The problem of induced abortion remains extremely important in modern obstetric and gynecological practice. Its relevance is determined not only by the level and prevalence of such surgical interventions but also by the risk of complications. Despite the availability of a variety of safe and effective methods of contraception, the frequency of abortions over the past decade has remained consistently high. Improvement and widespread adoption in practice of the latest methods of abortion have led to a decrease in the frequency of post-abortion complications. However, there are versions that abortion can lead to negative mental consequences, which have a strong impact on the lives of women. In general, induced abortion does not cause mental anxiety or sexual dysfunction after the abortion, but the latter can occur if a woman undergoes voluntary termination of pregnancy. The overall credibility of a source is paramount in understanding the intricacies of the issue. Therefore, primary sources are superior to secondary ones because the former is more specific and provides critical details without generalizations.
The main difference between credible and non-credible sources lies in the author’s expertise in the field. The Wikipedia source on abortion and mental health states that abortion does not lead to post-abortion trauma, anxiety, and other issues (“Abortion and mental health,” 2020). However, the journals from the European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology shows that in both necessary uterus evacuation and voluntary termination of pregnancy leads to sexual dysfunction and dissatisfaction (Dundar et al., 2016). The latter statement is especially true when a woman conducts a voluntary abortion because the dysfunction level changes drastically. Therefore, a credible source provides more specific details and conditions as well as identifies the issue.
Another distinguishing factor is the date of publication and evidence presented. Wikipedia source does not offer any form of evidence, but instead, it lists a number of other sources. In the case of the journal, there is a methodology in conjunction with the resulting data. One can easily observe how voluntary termination of pregnancy leads to a higher increase in dysfunction from 5.33 to 8.12 compared to the uterus evacuation group’s change of 6.02 to 6.4 (Dundar et al., 2016). Wikipedia does not provide such critical methodological overviews and instrumental analysis, which makes its claims insignificant. In addition, the date of publication of the journal is in a recent category, whereas some of the points in the Wikipedia article are based on 1990 studies. It is evident that the Wikipedia article relies on heavily outdated sources, whereas information in the journal is within an adequate time frame.
One of the subtlest and critically important factors is the presence of agenda. Wikipedia article states: “While some studies have reported a statistical correlation between abortion and mental health problems, these studies are typically methodologically flawed and fail to account for confounding factors, or, as with results of women having multiple abortions, yield results inconsistent with other similar studies” (“Abortion and mental health,” 2020). It clearly supports the version of abortion, not causing any issues, and categorizes studies as low and high-quality without providing a precise, logical basis.
In conclusion, one should be aware of the information’s source regarding its credibility and non-credibility. As it was shown in the abortion case, the credible journal provides the methodological explanation, detailed analysis, and statistically relevant observations. However, the Wikipedia article uses outdated sources, does not give evidence, and possesses a definitive agenda supporting the idea that abortion does cause any problems. Therefore, it is evident that the journal is highly objective and direct, whereas the Wikipedia article is filled with misconceptions and generalizations.
References
Abortion and mental health. (2020). Web.
Dundar, B., Dilbaz, B., & Karadag, B. (2016). Comparison of the effects of voluntary termination of pregnancy and uterine evacuation for medical reasons on female sexual function. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 199, 11-15.