Life Issues

Footprints Magazine Mid 2002

RIGHT TO LIFE IN HIGH COURT ACTION
Society seeks legal protection for unborn children and mothers by restricting use of the French abortion pill RU486.
The ASC in March filed an application with the High Court in Wellington seeking clarification on the use of Mifepristone, RU486 the French abortion pill. The hearing is scheduled for two days the 18th and 19th September. The application was made on behalf of the drugs importer Istar Ltd. The CS&A Act sect 18 requires that an abortion be performed at a licensed institution. The chairman of the ASC Dr Lesley Rothwell, a Wellington GP, said that the committee wanted the court to clarify whether women had to stay in the hospital or clinic until the embryo or foetus had been expelled. Right to Life New Zealand has engaged the services of Peter McKenzie QC to represent the society at this important hearing. The grounds stated by the society in the application to the court to be heard were that the interpretation of application of section 18 of the Act could have serious implications for the welfare and health of women in the performance of abortions in New Zealand and is an issue of considerable public importance. Kristy McDonald QC will be representing the ASC at this hearing for a declaratory judgement.
At a preliminary hearing, Justice Wild indicated that Right to Life may be granted the status of amicus curiae. Kristy McDonald’s council for the ASC, in a letter to the society’s council on 28 May stated that the ASC opposed this proposed appointment on the grounds that they would prefer that the amicus is someone who has had no association with any interest group in this area. It is mentioned that a media release from the Ministry of Health on the 30th August stated that women being administered RU486 were to remain on the licensed premises after the administration of the prostaglandin until expulsion of the foetus occurs. Right to Life understands that the Minister of Health had previously obtained an opinion from the Solicitor General which confirmed this requirement in compliance with section 18. Right to Life, in correspondence with the ASC had been advised that the committee had sought an opinion from a Wellington QC that had also confirmed this interpretation of section 18. These facts raise important questions about the appropriateness of the ASC seeking this court action at the taxpayers expense on behalf of a private company. It is contended by Right to Life that if Istar Ltd. wished to promote its business by challenging section 18, they should have done so at their own expense. Our society wrote to the Minister of Justice, the minister responsible for the performance of the CS&A Act on 6th April. We submitted that the ASC had acted inappropriately in bringing this action and requested that the Minister direct the ASC to withdraw the action. The Minister replied on 20th May advising that it would be inappropriate for him “to direct the ASC, or otherwise intervene in the way that it carries out its duties.” It is noted that since the passing of the CS&A Act in 1977 the interpretation of section 18 has been, until now, unchallenged.
Section 18 states: Restrictions on where abortions may be performed
-(1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, no abortion shall be performed elsewhere than in an institution licensed for the purpose in accordance with this Act.
Section 2, Interpretation – In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires -
“Abortion” means a medical or surgical procedure carried out or to be carried out for the purpose of procuring – a) The destruction or death of an embryo or foetus after implantation OR b) The premature expulsion or removal of an embryo or foetus after implantation otherwise than for the purpose of inducing the birth of a foetus believed to be viable, or removing a foetus that has died.
Section 37, Offences states – (1) Every person who – a) Performs an abortion elsewhere than in a licensed institution commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding $1000.
In our society’s view, section 18 is clear in its intent. It is an important part of the legal framework that was intended to protect mothers and their unborn children. The requirement that women having an abortion do so in a licensed facility is to ensure that all the necessary facilities are available to attend to complications should they arise. The Minister of Health will be giving evidence at this hearing, we believe to support a new interpretation of section 18. It is our society’s view that this hearing is an attempt to change the law without recourse to Parliament. It is mentioned that RU486 is to our knowledge only being provided at the Parkview Clinic in Wellington hospital for selected late term abortions. Our society in September 2001, wrote to the five major DHBs where the majority of abortions are performed. We presented them with a submission requesting them not to introduce RU486. The DHBs were Auckland, Waikato, Canterbury, Otago and Capital & Coast. Each DHB except Wellington advised that a decision to use RU486 had not been made.
RU486 is a human pesticide. Our society has been campaigning since 1990 to keep this lethal drug, manufactured for the sole purpose of killing unborn children, out of New Zealand. Our society’s involvement in this important hearing is part of this continuing campaign.
At the directions conference on 30th May, Justice J. Wild, was replaced by Justice Gendall, the former being disqualified from dealing with this matter. The Judge ruled that all of the intervening applicants including Istar Ltd, and the Ministry of Health, should have party status and all would be granted permission to make submissions in the court. The court directed that all of the interveners before the court, including Right to Life, should be heard and receive the submissions of the applicant, the ASC, and be permitted to make submissions and to speak to those submissions at the hearing. There would be no cross-examination. Mr Bruce Squire QC was appointed as amicus to assist the court.

