 1970 (three years prior to Roe v Wade) saw their crime rates begin to drop sooner than the others. Similarly, they showed that the states with the lowest abortion rates had the highest crime rates. Finally, the authors argue that most crime is committed by the children of poor and minority women. Since these women are the ones most likely to have abortions, then we would expect crime in these communities to be dropping the most and, indeed, the authors did show that crime in these communities has decreased.

Morgentaler welcomes Donohue and Levitt study

For those who have felt the need to justify their stand on abortion, this study would be a welcome support. Indeed, Dr. Henry Morgentaler was one such individual. In the National Post (May, 2001), he said the Donohue and Levitt study only substantiated his own beliefs, some of those being: 1) that availability of abortion decreases crime, 2) that children who receive love and affection are less violent, 3) that unwanted children are often brutalized.

In reference to Dr. Morgentaler, I can only say my experience suggests to me he is wrong. Concerning abortion reducing crime, I will discuss that shortly. Concerning children being less violent when they are loved, he is possibly correct. However, many children who were once wanted and loved eventually become unloved and then victimized, and many even remain loved but are still brutalized out of frustration/stress of the caregiver. Concerning unwanted children being brutalized, that is often true, but it is also true that wanted children are also often brutalized. In short, I think Dr. Morgentaler is naïve in his understanding of being wanted and being abused.

Problems with the Donohue and Levitt Study

Coincidence vs. cause and effect

Let me now return to the study of Donohue and Levitt. Abortion, of course, was legalized in the U.S. in 1973. There is also little disagreement that crime has dropped during the past decade. However, to argue that this proves that the increase in abortion caused the decrease in crime is, I think, without merit. It is common for events to coincide. In recent years we've had an increase in global warming along with a seeming increase in "terrorism," but it would be unreasonable to suggest that global warming was the cause of the recent attack on the World Trade Center.

Let us assume, however, that this increase in abortion has caused crime to drop. That would still not be a terribly interesting piece of information. It would seem self-evident that if fewer children were being born then there would be fewer people to commit crime. If research is to be significant, it should tell us something we don't already know.

At any rate, Donohue and Levitt point out that the five states that first legalized abortion were also the ones to first see a drop in crime. They feel this strengthens their argument that legal abortion caused the crime rate to drop. I believe they are mistaken. It is my contention that the reason these particular states saw the first drop in crime could very well be a result of the progressive politics of these states (legalized abortion possibly being one result of that) and a higher socio-economic status. These five states were California, New York, Alaska, Hawaii, and Washington. If crime is caused by one's impoverished environment (as I will address shortly), then it would be fairly easy to imagine that the early crime reduction in these five states was because of their more positive socio-political-economic environment rather than the specific availability of abortion.

Racist implications

Having said all of that, I might add that the most personally distressing aspect of the study by Donohue and Levitt is the racist implications it suggests. The authors state that poor, minority women are the most likely to have abortions and it is in these communities where we've seen the biggest drop in crime. In their discussion they stated, "homicide rates of black youths are roughly nine times higher than those of white youths.black and white births eliminated by legalizing abortion would have experienced the average criminal propensities of their respective races."

I must respond to this discussion of race. I recently spent six years as a mental health worker in one of America's largest juvenile detention facilities. Almost all of my clients were poor, minority children. Many of the girls had children and many were pregnant. Donohue and Levitt stated that poor, minority girls/women have abortions more than women from other groups. This may be true, but it has not been my experience. My clients almost never opted for an abortion. The drop in crime in their minority communities was therefore probably not due to abortion.

My other concern with Donohue and Levitt's discussion of race was their assertion that crime among minorities is so high. Some statistics may show this to be the case, but these statistics must be viewed with a critical eye. Our judicial system is racist, and to think otherwise is naïve (Craig Haney and Philip Zimbardo, The Past and Future of U.S. Prison Policy , 1998). Time and again, not only with minor offenders but also with adult offenders, I've witnessed my African American clients being treated more harshly than my white clients even when the circumstances of the crime, the attorneys, and the judges were all the same. It is also true that poor, minority offenders cannot often afford the kind of legal representation that more affluent offenders can afford. They are far less likely, for instance, to have a murder charge dropped to involuntary manslaughter or even dismissed altogether. The resulting crime statistics in the African American community are probably, therefore, more a measure of racism than of true criminal activity.

