September 27, 2005

Freakonomics

Sept. 27 - I had been unable to remember the source, author or name of an article I had read (which turned out to be a book review!) so was unable to link it in my post on Fatherhood and Grandparenthood. I am grateful that reader Andrew P. recognized my brief description and very kindly emailed me the relevant information.

The book Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything by economist Steven D. Levitt and scientist Stephen J. Dubner was reviewed by Orson Scott Card in Freakonomics Or You Have to Find the Facts Before You Can Face Them. Some of the assertions in the book are controversial and Card touches on one of the hypotheses: that lower crimes rates came about as a result of decriminalizing abortions.

In 1973, Roe v. Wade made abortion permissible throughout the United States. The floodgates opened, and vast numbers of abortions were performed. As a result, vast numbers of children were not born.

Ah, but which children? The vast majority of the abortions were among women who would have been raising their children without a father; substantial numbers of these women were addicts. And even the abortions performed on middle-class women were somewhat more likely to be the result of liaisons in which one partner or the other, or both, had poor impulse control.

In other words, the fetuses that were aborted, had they been born, would have become children who were statistically the most likely group to become criminals. Raised by single mothers, in poverty, with genes that might not provide them with much ability to foresee the longterm consequences of impulsive actions.

The crime rates began falling exactly when that generation of children would have reached adolescence and those with such tendencies would have begun their criminal careers.

It certainly looked as if we killed off much of our criminal class in the womb.

Did I mention that some of the conclusions are controversial?

I've only excerpted the portion of the review that fit the blog post I was writing, but the review is about much more than that and addresses one of the biggest problems of this information age: too much specialized knowledge by experts which we can neither ignore nor understand.

I was curious and read about the book at the Freaknomics site and saw something that never fails to get my attention:

[Steven D. Levitt] usually begins with a mountain of data and a simple, unasked question. Some of these questions concern life-and-death issues; others have an admittedly freakish quality. (Emphasis added)
I can't recommend the book as I haven't read it (at least not yet) but it sounds intriguing.

I need to write (or at least begin) a report on a meeting I attended yesterday evening and then catch some sleep so probably won't post again until tonight.

(Orson Scott Card link via Relapsed Catholic)

Posted by: Debbye at 07:43 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 477 words, total size 3 kb.

1 In the meantime you may want to rethink all those stories of mahem, rape and murder and the piling of bodies by the door that supposdly took place in the huge Katrina Storm shelter. You may be inclined to re-edit all those mental pictures made when you read about what two LA Times professionals find upon investigating their own Media navel. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-rumors27sep27,0,5492806,full.story?coll=la-home-headlines If the link fails you, This was pointed to me by a commentor on Pressthink this morning, early. Easy to scroll and find. Those comments are really worth a scroll too! Editors today get the obvious story..Rita and Michael Jackson, but has good investigative journalism Died? The Whistle Blower Protection law that is so quietly and stealthily being bucked by the governments of Canada, the USA and in the United Nations, all current, all on-going as we speak. As my daughter would say....*Duh?*. 73s TG

Posted by: TonyGuitar at September 27, 2005 12:30 PM (rmMzv)

2 I have read Freakonomics and I can recommend it heartily. If you are a parent, the chapter "What makes a perfect parent" will show you how everything that you thought mattered, didn't. And if you ever wondered why drug dealers still live with their moms, you'll soon find out that you are probably better paid.

Posted by: Larry Borsato at September 27, 2005 01:17 PM (n2yyR)

3 I can happily second Larry's recommendation. I found the same review you quoted, bought the book on Friday and read it over the weekend. Very interesting, although it lacks that unifying theme beloved of organizationally minded readers.

Posted by: Nicholas at September 27, 2005 08:01 PM (bfwnL)

4 I can't see legalized abortion lowering crime rates. It's too easy to look at it the opposite way: Welfare mother, no idea who father is, finds herself pregnant. That's a pay raise and nine months from now, a pay raise that lasts 18 years. She could get an abortion but knowing she'll likely end up pregnant again soon anyway, decides to go for the check. Single welfare parent upbringing means better odds of producing a criminal. Joe and Jane Sixpack (not yuppies) both too busy working to be criminals, trying to save for a house or something constructive. Jane gets pregnant. They can't afford to raise a kid and don't have the time. She gets an abortion. Two parent household, both willing to work and plan for the future, less likely to produce a criminal. But in the first example there's no abortion, in the second there is. So while abortion didn't prevent the criminal, it did prevent the non-criminal (which wouldn;t change the crime rate except as a matter of per capita counting).

Posted by: Jay at September 28, 2005 01:01 AM (PIbeE)

5 I happened across Freakonomics here on the net around April, and got caught up in it right away. Then later in May, there was a long interesting interview on CBC Radio One. For those really into this, you can probably find it in CBC archives and enjoy a fun interview. There was incentive enough on the website to get me to send in suggestions about figuring the effect on young 20- something taxpayers if they could see some heavy economics calc projections resulting from the Liberal scammers, [Libscams], feeding from the 100 breasts on the underbelly of our National Revenues. He is primarily American oriented and wildly popular, so I doubt there could be any consideration to Canadian Freakonomitry. '3s TG

Posted by: TonyGuitar at September 28, 2005 02:16 PM (rmMzv)

6 I haven't read the book, but I do remember back in the early '70s (when the availability of contraception was less widespread than today) and a very persuasive speaker at a "Control Our Bodies" rally was a woman who worked with physically abused children. Her argument was that unwanted children are often abused (and I mean real abuse, not just raising one's voice) and that being able to control one's reproduction should reduce the number of abused children. I left the Catholic Church due to their stand on contraceptives, so am not objective on the issue!

Posted by: Debbye at September 28, 2005 08:30 PM (oIH78)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
19kb generated in CPU 0.0159, elapsed 0.0948 seconds.
64 queries taking 0.0862 seconds, 148 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.