GENERAL ELECTION 2002
We have the privilege and responsibility to elect on the 27th July a new Parliament and government. At this time it is desirable to consider the inspired words of a great American statesman Thomas Jefferson.. “The care of human life and happiness and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government.” The first duty then of Parliament, is to ensure that there is effective legal protection for every citizen from conception to natural death. New Zealand urgently needs a strong pro-life Parliament. For a voter concerned for the right to life, there is a well-known principle that overrules party affiliations or allegiances. Any candidate who would deny the human rights of the unborn is unfit to sit in Parliament. The promotion of a culture of life and the opposing of a culture of death should be the principle issue at this election. This will only happen if we make it an issue by ensuring that before we decide on which electoral candidate we are going to vote for and which party we are going to support with our list vote, you’re encouraged to telephone the candidate and seek his or her views on effective legal protection for the unborn child.
Right to Life has commenced its election campaign and is undertaking the following action 1. To send a questionnaire to approximately 400 electorate candidates of the major political parties. 2. To prepare an election guide to be advertised in major city newspapers. 3. To prepare an election guide to be sent to approximately 400 churches in New Zealand.
As this is a snap election the severe time constraints may influence the completion of this campaign. Readers are invited to visit our society’s web page - www.right-to-life.org for information received on the responses of candidates to our questionnaire and party policies.
The questionnaire sent to candidates was as follows.
If elected to Parliament at this election;
Would you support increased legal protection in New Zealand for children before birth? Yes/No
The Crimes Act states that an unborn child does not become a human being until it is born. Would you support Legislation that would recognise the human rights of a child before birth as with a child after birth? Yes/No
Females under 16 years of age may have an abortion without the knowledge or consent of their parents. Would you support an amendment to the Guardianhship Act to require that an abortion on a girl under the age of 16 may not be performed without knowledge and consent of parents? Yes/No
Would you Oppose Legislation that would give doctors the right to kill or assist suicide of their patients (Euthanasia) ? Yes/No

Party Stances on Protection of the Unborn Child
The following Political Parties have no policy to support increase legal protection for the unborn child; National, Labour, Act, NZ First, Progressive Coalition and Greens.
Christian Heritage Party
The first plank of the Christian Heritage Party concerns the family and the first point under that heading is “respect for life”
The Christian Heritage Party would: - Uphold the sanctity of life from conception to natural death. - Vigorously uphold the legal rights of the unborn child. As an initial step towards that goal, we would amend the Contraception, Sterilisation and Abortion Act by removing the “mental health” clause under which more than 98 per cent for abortions are performed. - Encourage community support for women and their families in crisis pregnancy situations. - Provide new funding for research into post-abortion trauma. - Promote adoption as an alternative to abortion. - Amend the Bill of Rights Act to recognise the human rights of unborn New Zealanders. - Ensure the availability of full counselling services, independent of abortion clinics. - Oppose any form of euthanasia, including assisted suicide. - Make it illegal to destroy, experiment on, or sell embryos resulting from in vitro fertilisation (IVF)
The Christian Heritage party is committed to upholding the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death, as one of its eleven non- negotiable policy principles.
United Future
The Hon Peter Dunne MP, has advised our society in a letter that “One of United Future’s founding principles is respect for life. We uphold the current law on abortion, but want to see it enforced as it was intended so that the total number of abortions will be reduced. United Future answers “yes” to each of the questions you have posed. This response is made on behalf of all United Future candidates.
We would encourage members to use their list vote to defend life, oppose the killing of unborn children and euthanasia by using your list vote to support the Christian Heritage Party or United Future.

