The Case Against Abortion

A courageous Victorian GP, Dr. Mark Hobart, has spoken out against abortion for gender selection purposes, describing his own experience of refusing to refer on those grounds. Read more here .

The public's response has generally been one of disgust that anyone would seek an abortion because they didn't want a girl or boy (see vote poll  and comments following the article here).

Click the image above to see the Letters to the Editor in full size

But now Dr Hobart could face tough sanctions.

According to another Herald Sun article, "Dr Hobart admits he has broken the law and could face suspension, conditions on his ability to practice or even be deregistered. But he was willing to risk punishment in pursuit of principles".

The article also mentions another doctor "who was brought before the Medical Board in January for airing his views against abortion was cautioned and warned he could be deregistered if it happened again".

Christian Agenti host of 'Talking Back the Night' on FM Mix 92.7 spoke with Dr Hobart and got feedback from callers on their views. You can listen here

Dr Hobart was interviewed this morning by Neil Mitchell. You can hear the interview here

It will be very interesting to follow what happens from here - we will keep you posted.

 By Debbie Garratt - CEO of Real Choices Australia.

Reproductive Choice Australia's latest campaign is one which brings a sickening feeling of dismay to the many people who have contacted us about it.  Reproductive Choice propose to carry out a flashmob in Melbourne's CBD, wearing t-shirts with the slogan: Abortion, a Fact of Life .

For those who don't know what a flash mob is, it is a group of people who carry out a pre organised form of entertainment in a public space, most often to the surprise and delight of unassuming passers-by. Flash mobs usually consist of some dancing and/or singing or some kind of drama. They can be lots of fun.

Leslie Cannold, a prominent pro-abortion advocate leads the dancing lesson in a YouTube video, where they are working to recruit participants for the flash mob.

Leslie Cannold stated in her book, The Abortion Myth, that she had very real concerns that the experiences of women who sought and had abortions were not being heard. Yet it seems that when it comes to the evidence that abortion leaves up to 30% of women suffering serious and prolonged mental health problems, and that many women are having abortions in the absence of genuine and supported alternatives, neither Leslie, nor her organisation are interested in hearing the voices of real women. Dancing in the streets to celebrate abortion is their answer to these women. Celebrating what for so many women is a tragedy and an unwanted solution to a difficult issue. Shouting down the testimonies of women harmed by abortion at events where they desperately try to have a voice is the answer they give to the women whose rights they espouse to value.

This event serves to minimise, if not dismiss the very real trauma so many women experience whenfaced with an abortion decision. It makes a mockery of the circumstances so many women find themselves struggling with if they are unexpectedly pregnant and are desperate for support. It shows how little pro abortion advocates really understand what it is they are fighting for, surgical and medical solutions to social problems that make it challenging for women to fully participate in activities of their choosing, whether that be in the home, the workforce or in education.

Instead of lobbying for greater access to childcare, more flexible work practices, less violence toward women, more concern about the potential harm of abortion, they choose to dance in the streets to celebrate the pain their advocacy helps to inflict on women, men and children.

An opinion piece by the president of Life Network Australia has been published on line.

The article talks about how the 40 Days for life campaign is highlighting the need for greater support services to be offered to women facing unplanned pregnancies and how the 40 Days for Life campaign is offering hope and saving thousands of lives internationally.

It can be read here

 

Media Statement by Debbie Garratt, Real Choices Australia

Used with permission.

‘Call for free abortions as needy women priced out of procedure’ says the headline, with women’s health advocates stating that, ‘Growing numbers of women in desperate financial straits cannot afford abortions.’ (Sydney Morning Herald, August 6)

With up to 75% of abortion seeking women stating financial constraints as a reason they are unable to continue their pregnancies, one has to wonder what these ‘women’s advocates’ are doing to ensure that no woman has an unwanted abortion when financial constraints are a primary factor.

The cases put forward in this article of the woman with 5 children and a domestic violence issue, a homeless mother and a mother with children in foster care seem on the surface to be desperate cases for abortion. However, these cases only demonstrate how miserably we are failing to support women and children out of their dire circumstances by offering them surgical solutions to their social problems. This kind of problem provides abortions for the pregnant, homeless women, instead of housing and financial support.

