C. Everett Koop
The Koop Report on Abortion
In July of 1987, President Ronald Reagan asked Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, to to prepare a report for the nation on the health risks of abortion for women.
In brief, in a letter to the President seventeen months later, Dr. Koop ducked the assignment claiming that due to an inadequate base of research no definitive statements could be made. The pro-abortion media immediately twisted Koop’s non-report into a claim that no dangers to abortion could be found, ergo, abortion is safe. Similar distortions of Koop’s statements continue to this day particularly in medical journals where pro-abortion researchers frequently cite the Surgeon General’s letter as an “authoritative” review which confirmed the safety of abortion. For his part, Dr. Koop continues to be haunted by the whole matter, facing the sporadic denouncements of conservatives who believe that he “betrayed” the cause.
What really happened? What did Koop really say and what could he have said?
The Unwanted Assignment
It all began when the President was preparing for a summit meeting with pro-life leaders who were outraged over the firing of JoAnn Gasper from the Department of Health and Human Services. (Mrs. Gasper had been fired for enforcing a hard line interpretation of federal regulations banning abortion funding, a position her immediate supervisors in the Administration did not share.) At the urging of at least one pro-life aide, President Reagan was convinced that pro-lifer’s would be mollified by allowing Koop, one of their own, to produce a report which would prove the negative health effects of abortion on women and thus contribute to the reversal of Roe v. Wade. Having personally reviewed a number of post-abortion testimonies himself, Reagan was perhaps so convinced of abortion’s traumatic effects that he assumed that the assignment would be an easy one which Koop would relish. (It is even reported that President Reagan frequently gave copies of post-abortion testimonies to others in defense of his anti-abortion position.)
Koop, for his part, did not relish the assignment. On at least two occasions Koop attempted to convince the president to withdraw his request for a report. When his petitions were rejected, Koop assigned the task to an assistant explaining that he wanted to “distance” himself from the report. Koop simply did not like being dragged back into the abortion controversy, especially in an official role as an “expert” on the health effects of abortion. He knew, far better than the president, that every piece of evidence, every conclusion, every nuanced statement that Koop might make was going to be dissected and attacked by one side or the other. The forensics experts at the O.J. Simpson trial faced less of a grilling than that which confronted Koop.
Initially, Koop assigned an assistant, George Walter, the task of researching the matter. [1] Walter obtained a list of articles from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), authored mostly by CDC pro-abortion surveillance staff (several of whom moonlighted as abortion providers). It is also reported that Walter consulted with Planned Parenthood's Alan Guttmacher Institute.
Walter report was given to Koop, but Koop didn't believe the report had sufficient merit to give it his stamp of approval.
Koop, therefore, decided that no final “report” could be given at all. Instead, he provided a letter to the President Reagan explaining why there was insufficient data on which to base a report. Koop concluded the letter by stating that a prospective five year study, costing between $10 and $100 million would best address the lack of unassailable data. Even in this, however, he was noncommittal. His statements regarding the possibility of a prospective study had the tone of “if you really want to know, this is what should be done.” Nowhere did he actually champion the pressing need for such a study on the grounds that abortion is one of the most common surgeries in America and lack of adequate research about abortion sequelae is simply unconscionable.
So, rather than report on what can be deduced from the data, Koop chose to concentrate on what is not known. He did this by insisting that any official report from his office could only include “unassailable” data.[2] Because there are no perfect studies, especially in the field of behavioral science, there is always room for criticism and dispute. So, in hiding behind the demand for “unassailable” data, Koop had found his way out. By insisting that any report must be based on "unassailable data" when in fact all the studies available had numerous weaknesses, Koop was able to focus on those weaknesses in order to avoid drawing any conclusions. This was reflected in his subsequent letter in which he stated “scientific studies do not provide conclusive data about the health effects of abortion on women.”
He said it was not a public health issue but a moral one.[3]
Most curiously, in the furor of confusion following his letter, it became clear that Dr. Koop in fact had two positions. His public position was that of the uneasy Sergeant Schultz who claims: “I know nothing!” This non-opinion was all that he could confidently defend as the Surgeon General for the United States. But as he also held the private opinion (which because it was private was somehow above criticism) that there was sufficient and compelling evidence which left “no doubt in my mind” that there are serious physical complications and “tremendous psychological problems” resulting from abortion.3
Koop did not present the draft report to Reagan and claimed he never approved it.[4] In March 1989, the "Koop Report" became public after it was subpoenaed and became part of a Congressional subcommittee hearing.[4] Although there were allegations that the report had not been released previously because it was biased, the document contained all arguments on both sides of the issue.[4]
<ref name="CD'>Christina Dunigan. The Koop Report: The REAL Story Clinic Quotes. August 30, 2012.
NOTES
The above article includes sections and excerpts of Revisiting the “Koop Report” by David C. Reardon, Ph.D., with permission from the Elliot Institute and excerpts from Wikipedia...reprinted with permission from the public domain.
The C. Everett Koop Papers: Reproduction and Family Health
- ↑ Leary, Warren E. (March 17, 1989). "Koop Says Abortion Report Couldn't Survive Challenge". New York Times.
- ↑ John Whitehead and Michael Patrick, “Exclusive Interview: U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop,” The Rutherford Institute, Spring 1989, 31-34.
- ↑ Schoifet, Mark (February 25, 2013). "C. Everett Koop, Surgeon General Who Took on Tobacco, Dies at 96". Bloomberg.
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedNYT Leary