ABORTIONS – YEAR ENDED DEC 2001
Statistics Released by Statistics New Zealand – 11 June 2002
Number of abortions
The trend in the number of abortions performed in New Zealand continues upwards. A total of 16, 400 induced abortions were performed in New Zealand in the December 2001 year, 300 or 1.9 percent more than in 2000 (16, 100). The latest rise follows an increase of 3.9 percent in 2000 and an annual average increase of 5.6 percent between 1993 and 1997.

Abortion rates
The general abortion rate (number of abortions per 1, 000 women aged 15-44 years) increased from 19.0 in 2000 to a high of 19.4 in 2001. Abortion ratios followed a similar pattern. The abortion ratio per 1, 000 known pregnancies (live births, stillbirths and abortions combined) increased from 220 to 226. This means that just over one in five known pregnancies was terminated by induced abortion.
Table 4 gives the age-specific and total abortion rates for New Zealand women during 1991-2001. The total abortion rate gives the number of abortions that a group of women could expect to have during their reproductive life, given the age-specific abortion rates of a particular year. On the basis of the 2001 age-specific abortion rates, on average, 1,000 New Zealand women could expect to have 606 induced abortions during their reproductive life, that is, about six abortions for every ten women. The total abortion rate for the year 2001 represents an increase of around 50 percent on the abortion rate of 408 per 1,000 recorded a decade earlier in 1991.

Abortions by age of women
The age group 20–24 years is the most common age for abortions, accounting for approximately three out of ten abortions in any year. Women in this age group had the highest abortion rate – 37.5 per 1,000 in 2001. Beyond age 24, both the number and rate of abortion decreases with increasing age: the older the woman, the lower the rate. Women aged 25–29 years had the second highest level among all women (26.3 per 1,000 in 2001), followed closely by women aged 15–19 years (24.1 abortions per 1,000).
Between 2000 and 2001, abortion rates rose for women aged 15-34 years. The rate for 15-19 year-old women rose by 2.6 percent from 23.5 percent per 1,000 to 24.1 percent per 1,000. The rate for women aged 20-34 years rose by an average of 4.1 percent. The largest percentage increase was recorded among women aged 45 years and over, their rate increased from 0.3 per 1,000 in 2000 to 0.4 per 1,000 in 2001. However, the actual numbers involved are small (less than 50) and there is a lot of year to year variation.
The abortion rate dropped by 14.3 percent for 11-14 year-old women from 0.7 per 1,000 in 2000 to 0.6 per 1,000 in 2001. However, as with women aged 45 years and over, the actual number of abortions involved is small. The rate for women aged 35-39 years and 40-44 years also decreased by 3.5 and 4.8 percent respectively.
As with women giving birth, those having abortions are gradually becoming older. Those aged 25 years and over accounted for 51 percent of all abortions in 2001, and 50 percent in 1991. The average age of women having an abortion has risen by 0.4 years since 1991 to 26.5 years in 2001. This compares with an average age of 29.5 years for women giving birth.