The suggestion by Catherine White that the continuation of unplanned pregnancies places a burden on child protection and welfare services is without evidence, and is a not too cleverly disguised opinion that women from lower socioeconomic circumstances should not be offered the support they need to bring their children into the world. Her statement that women adversely suffer mental health issues if they give birth following an unplanned pregnancy is also without substantiation. In fact, the opposite is true with international evidence demonstrating that up to 30% of women experience serious and prolonged mental health problems after abortion, creating an unnecessary burden on our economy, not to mention the lives of women themselves and their families.

The fact is that about half of all pregnancies are unintended, and about half of these lead to abortion, with more than 95% of those being undertaken for psychosocial reasons. These reasons are often complex and often related to a woman’s economic situation, including worry about employment, education, housing and withdrawal of support from partners and family. Until we have a system where a woman’s economic and social needs can be adequately addressed and remedied, we cannot continue to espouse abortion as an actual choice.

When a woman is forced to choose between her education and having her baby, her employment and having her baby or her boyfriend/partner/husband and having her baby this is not choice, it is coercion. When services fail to demonstrate their willingness to meet a woman’s social and economic needs so that she feels able to choose to continue her pregnancy, they are contributing to this coercion.

Instead of more discussion about increasing access to abortion, particularly medical abortion with its much higher risk of adverse effects, we need to be discussing the real reasons why women have abortions and offering real solutions. Only then can we say that real choice exists.

Debbie Garratt

Executive Director

02 6059 5550

Ruth Lamperd's article, 'The best doctors are only human', has been welcomed by pro life advocates who remain concerned that our society has only expressed outrage at the loss of one of the twin boys aborted two weeks ago today. It has become obvious that the outrage is because of a  "bungled abortion", that claimed the life of the "wrong baby". 

But what about the other baby boy - the "unhealthy twin"?

In her article, Ms Lamperd describes a contrasting outcome for a boy called Kush, who also had a serious diagnosis similar to that of the "unhealthy twin": "At 19 weeks gestation, medics discovered he had a serious congenital heart defect. They recommended termination because of the likelihood he would die early and painfully. But his parents would not consider abortion. When he was born prematurely at under 2kg they had no expectations. One minute? One day? One week? One month? A year was even too much to expect, even if they hoped".

The article says that "Kush will join classmates at a graduation dinner celebrating the end of his primary school years" and that "Last year, he qualified for his school's cross-country competition and he plays cricket every weekend. He's a kid who was never expected to live long enough to even start primary school, let alone finish it. This little chap functions on only three heart chambers. He's cheeky and smart and he has a mile-wide smile".

How is it possible to know what the possibilities may have been for babies lost to abortion - for our "unhealthy twin", who are simply not given any chance at life? There has developed a "cruel to be kind" mentality in our society that is fast removing any chance that these babies have to 'beat the odds'. And we can all tell a story of someone we know who has!   

Ms Lamperd closes by saying "You can't help notice the wildly contradictory ideas on what constitutes viable human life. Or human life full stop. People like Kush and his parents are in no doubt."

NB. According to the Victorian Health Department's Report - Infant Mortality and Morbidity, over half of the babies aborted late term in Victoria are performed on perfectly healthy babies - so the loss of "the healthy twin" is no different to what happens 'every other day' in Victoria.

Related article here.

 

By Debbie Garratt, Real Choices Australia - Used with permission.

This week we watched in horror as the story of the tragic death of two baby boys at the royal women's hospital  unfolded.  We are rightly horrified.  A healthy, viable, loved baby has been deliberately killed and the parents and other family members will have to live with the loss and grief for the rest of their lives.  It is a tragedy. 

One aspect of this story that will not make the news is that had the 'correct' baby been terminated he would have been simply a number in the 2011 Perinatal Morbidity Statistics.  We wouldn't have heard about him or his family. 

Is it because the baby was healthy that we are outraged and it made the news headlines? No, it can't be that because every year healthy babies are aborted after 23 weeks of pregnancy.  The Perinatal Morbidity Statistics reveal that of 328 late term abortions in 2008, 178 of them were performed on healthy babies whose mothers were experiencing psychosocial problems.  So it isn't that the baby was healthy that we are outraged, otherwise we would be outraged for all of these babies and their mothers.

Is it that the baby was apparently 'wanted' then?  Perhaps not, as research tells us that more than 70% of women having abortions do so feeling as though they have no other choice.  This suggests that if the women were provided social and emotionally supportive alternatives they would have continued their pregnancies.   It wasn't their babies that were unwanted, but the circumstances they found themselves in. 

