In Italy, gain and loss in the struggle for life

On November 11, 2011, in Blog, by Alisdair

abortion italy In Italy, gain and loss in the struggle for life

Cross posted from Jospephine Quintavalle. Josephine is the director of CORE, Comment on Reproductive Ethics, a non-profit organisation in the UK which focuses on the controversial issues associated with human reproduction. The group was founded in 1994 and is a key contributor to ethical debate at national and international level.

I receive an excellent newspaper cutting service from the Movimento per la Vita in Italy, and am grateful to my pro-life colleagues in that great country for keeping us up-to-date on the significant progress they are making on so many ethical fronts.

Last week, for example, there was news highlighting the significant financial aid being offered by the Friuli region of Italy to pregnant women facing economic hardship, an excellent example of a very practical solution to a major cause of crisis in pregnancy.

And it was encouraging in October to read — albeit reported unenthusiastically by Italian daily newspaper La Repubblica – that, thanks to a huge increase in healthcare professionals registering conscientious objection to abortion, the annual number of terminations has gone down from 231,000 in 1982 to 115,372 in 2010.

The refusal of Italian medical staff (gynaecologists, anaesthetists, nurses, and others) to take part in abortion has been felt particularly in the South, and La Repubblica states that there are now only some 150 doctors (many elderly) left who are prepared to perform them. How soon before there are none?

According to the newspaper, one Italian abortionist laments that he has had no holiday in eight years because nobody else will do terminations in the hospital where he works. He does nothing else, no other gynaecological interventions, and is cold-shouldered by medical co-workers. He has handed in his notice.

Abortion numbers halved in 15 years! And largely through the power of conscientious objection. Congratulations to our Italian friends. If only we could count on such solidarity within our own health professions.

But …

There was another Italian abortion story reported recently, however, which does not make for such comfortable reading, and which highlights a very significant problem within the European community in general. (Sunday Times, 9 Oct.)

It was about an abortion performed in London at 28 weeks gestation on an Italian mother, who flew over to confirm a diagnosis of fetal abnormality. This was followed by feticide (a fatal injection to the fetal heart). She returned home quickly and the dead baby was delivered soon after. The story came to light because of an inquiry at the hospital where the abortion was completed.

Some 140 Italian women come to England every year for abortions, along with many from other countries both within and outside the European Union. Many are late abortions and quite possibly involve feticide, but it is not known on how many occasions the woman has then gone home to deliver a dead baby. This was considered one of the most horrifying aspects of the recent Italian case, and even some pro-abortion doctors expressed huge discomfort on hearing about it.

Abortion always horrifies, but now there’s a wider problem we have to confront.

Many European countries have stringent regulations in place, even completely banning abortion, or limiting the practice significantly, but it matters little to those with means to travel outside their own country. What is prohibited in one country will be permitted in another, not least Britain which has some of the most liberal legislation in the world.

Abortion tourism makes a complete mockery of restrictive national legislation – and this applies equally to fertility tourism. It is almost impossible to conjure up a scenario involving assisted reproduction so unacceptable that it would be universally banned across Europe.

I do not know what the answer is, but at the moment the trump cards are held by the most liberal countries, even if they are in the minority. If you can’t do it in your own country, shop around and you are sure to find somewhere unprincipled where anything and everything is permitted.

Tagged with:
 

The Statistics New Zealand has just released the official abortion statistics for 2010, and they make for some encouraging reading.

From the official Statistics New Zealand press release:

The number of abortions performed in New Zealand decreased in 2010, Statistics New Zealand said today. A total of 16,630 induced abortions were performed in New Zealand in 2010, 920 fewer than in 2009.

The general abortion rate (abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years) decreased from 19.2 per 1,000 in 2009 to 18.1 in 2010.

“The 2010 abortion rate is the lowest since 1999 when it was 18.0 per 1,000,” Population Statistics acting manager Deb Potter said. “This lower abortion rate indicates that the decrease in the number of abortions was due to fewer women having abortions rather than to changes in the size or age structure of the population.”

From …

At times it seems that some UN policy makers want the world to follow the US when it comes to abortion. This is what it would look like. Forty-one per cent of all pregnancies in New York City end in abortion.  The grim statistic has activated new pro-life initiatives in the metropolis.

Last week, religious leaders called for a unified effort to lower the number of abortions in the city.  Rabbi Chaim Dovid Zwiebel of Agudath Israel of America challenged, “We’ve been hearing for many years from pro-choice supporters that abortion should be safe, legal and rare. If that’s the goal, we’ve clearly, abysmally failed, especially here in New York City.”

Archbishop Timothy Dolan urged that the public has “to do more than shiver over these chilling statistics.” The archbishop reaffirmed the pledge made by the late John Cardinal O’Connor, to find assistance in 2011 to any expecting mother in need of help.

The New York-based Chiaroscuro Foundation, headed by hedge-fund manager Sean Fieler, organized a press conference to raise the alarm about these statistics.  In answer to the plea from religious leaders to find new ways to reduce to the abortion rate, the Chiaroscuro Foundation pledged $1 million in 2011 to support women experiencing unplanned pregnancies, raise awareness of the high abortion rate and support abstinence education programs.

Greg Pfundstein, Executive Director of the Chiaroscuro Foundation, stressed that while abortion is legal still the public “can’t pretend this isn’t a social and public health problem of massive proportions.”  Pfundstein points out that with abortion rates as high as NYC’s, “any medical risks associated with abortion could amount to a public-health crisis, as the disturbing rise in the rate of pre-term birth may already indicate.”