Marital status
While the number of abortions has increased in the past ten years, there has been a gradual change in the marital status of women having abortions during this period. This may be attributed partly to changes in family formation patterns, especially the trend towards fewer and later marriages, the growth of de facto unions, and a growing proportion of New Zealand women remaining single through their 30s.
The majority of abortions in any year are to women who have never been married. During the 1990s, they have made up a slowly growing proportion of all women having abortions, up from 58.6 percent in 1991 to 59.6 percent in 2001. The corresponding increase for women in de facto unions was from 7.8 percent to 13.9 percent. These increases were in contrast to married and separated women who made up 30.0 percent of all women having abortions in 1991, but 24.3 percent in 2001.

Previous abortions
A growing proportion of induced abortions are now repeat abortions. About 34.0 percent (or one in three) of all abortions in 2001 were performed on women who had had at least one previous abortion, up from 28.6 percent in 1996 and 23.2 percent in 1991. One in ten women having an abortion in 2001 had had two or more previous abortions.
By contrast, first time abortions accounted for 66.0 percent of all abortions in 2001, compared with 71.4 percent in 1996 and 76.8 percent a decade earlier in 1991.

Previous Children
A growing proportion of women having abortions have already had one or more live births. Some 46.8 percent of the women who had an abortion in 2001 had no children. This is similar to a figure of 46.9 percent recorded in 2000, but significantly down on the 1991 figure of 50.0 percent. By contrast, 19.2 percent of women having an abortion in 2001 had one previous live birth, compared with 18.0 percent in 1991. Similarly, about 34.0 percent of women having an abortion had two or more live births, compared with 32.0 percent in 1991. Further analysis shows sharp differentials by age. About 8 percent of the 15-19 year age group who had an abortion in 2001 had no children. Among 30-34 year-olds, 57 percent had two or more children.

Duration of pregnancy
The latest data shows a further increase in the number of terminations performed under eight weeks gestation. The percentage of abortions where the duration of pregnancy was less than eight weeks increased from 5.3 percent in 2000 to 5.6 percent in 2001, and has more than doubled since 1996 (2.4 percent). However, the percentage of abortions where the duration of pregnancy was between eight and nine weeks decreased from 32.2 percent in 2000 to 29.0 percent in 2001. By contrast, there was an increase in pregnancies of 11 and 12 weeks duration, from 29.1 percent in 2000 to 30.4 percent in 2001. Similarly, there was an increase in the proportion of abortions at more than 12 weeks gestation from 11.3 percent to 12.9 percent.
The most common pregnancy length was ten weeks, which accounted for 22.1 percent of all induced abortions in both 2000 and 2001.

Ethnicity
Ethnic-specific abortion data and other demographic data (for example births) are not directly comparable because of the differences in the questions asked to collect ethnic information. Consequently, ethnic differentials are difficult to measure precisely. Broadly based comparisons do indicate that Asian women have a higher abortion ratio (number of abortions per 1,000 known pregnancies) than their European counterparts. In 2001, the abortion ratio was 207 for European women and 364 for Asian women, which was 61 percent above the national average (226). The corresponding ratios for Maori women and Pacific women were 280 and 255 respectively.
A more detailed analysis of ethnic differentials in abortions was carried out by Statistics New Zealand in 2001. This study looked at the age patterns of women seeking abortions among the main ethnic groups and found that Asian women seeking abortion were older than women of other ethnic groups. Asian women aged 30-44 years accounted for 42 percent of all Asian abortion patients in 2000. In comparison, Maori women aged 30-44 years accounted for less than one-quarter of Maori abortion patients. These differences are a direct result of the different childbearing patterns among the two ethnic groups.
This study also found that young Asian women (under 25 years) show a relatively high propensity to abort a pregnancy. In 2000, around 75 percent of Asian teenagers aborted their pregnancy compared with 59 percent for European teenagers, 41 percent for Pacific teenagers and 32 percent for Maori teenagers. Similarly about half of pregnant Asian women aged 20-24 years, but only one-quarter of their Maori counterparts terminated their pregnancy. For more information see “Ethnic differentials in induced abortions in New Zealand”, available on the Statistics New Zealand website (www.stats.govt.nz)