Perhaps it is that the tragedy of abortion on the lives of babies, women and families has become so great that we don't really want to believe it when we hear it.  When something like this situation occurs it's a collective and cumulative outrage for all mothers and babies that we express.   We should be outraged with a society that continues to allow women to be told that their medically determined 'less than perfect' children are better off not being born or that their social problems are best 'fixed' by the termination of their child.  

The messages we send women and girls about their 'right' to pregnancy and motherhood are outrageous.  Teen mums in Wagga Wagga have been told this month that they must choose between their children and an education,  that abortion would have been a 'better' choice for them.  Instead of looking for ways to support young mums to build a positive future full of opportunities, local services fuss about the lack of surgical termination options available locally.  

Instead of getting the support and encouragement to embrace and love their 'less than perfect' child, even if he only lived a short while, a couple have now lost both their children.  

We should be outraged, but let's be outraged on behalf of every mother not offered what she needs to be able to hold her baby in her arms rather than an ache in her heart for the rest of her life.





Executive Director


Real Choices Australia

Late Line reported that a woman is in a critical condition in Box Hill (Melbourne), following a late term abortion of her 24 week old unborn baby. The patient is in intensive care after experiencing organ failure.

According to the report, the owner and physician of the clinic, Dr. Mark Schulberg, who is known as "Australia's late term abortion specialist", has faced the Medical Board of Australia. He told Late Line that "the patient had a serious previous existing condition and that the abortion had nothing to do with her current state of health. "
Late Line also revealed that it was at Dr. Schulberg's clinic that an anaethetist allegedly infected some 40 patients with Hepatitis C, between 2008 and 2009.

Pro life organisations argue that abortion hurts women, and although it is the most common female procedure, it is also the most under-regulated. The current abortion legislation does not require physicians, such as Dr. Schulberg, to warn of such risks to women, nor is there any requirement to explain just what the procedure entails.

Well known for her support of abortion, Dr. Caroline De Costa conceded that late term procedures are risky, with the possibility of hemorrhaging, admission to hospital and the requirement of pain relief. Dr. De Costa also said that late term abortions are done because of a "Diagnosis of a severe abnormality in the child, often incompatible with life or incompatible with the quality of life that is acceptable to the parents" and "sometimes because the mother has developed a medical condition during pregnancy, which is being exacerbated by the pregnancy continuing. It is usually done for a major medical indication".

In defending the practice, some doctors argue that these are rare cases and usually done for extreme abnormalities. Doctor Lachlan De Crespigny also made these claims, but they were shown by a Victorian Health Department Report to be inaccurate - the report revealed that over half of the babies aborted late term were in fact, healthy babies. The most recent Victorian Health Department report (2008) reveals that some 178 of the 328 late term abortions were performed for 'psycho social' reasons - see information following this article. 

It is alarming that doctors appear to be more willing to expose women to the risks of late term abortion, rather than referring women for support. Many of us, including those with disabilities, take exception to the notion that a babies life is measured by the "quality of life acceptable to the parents". Dr. De Costa has effectively admitted that the practice of eugenics is 'alive and well' in Australia. 

For babies who are "incompatible with life", it seems bizarre that doctors would add the trauma of a barbaric abortion procedure, to a baby who is already terminal and to his/ her parents.

It is questionable just what "Medical conditions exacerbated during pregnancy" warrant an abortion? 
Surely excellent medical care (and practical support) for the mother and the baby (rather than abortion) is a priority? 
 A young pregnant friend attended a hospital in Melbourne for extreme morning sickness, but eventually had an abortion. She was informed by her doctor that if she wanted to have another baby, she should get private medical cover to receive the care she needed.
This statement by Dr. De Costa (and the experience of my friend) raises serious questions about abortion being offered as second rate 'treatment' for medical conditions.

The greatest injustice of this whole tragic situation is that in this instance it is possible that there will be two fatalities. The twenty four week old baby, like all other late term babies who are aborted, endured two days of excruciating pain (no anaesthetic required by Victorian law). While Victorian law recognises the rights of the mother - who is receiving excellent hospital care, her dead baby remains ignored by law, discarded by our society and another victim of our violent abortion industry.
 
