Nancy Russo

Statements by Russo

• Nancy Russo was quoted in January 2004 by a science reporter from the Toledo Blade newspaper saying "As far as I'm concerned, whether or not an abortion creates psychological difficulties is not relevant...it means you give proper informed consent and you deal with it". 

• "To pro-choice advocates, mental health effects are not relevant to the legal context of arguments to restrict access to abortion." Russo told Warren Throckmorton, a columnist for the Washington Times. Regarding the latter quote, it is reported that she actually said "it doesn't matter what the evidence says" but Throckmorton agreed to let her rephrase her comments after providing an advance copy of the article for her review.
  

After decades of research, evaluating abortion's effect still difficult. Jenni Laidman, Toledo Blade, January 22, 2004.

"Abortion and mental health" January 21, 2005.

[http://www.afterabortion.info/news/APA.htm "Evidence Doesn't Matter" -- APA Spokesperson Says of Abortion Complications" Elliot Insitute Feb. 15, 2005

• Chair of the APA's Division 35, Task Force on Reproductive Issues, Russo made the following respponse to APA member Robert Gallagher who questioned the wisdom of the APA taking "a very clearly political stance by explicitly associating itself with the Pro-Choice Forum."

ROBERT GALLAGHER'S STATEMENT has three problems: disregard of APA's history on abortion issues, naïveté about the role of values in science, and misconstrual of the pro-choice position for research on postabortion emotional responses.

In 1969, APA's Council of Representatives resolved that abortion be considered a "civil right of the pregnant woman." More recently, pro-life misrepresentation of research findings led the council to resolve that APA disseminate scientific information on reproductive issues to policy-makers and the public. Our work is a direct response to that mandate.

Gallagher naïvely assumes findings with implications for women's lives can be "apolitical." Science always reflects the values of scientists--the difference here is that we state our values up front and do not pretend scientific methods make findings value-free.

More importantly, he ignores the fact that our Web site is a response to a pro-life campaign that interprets psychological data in inappropriate and destructive ways. Given that "silence is consent," psychologists have an ethical obligation to counter such misinformation.

Finally, the Phillip Morris analogy is inapt. We have no interest, economic or otherwise, in portraying abortion as a risk-free event. A pro-choice position means that we believe abortion is the woman's choice, that women should be given accurate information and informed consent in making their reproductive choices, and that they be supported in their decisions. The charge that this activity, which is congruent with APA policy and conducted in conformance with scientific standards, "undermines the integrity" of APA is without basis.

NANCY FELIPE RUSSO, PHD

Arizona State University

LINDA J. BECKMAN, PHD

Alliant International University

Los Angeles

From this response it is clear that Russo clearly believes the APA's political position on abortion as a civil right is warrant for pro-choice activism.