welt.de
German Stillbirth Rate Rises Amidst European Decline
A study by the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research shows that the stillbirth rate in Germany increased from 3.5 per 1000 births in 2007 to 4.3 in 2021, potentially due to factors such as improved prenatal diagnostics, legal allowances for late-term abortions in cases of severe fetal abnormalities, and the increasing average age of mothers.
- Why is Germany experiencing a rise in stillbirths while other European countries show stable or declining rates?
- The number of stillbirths in Germany increased from 3.5 per 1000 births in 2007 to 4.3 in 2021, while other European countries saw stable or decreasing rates. This is partially attributed to Germany's legal allowance for late-term abortions due to severe fetal abnormalities, a factor not present in many other countries. Improved prenatal diagnostics in Germany may also lead to the detection of more abnormalities resulting in higher stillbirth numbers.
- What role do differences in legal frameworks regarding late-term abortions and the quality of prenatal diagnostics play in the disparity of stillbirth rates between Germany and other European nations?
- The higher stillbirth rate in Germany compared to other European countries is complex and not solely attributable to one factor. While improved prenatal diagnostics may lead to the identification of more fetal abnormalities, the legal permissibility of late-term abortions in cases of severe fetal abnormalities also contributes significantly to the higher statistics. This difference in legal frameworks and diagnostic capabilities makes international comparisons challenging.
- How can future research refine international comparisons of stillbirth rates and account for the complex interplay between medical advancements, legal practices, and the psychological aspects of pregnancy?
- Future research should focus on disentangling the effects of improved prenatal diagnostics and legal frameworks on stillbirth rates. This will necessitate more nuanced international comparisons that consider variations in definitions and practices related to stillbirths. Furthermore, exploring the psychological impact of increased prenatal diagnostic capabilities and the decision-making processes surrounding late-term pregnancies is crucial.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the increase in stillbirths in a way that emphasizes the expert's perspective, which largely downplays the significance of the increase, highlighting the excellent German healthcare system and suggesting various factors that might mitigate concerns. The headline itself, while not explicitly stated in the provided text, likely focuses on the rise in stillbirths, creating an initial sense of alarm before the article shifts to explain various potential mitigating factors and ultimately calms concerns. The inclusion of multiple "Lesen Sie auch" (read also) sections might also distract from the core issue at hand, potentially influencing reader perception.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral, but the repeated use of phrases like "erschreckendes Ergebnis" (shocking result) in the introduction might set a negative tone. The expert's explanations, while factually correct, tend to downplay the significance of the rising stillbirth rate by emphasizing positive aspects of the German healthcare system. This could be interpreted as subtly minimizing the problem.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the perspective of Dr. Abou-Dakn and doesn't include other viewpoints, such as those of midwives, patient advocacy groups, or researchers with differing opinions on the causes of rising stillbirth rates. The article also omits discussion of socioeconomic factors that could influence stillbirth rates, like access to healthcare or maternal stress. While acknowledging some limitations in international comparisons due to varying definitions of stillbirth, the article doesn't delve into the methodological differences between studies and their potential impact on the results.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat false dichotomy by suggesting that the higher stillbirth rate in Germany is primarily due to later-term abortions for fetuses with severe abnormalities. While this is a contributing factor discussed by the expert, other potential causes such as maternal age, pre-existing conditions, and access to prenatal care are also mentioned but not explored in sufficient depth to create a balanced view. The implication that this is the sole or primary cause oversimplifies a complex issue.
Gender Bias
The article focuses primarily on the experiences and opinions of Dr. Abou-Dakn, a male doctor. While it addresses the concerns of pregnant women, it mainly does so through the filter of the doctor's perspective. There is no explicit gender bias in language, but the lack of diverse voices might inadvertently perpetuate an imbalance in representation.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights a concerning rise in stillbirths in Germany, indicating a negative impact on maternal and child health. This directly relates to SDG 3, which aims to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages. The increase in stillbirths contradicts the goal of reducing neonatal mortality rates.