 While refusing to go into the details of the case, Victorian Health Minister, David Davis stated that the public would be concerned. Surely the public has the right to know the grizzly details of such horrific late term abortion procedures, which have increased by 600% at the Royal Women's Hospital in Melbourne (since the Victorian abortion law reform in 2008), with staff reportedly traumatised.

A doctor friend described role playing as part of her medical training some years ago. The assignment was to warn a patient of the risks of any procedure. She began to describe the many possible and serious side affects of an abortion procedure - she was abruptly interrupted by her mentor and advised that "You do not warn of the risks of abortion".

 Dr. David Grundman was interviewed some years ago on 60 Minutes and refused to describe a late term abortion procedure to the public. Surely, with one mother's life in the balance - and yet another dead baby, the media will now describe just what this procedure entails.

Late Line stated that "The Medical Board of Australia is investigating the case and is yet to reach a conclusion." Life Network Australia concludes that abortion continues to hurt babies, women and families.

Related Information:
The Herald Sun (Aug 26, 2011) reported that
- " The Consultative Council on Obstetric and Paediatric Mortality and Morbidity 2008 annual report released last week shows there were 328 late term abortions that year, 178 of which were performed on women  for ''psychosocial'' reasons.

- "The other abortions were performed because of congenital abnormalities. "

- "Sixty-five of the psychosocial abortions were performed on women under 20 years of age."

- "One hundred and eight women who had psychosocial abortions travelled from interstate or overseas, where few doctors are willing to perform the procedure."

- "At least two of the psychosocial abortions were performed on women more than 7 months pregnant."

- "The figures were slightly down on 2007, which recorded 345 late term abortions, 164 for psychosocial reasons".
(This last statistic seems inconsistent with Channel Seven's Report of the 600% increase in late term abortions at the Royal Women's Hospital in Melbourne).

The pro abortion rhetoric "It is a woman's choice" ignores the plight of so many baby girls who do not reach womanhood because they are aborted, killed or abandoned - The United Nations estimates some 200,000,000 girls are missing due to sex selection as a result of family planning in China and India. 
It's a Girl Documentary here

Footage and information such as this is a big problem for groups such as EMILY's List who pride themselves on being pro "choice" and who claim to promote equal opportunity for women!

Life Site News has written an article describing the mass culling of females in Asia. The article states that "Some 163 million women are missing from Asia. That is the entire female population of the United States."
"The culprit is sex selective abortion according to Mara Hvistendahl’s fascinating book Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys Over Girls, and the Consequences of a World Full of Men.  Hvistendahl is not pro-life nor is she Catholic, but that is what, I believe, makes this book courageous.  Of course in typical pro-choice fashion, she refuses to address the facts of when human life begins, but she does tackle the sacred cows at the root of the devastation that now faces Asia: widespread abortion and the population control movement of the West."
Read more here: http://www.lifenews.com/2011/08/03/legacy-of-population-control-163-million-missing-women/ 

 Rebecca Kiessling is an international pro-life speaker from the U.S, an attorney, a wife and mother of five. Her life story is inspiring - having been conceived in rape, she has made it her mission to change the negative stereotypes and expectations surrounding pregnancies by rape and to advocate for lives like hers that are often aborted.
"I do hope that, as a child conceived in rape, I can help to put a face, a voice, and a story to this issue" - Rebecca Kiessling.

The following article has been used with permission.

We've all heard someone say "I'm pro-life, well, except in cases of rape . . ." or "I'm pro-choice, especially in cases of rape !"

Have you ever considered how really insulting it is to say to someone, "I think your  mother should have been able to abort you."?  It's like saying, "If I had my way, you'd be dead right now."  And that is the reality with which I live every time someone says they are pro-choice or pro-life "except in cases of rape" because I absolutely would have been aborted if it had been legal in Michigan when I
was an  unborn child, and I can tell you that it hurts. 
But I know that most people don't put  a face to this issue -- for them abortion is just a concept -- with a quick cliche, they  sweep it under the rug and forget about it. 

I was adopted nearly from birth.  At 18, I learned that I was conceived out of a brutal rape at knife-point by a serial rapist.  Like most people, I'd never considered that abortion applied to my life, but once I received this information, all of a sudden I realized that, not only does it apply to my life, but it has to do with my very existence.  It was as if I could hear the echoes of all those people who, with the most sympathetic of tones, would say, “Well, except in cases of rape. . .  ," or who would rather fervently exclaim in disgust: “Especially is cases of rape!!!”  All these people are out there who don’t even know me, but are standing in judgment of my life, so quick to dismiss it just because of how I was conceived.  I felt like I was now going to have to justify my own existence, that I would have to prove myself to the world that I shouldn’t have been aborted and that I was worthy of living.  I also remember feeling like garbage because of people who would say that my life was like garbage -- that I was disposable.