I have attempted to illustrate that the supposed connection between legalized abortion and the drop in crime is fraught with problems. While abortion was legalized in 1973 and crime rates began to drop in 1990, there is probably little reason to believe one caused the other.

Problems with the Lott and Whitley study

As mentioned earlier, John Lott and John Whitley sought to disprove Donohue and Levitt. Lott and Whitley cited research that showed that abortion resulted in more out-of wedlock births and they believe this has resulted in more violent crime. Their argument, I believe, could be summarized as follows: the availability of abortion leads to a more permissive society, which leads to more out-of-wedlock births and it is these people who have a tendency to become violent criminals.

There are several problems with this line of reasoning. The availability of abortion may or may not lead to a more permissive society, but even if it does, I would still question the supposed connection between being permissive and having out-of-wedlock children. Many women give birth outside of marriage but surely we would be amiss to say these women are, therefore, necessarily permissive. For instance, I have had African American clients who have had children out-of-wedlock because their prospective husbands had been sent to prison, partly as a result of a racist judicial system. Surely that should not imply that these women were permissive. Having said that, I would nevertheless have to agree that some of my "criminal" clients have been born to "permissive" parents. On the other hand some of my clients have been born to very "controlling" parents. While my evidence is largely anecdotal, I would have to say those with controlling parents are actually more likely to become violent than those with "permissive" parents.

Abortion and crime unrelated

What then are we to do with the information contained in these two conflicting studies? I don't believe Donohue and Levitt proved that abortion has been the cause of the recent decrease in crime. I also don't believe that Lott and Whitley have proved that abortion has caused any increase in crime. I am actually inclined to believe that abortion itself is not even related to the rate of crime. One might still ask, of course, why crime has declined in recent years and, more generally, what the causes of crime might be.

I don't believe any of us know for sure why crime has been dropping nor do we know for sure what the causes of crime might be, but I will offer some opinions. In all my years working with offenders, the most common theme among these individuals has been their experience of abuse as a child, lack of opportunities including poor education, negative family environment, racism, and so forth. I have rarely heard a client say, "I got into crime because I was unwanted" (as Donohue and Levitt would suggest). Nor have I seen evidence that they began causing trouble because they were raised in single-parent households (as Lott and Whitley might argue).

The vast majority of my "criminal" clients have had parents who very much wanted them. The vast majority were also raised by either both parents or in some type of "extended" family, although these families have almost always faced severe environmental challenges to their being effective caregivers. For instance, almost every offender I've worked with had dropped out of school prior to getting in trouble with the law. They dropped out of school because the teachers were not effective, the schools were not safe, they were too anxious or depressed to concentrate, they were too ashamed to be there, et cetera. However, I have never heard them say they dropped out of school because they did not want to learn.

Other people have found similar evidence in their discussion of crime causation. Haney and Zimbardo found environment to be extremely significant in the development of criminal behavior. James Gilligan (as quoted in Behind the Razor Wire, 1999) asserted that the most effective intervention to decrease crime is education.

One could go on about crime causation. The causes are many. Suffice it to say, however, I do not believe there is much evidence to suggest crime is caused by abortion. Similarly, I believe there is equally little evidence to suggest the drop in crime is caused by abortion.

The need for honest debate

In conclusion, I feel the need to acknowledge the fact that there are serious issues facing this world of ours-issues that we must try to understand if we are to resolve them. Abortion and crime do indeed impact our lives. It behooves all of us to grapple with the complexities surrounding them, including their causes and consequences. If these debates are to be meaningful, they should be honest. How we design and conduct research and what we do with the results should be free from bias. If we are exploring such things as abortion or crime there should be no hidden agenda; we should be "open" to where the research leads us. The esteemed eighteenth century philosopher, Immanuel Kant, cautioned:

Moral principles must be grasped entirely a priori. To mix them up with empirical considerations of self-interest and the like is not merely a confusion of thought, but an obstacle in the way of moral progress. ( Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals , p. 25)

Donohue and Levitt tried to demonstrate that abortion decreases crime while Lott and Whitley attempted to show an inverse relationship. Both, I believe, failed because there probably is no connection. Nevertheless, abortion and crime, as well as other social concerns, certainly merit further study, and it would be wise to continue to pursue an understanding of them within an honest debate.?

Jim Maloney, who has worked in corrections for the past 30 years, is a California Licensed Clinical Social worker. He currently supervises a Los Angeles County forensic mental health clinic and is a psychotherapist with the City Attorney's Office.