Levels and trends in induced abortion – an international comparison
In recent years in New Zealand, induced abortion has grown significantly in importance as a factor in regulating and influencing fertility, despite the availability of a wide range of contraceptive methods. This brief note compares the level and pattern of induced abortion in New Zealand with those of other selected countries, including Australia, Canada, England and Wales, and the United States. The comparative analysis draws on three indices, ie abortion ratio, total abortion rate and age-specific abortion rates.
Table 8 gives the latest abortion rates and ratios for the various countries. The abortion ratio gives the number of induced abortions per 1,000 abortions and live births combined. The denominator is supposed to represent known pregnancies, but a restricted alternative was adopted which excluded miscarriages (because of lack of data) and late foetal deaths. These data limitations aside, the abortion ratio for any country indicates the number of known pregnancies that are terminated by an induced abortion.

Society Report
Media – Media releases have been made to the national media including newspapers, radio and TV on embryonic research, the emergency contraceptive pill (ECP), the abortion statistics for 2001, and on the Queens Birthday honour of Dr. Sparrow. Interviews with the society’s spokesperson were broadcast on TV3 on the abortion statistics. NOW TV on embryonic stem cell research, NOW TV on abortion statistics, CTV on abortion statistics, CTV on euthanasia.
Comments from the society were sought by the Sunday Star Times on IVF embryo research, the Wellington evening Post and Radio NZ on the Queens birthday honour of Dr. Sparrow.
Important Correspondence
Abortion Supervisory Committee (ASC)
A request was made to the ASC seeking under the Official Information Act, statistical information not provided in the committee’s annual report.
Minister of Health (MOH)
A letter was sent to the MOH raising issues about the lawfulness of abortions performed in licensed facilities operated by District Health Boards (DHB). Right to Life submitted that DHBs had a responsibility in law to make certifying consultants and abortionists employed by DHBs accountable for the lawfulness of abortions. The MOH replied that DHBs had no responsibility. This society does not agree with the Minister.
Minister of Justice
A letter was sent to the Minister who is responsible for the performance of the Crimes Act and the Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion Act. We asked questions concerning the accountability of certifying consultants. There has been no reply.
Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB)
A letter was sent to the CDHB requesting information on any contractual and funding arrangements for providing abortions for women outside of Canterbury. About twenty women come from Invercargill and Southland each month.
Unborn child/Medical waste
A letter was sent to the Board on the treatment of the remains of unborn children being treated as medical waste. We wrote: Our society seeks to promote the sanctity of life ethic and the right to life of every human being from conception, intrinsic to this ethic is the respect that should be shown to the body of a human being after life has departed. It is our understanding that the bodily remains of unborn children destroyed at the Lyndhurst Abortion facility are treated as medical waste. We believe that the human remains of these children are collected by Medical Waste Ltd and incinerated with medical waste at their plant in Wairakei Road. The killing of unborn children is a violation of human rights and a great injustice, it is offensive to this society and to many in our community. The treatment of the remains of unborn children as human waste is a cause of further offence. It is our understanding that the Capital and Coast District Health Board do not treat the bodily remains of aborted children as medical waste. The bodily remains are cremated at a crematorium and the ashes distributed at a cemetery. We believe that this protocol is a more respectful and appropriate manner of handling the bodily remains of these children. It gives recognition to the truth that these children are human beings members of the human family and are entitled to respect by the