I've often experienced those who would confront me and try to dismiss me with quick quips like, “Oh well, you were lucky!” Be sure that my survival has nothing to do with luck.  The fact that I’m alive today has to do with choices that were made by our society at large, people who fought to ensure abortion was illegal in Michigan at the time – even in cases of rape, people who argued to protect my life, and people who voted pro-life.  I wasn’t lucky.  I was protected.  And would you
really rationalize that our brothers and sisters who are being aborted every day are just somehow "unlucky"?!!

Although my birthmother was thrilled to meet me, she did tell me that she actually went to two back-alley abortionists and I was almost aborted.  After the rape, the police referred her to a counselor who basically told her that abortion was the thing to do.  She said there were no crisis pregnancy centers back then, but my birthmother assured me that if there had been, she would have gone if at least for a little more guidance.  The rape counselor is the one who set her up with the back-alley abortionists.  For the first, she said it was the typical back-alley conditions that you hear about as to why "she should have been able to safely and legally abort" me -- blood and dirt all over the table and floor.  Those back-alley conditions and the fact that it was illegal caused her to back out, as with most women. 

Then she got hooked up with a more expensive abortionist.  This time she was to meet someone at night by the Detroit Institute of Arts.  Someone would approach her, say her name, blindfold her, put her in the backseat of a car, take her and then abort me . . . , then blindfold her again and drop her back off.  And do you know what I think is so pathetic?  It’s that I know there are an awful lot of people out there who would hear me describe those conditions and their response would just be a pitiful shake of the head in disgust:  “It’s just so awful that your birthmother should have had to have gone through that in order to have been able to abort you!”  Like that’s compassionate?!!  I fully realize that they think they are being compassionate, but that’s pretty cold-hearted from
where I stand, don’t you think?  That is my life that they are so callously talking about and there is nothing compassionate about that position.  My birthmother is okay – her life went on and in fact, she's doing great, but my life would have been ended.  I may not look the same as I did when I was four years old or four days old yet unborn in my mother’s womb, but that was still undeniably me and I would have been killed through a brutal abortion.

The nasty disposition and foul mouth of this second back-alley abortionist, along with a fear for her own safety, caused her to back out.  When she told him by phone that she wasn't interested in this risky arrangement, this abortion doctor insulted her and called her names.  To her surprise, he called again the next day to try to talk her into aborting me once again, and again she declined and was hurled insults.  So that was it -- after that she just couldn’t go through with it.  My birthmother was then heading into her second trimester – far more dangerous, far more expensive to have me 
aborted.

In law school, I’d also have classmates say things to me like, “Oh well!  If you’d been aborted, you wouldn’t be here today, and you wouldn’t know the difference anyway, so what does it matter?”  Believe it or not, some of the top pro-abortion philosophers use that same kind of argument:  “The fetus never knows what hits him, so there’s no such fetus to miss his life.”    And if a baby is aborted, and no one else is around to know about it, does it matter?  The answer is, “YES!  Their lives matter.  My life matters.  Your life matters and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise!

According to the research of Dr. David Reardon, director of the Elliot Institute, co-editor of the book Victims and Victors:  Speaking Out About Their Pregnancies, Abortions and Children Resulting From Sexual Assault, and author of the article "Rape, Incest and Abortion:  Searching Beyond the Myths," most women who become pregnant out of sexual assault do not want an abortion and are in fact worse-off after an abortion.  http://www.afterabortion.org. 
So most people's position on abortion in cases of rape is based upon faulty premises:  1) the rape victim would want an abortion, 2) she'd be better off with an abortion and 3) that child's life just isn't worth having to put her through the pregnancy. 

I hope that my story, and those following, will be able to help dispel that last myth.

For Life,
Rebecca
rebecca@rebeccakiessling.com

Rebecca's website has footage from three women who were raped and who defied pressure from society to abort their babies. Their stories are both beautiful and powerful - well worth watching.  http://rebeccakiessling.com/PregnantByRape.html