Full story here…

Tagged with:
 

Abortions on young NZ’s double in 20 years

On July 8, 2010, in Blog, by Admin

The number of children having abortions has almost doubled over the past 20 years.

The latest statistics have prompted calls for parents to be informed if their daughter is considering an abortion, but health professionals say the move would be “disastrous”.

Last year, 79 girls aged from 11 to 14 had abortions. Of those, 68 were 14-year-olds and 13 aged 11 to 13.

The latest figure is nearly twice the 43 girls under 14 who had abortions in 1991. While the figures have generally been rising, the peak was in 2005, when 105 girls aged 14 and under had an abortion.

Family First director Bob McCoskrie said it was outrageous that parents had to sign a consent form for their child to go on a school trip to the zoo but could be left in the dark if their 11-year-old was having an abortion.

Family First and ProLife New Zealand have been campaigning for parents to have the legal right to be informed if their daughter is considering an abortion.

A law change that would have made it mandatory, backed by National MP Judith Collins, was voted down in 2004.

McCoskrie said a recent Family First-commissioned poll found 80 per cent of people thought parents should be told if their daughter was pregnant and considering an abortion.

He said there was support for the idea within the National Party, but no-one seemed willing to push through a law change.

“Abortion is the only procedure or event in a teenager’s life where for no good reason good parents are legally excluded,” he said.

Wellington teenager Jasmine Thomas said she felt pressured by staff at a youth health clinic to have an abortion from the moment she found she was pregnant.

The 17-year-old said she did not want one, but was given nearly 20 pamphlets on abortion to take home.

Questions from doctors and peer pressure from friends meant she started to consider a termination, but decided against it after her 12-week scan.

“I think heaps [of young people] get pressured into it,” she said.

Thomas, who is due in nine weeks, said parents should have the right to know if their daughter was considering an abortion, but not to interfere in her decision.

Full story here…

I think that the comments from pro-abortionist doctor Sue Bagshaw are actually quite interesting.

Here’s what the article has to say:

“Christchurch youth health physician Sue Bagshaw said any move to make informing parents mandatory would be “disastrous”.

Girls would be too frightened to access health care, which would mean more unwanted babies, she said.”

I sense an agenda.

You see, with this comment, Bagshaw has shown that she is committed to the belief that abortion is better than an unwanted baby is.

Bagshaw’s comments show that when she deals with young woman in a crisis-pregnancy she goes into such sessions with a pre-concieved belief that abortion is better for a young woman than an unwanted baby is.

See the problem here?

Quite clearly, her attitude here, backs up what Jasmine Thomas said, when she talked about feeling ‘pressured by staff at a youth health clinic to have an abortion from the moment she found she was pregnant.’

Which is exactly why parents need to be given the right to protect their daughters from this sort of pressure.

Bagshaw then goes on to invoke the classic pro-abortion urban legend:

“I would be really concerned they would turn to back-street abortions or do it themselves.”

Sounds scary, but lacks all credibility as an argument.

Press release from Family Life International on Auckland DHB looking to cease funding of free morning-after pill scheme.

Monday 5 July, 2010

Family Life International NZ is pleased to hear that the Auckland DHB is no longer so focussed on committing public money to funding the free morning-after pill scheme.

“International research has shown that free morning-after pill campaigns are completely ineffective at reducing either teenage pregnancy rates, or abortion rates, and so any further spending on the Auckland scheme would be wasting public money that could be better spent on more pressing health needs” says Family Life International media spokesperson Brendan Malone.

“At the time that the DHB announced that it was going to be spending $300,000 in public funds on this scheme, Family Life International publicly stated that such a move was a pointless waste of money, and now the DHB’s own statistical analysis of abortion rates in their region has shown this to be correct” says Brendan Malone.

“Family Life International was very clear in its initial response to the Auckland morning-after pill trial that the best and most comprehensive international research shows that increased availability and access to the morning-after pill does absolutely nothing to reduce rates of abortion and teenage pregnancy.”

“It’s a shame that more careful attention wasn’t paid to this widely available research before $300,000 was wasted on this trial” says Brendan Malone.

ENDS

Remember this?:

“Giving girls and women the emergency contraceptive pill for free may have reduced the number of abortions performed by the Auckland District Health Board, officials suggest.”

A board paper by a planning and funding manager, Wendy Hoskin, indicates it may have affected the number of terminations performed at the board’s Epsom Day Unit, the region’s main abortion provider.

“When reviewing the statistics on termination of pregnancy, there has been a 13 per cent reduction in the numbers undertaken over the [October-December] period,” she says. “There could be a variety of reasons for the reduction, however early results show a positive trend.”

It comes from a NZ Herald story publiched last March.

You might also remember that we published a blog post at that same time which challenged the assertions made in that article – we basically stated that this was nothing more than PR spin from the DHB to try and justify the use of public funds on a technique that has been already been proven to be useless at reducing crisis-pregnancies and abortions.

You might also remember that in March this year Family Life International issued a press release about yet another study from the UK showing that the morning-after pill does not reduce crisis pregnancy or abortion rates.

As far as we can ascertain, that study was never even reported on in the NZ media.

Well, on the weekend, the NZ Herald ran this story

“…the full analysis has now concluded that while there was a “downward trend in terminations” the changes were not big enough to be considered statistically significant.”

And the hopeful news is this part of the article:

“Board officials urged the community and public health advisory committee to support making the pill free permanently.

But the chief planning and funding officer, Denis Jury, said yesterday the board would instead “consider a range of options to address the broader issue of teenage pregnancies”.