District Health Board and the community. It is important that we do not lose respect for life and the child both in life and in death. We wish to request that your Board give earnest consideration to our submission that the Board cease treating the remains of unborn children as medical waste and adopt the protocol followed by Capital and Coast District Health Board. We believe that such a protocol would be a source of consolation for the mothers whose children are destroyed at Lyndhurst. With respect to those children killed in late term abortions at the Christchurch Women’s Hospital would you oblige by informing us how the bodies of aborted children are cared for after being examined by a pathologist.
The CDHB replied
Women undergoing a termination (or miscarriage) either at the Christchurch Women’s Hospital or at the Lyndhurst Clinic are offered a choice of taking the products of conception with them, of hospital disposal, or where the termination is over 14 weeks the option of cremation is also available. If a pathologist examines the remains, the same choices are offered except the women are advised that the remains will be kept for four weeks before hospital disposal to allow time in case the mother alters her decision. The Christchurch Women’s Hospital is currently reviewing their procedures relating to foetus disposal and is reviewing the procedures of the Capital and Coast DHB and other providers as part of this review.
Churches
Our society sent a letter to approximately 300 churches nationwide encouraging them to writa to the Justice and Electoral select committee. This committee is to conduct an important enquiry into the performance of the Abortion Supervisory Committee after the election. We encouraged churches to request the committee to stop abortion on demand, making certifying consultants accountable and recommend to Parliament that the status of the unborn child be recognised in law as a human being with a right to life. This campaign has helped to raise awareness of the plight of the unborn child and to encourage pro-life action. Our society is grateful to the many churches who have written on behalf of the unborn child and have advised us of their commendable action.
District Health Boards DHBs
Letters were sent to the five major DHBs where the majority of abortions are performed. They were Auckland, Waikato, Capital and Coast, Canterbury and Otago. In a three page submission, Right to Life contended that DHBs had a legal responsibility to ensure that abortions were lawful and that certifying consultants and abortionists employed by the DHB were accountable for the lawfulness of the pattern of abortions they authorised and performed. Replies were received from all five DHBs. They all expressed confidence in the integrity of consultants etc. and disclaimed any legal responsibility for their actions. In the view of this society there is no other area of medicine where doctors are not held accountable. It is inconceivable and frightening that a small number of appointed doctors may take the life of an innocent and helpless unborn child and not be accountable to any person or authority for their action. A complaint has now been lodged with the Ombudsman against a selected major DHB for its failure to make consultants accountable and to ensure that abortions are lawful.
AGM of Right to Life
The AGM was held on 29 April at Age Concern. The President gave a full report on the society’s pro-life action over the previous year and expressed appreciation for support of members. The treasurer Paul Christenhusz presented the society’s audited financial statement for the previous year.
Those elected were
President, Philip Creed. Vice Presidents, Chris O’Brien, Ken Orr. Treasurer, Paul Christenhusz, Secretary, no nominations. Executive, Peter Coleman, Bede Cosgriff, Herman Jansen and Henry Allison. Patrons, the current patrons were re-elected. The Rev. Fr. Pat Kennedy gave an inspirational address titles “Human Life – Miracle of God’s Love”
Appreciation The executive is greatly appreciative of the contribution made to our society and the defence of life by three members who are no longer available to serve on the executive. Brother Lawrence Cole SM, who has been transferred to Timaru, John Bryant, an army officer who has been transferred to service in Australia, and David Malcolm.

