Talk:Unsafe abortion

Contraception prevalence
...and whether modern contraceptives are available.

This depends on whether prevalence is considered for the population as a whole, or for the population of pregnant women. I'm not sure that former case is very enlightening stated by itself - the same would be true of old-fashioned contraceptives, chastity and any number of social, biological or medical reasons for a reduction in pregnancy in general and unwanted pregnancy in particular. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 02:44, 24 February 2016 (UTC).

Systemic Bias Label
Hello my fellow editors, As of March 24th, 2019, I have added a systemic bias label to this page. I do not mean to imply that the viewpoints presented in this article are incorrect, rather, to label this article as biased in nature. Abortion is a very prevalent topic in American political discourse, and I have found this article to exhibit clear pro-choice bias. Sources are cited for some statistics, but many debatable claims are made. If people disagree with what I have done, or if they do not believe this situation qualifies to have a systemic bias label, they may feel free to remove it. I am not very experienced in Wikipedia editing but feel that this article deserves to be watched. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShnevorSomeone (talk • contribs) 21:01, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah? We provide the evidence based / scientific based position on topics. I will watch. Best Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 15:14, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

NPOV language label
Previously, I added a systemic bias label. This was removed without any addressation. Therefore, in good faith to whomever removed it, I have added a label warning about the partisan language used throughout the article. I’m sure whoever removed the previous label had their reasons, so I have reduced the acerbity, but seeing as how the language wasn’t changed, I will leave this label here. Please see my last comment for my rationale; the article remained unchanged from then to now. I will be open-minded with whomever wants to remove this label, but I ask that whoever removes this label either change the diction or justify themselves here on the talk page. As you can imagine, it is quite frustrating to see that my label was removed without any reasoning being stated. I invite the public to chat about this on the talk page. ShnevorSomeone (talk) 04:38, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Not sure the issue you are seeing. What language do you consider NPOV? Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 04:42, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Information Literacy and Scholarly Discourse
— Assignment last updated by Mbrens (talk) 18:08, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

“Unsafe abortion was and is a public health crisis”
Can’t we just say it is a public health crisis? This sentence is clunky and suggests it stopped being a public health crisis at some point. 2601:14D:400:8D70:6512:19C5:CB15:78BA (talk) 10:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * That sentence doesn't at all suggest that it stopped being a public health crisis at some point. NightHeron (talk) 10:13, 26 June 2022 (UTC)


 * There are bigger issues with this sentence, indeed, with the whole last paragraph of the lead, than whether the first sentence in it is clunky. What makes "unsafe abortion" a "public health crisis" as opposed to a mere "public health problem" or a "public health conundrum" is quite subjective. The fact that one particular source calls it a public health crisis and then, apparently, goes on to blame restrictions on legal abortion for the "crisis" should not be the basis for objective, encyclopedic facts. Goodtablemanners (talk) 04:18, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: CRISIS COMMUNICATION
— Assignment last updated by IceyBoyBano (talk) 19:25, 30 November 2022 (UTC)