Address… AGM “Right to Life NZ Inc.” … 29th April, 2002
“Human Life – Miracle of God’s Love”
Address given by Rev. Father Pat Kennedy, Patron, Right to Life New Zealand

Mr Chairman, members of this Committee, fellow-patrons of this Society, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for the privilege accorded me in asking I address this AGM.
When speaking about such grave matters as abortion, violence against human life, wrongful human experimentation, euthanasia, etc. how very difficult it is to speak with any positiveness, still less with any joy. But that I must endeavour to do.
All of us need a reminder to be joyful especially when things seem bad… “A happy baby at a funeral can raise a smile,” someone said.
I have been guilty as any other in being a grumpy pro-lifer. Standing for life in the face of so much abuse against life, is no easy task. But I must so stand with joy, with hope, and above all with love in my heart.
We must be people of the Risen Lord. Joy indeed! For our work as pro-lifers to be truly worthwhile and meaningful, we must examine our motives for what we do. Christian love must be at the very heart of all we do.
As I speak as Christian, and indeed as Catholic priest, I am reminded of the Risen Christ’s words to me – and to each of us- ‘And remember I am with you always, even to the end of time.’
Sadly, it is a fact, good and evil will co-exist in our world until the end of time. Holy Scripture tells us the final separation, when good will finally conquer evil, will take place only at the end of the age. This is not to say we are ever to condone evil. We must strive always to eradicate it. In doing so our term of reference must always be God.
A baby is kidnapped; a baby dies from cot-death; a toddler drowns in a family pool. Our hearts reach out in sorrow with the grieving parents and families. Then why is it countless N.Z. hearts don’t grieve at the deaths of some 250, 000 abortions (a quarter of a million ) in NZ since 1977? These were baby-deaths directly brought about! It’s abortion ‘on request’ in NZ today. In the light of these facts why would most New Zealanders say simply, “Who cares?”
It is not that those who say, “Who cares!” are bad people. I believe it’s because they see abortion and life’s related injustices, so differently from how we see them. The reasons for that, are truly complex. What we have learnt through family influence, through teachings imparted to us, through our Church’s teaching, through our faith in God, through our ideals and way of life, etc have influenced each of us strongly. Many others – perhaps most – have never had such influences in their lives. Perhaps they have had very opposite influences. Innocently, perhaps even in good conscience, such people are as opposed and out-spoken in their views as we are in ours. But we must never weaken in our stand for life. By our zeal, through prayer and action, we can be sure some – perhaps many- little lives are being saved from violence and death. Miracles can and do happen; and more things are wrought by prayer than this world dreams of. Pope John Paul II said recently to the Oceanic Synod, “The Church’s voice must never be silenced and it must persist in showing compassionate love to a world in need of healing.” Collectively and individually we are that voice.
Human life comes from God; it is his gift, has his image and imprint, a sharing in his breath of life. People cannot do with it as they will. God himself makes this clear to Noah after the Flood: “For your own life-blood, too, I will demand an accounting…. And from man in regard to his fellowman, I will demand an accounting for human life.” (Genesis 0.5)
The biblical text is concerned to emphasise how the sacredness of life has its foundation in God and in his creative activity. “For God made us in his own image.” (Genesis 9.6)
God alone can say: “It is I alone who bring life and death.” (Dt. 32.39). And God does all that as part of his care and loving concern for all his creatures.
This Society, “Right to Life NZ Inc.”, in conformity with the international pro-life movement, is a whole-of-life pro-life organization. It actively seeks to uphold the sanctity of life ethic and the right to life of every human being from conception to natural death. Its struggle is to oppose all that is against the God-given gift of human life such as any type or murder, genocide, abortion, euthanasia; whatever violates the integrity of the human person. It opposes all acts that are a dishonour to the creator.
Today broad sectors of public opinion justify certain crimes against life in the name of the rights of individual freedom, and on that basis they claim not only exemption from punishment but even authorisation by the State, so that these things can be done with total freedom and indeed with the assistance of health-care systems. All this gives cause to grave moral decline. Even certain sectors of the medical profession, which by its calling is directed to the defence and care of human life, are increasingly willing to carry out these acts against human life itself.
Today, more than ever, we must feel in duty bound to speak out with courage on behalf of those who have no voice. Today there exists a great multitude of weak and defenceless human beings, unborn children in particular, whose fundamental right to life is being trampled upon. We must, individually and collectively, respect, protect, love and serve life, every human life.
We have to go to the heart of the tragedy being experienced in modern society: the eclipse of the sense of God and of personhood, typical of a social and cultural climate dominated by secularism, which succeeds in putting Christian communities themselves to the test. Those who allow themselves to be influenced by this climate easily fall into a sad vicious circle: when the sense of God is lost, there is a tendency to lose the sense of person, of his dignity and of his life. “Without the creator the creature would disappear…… But when God is forgotten the creature itself grows unintelligible.” Birth and death, instead of being primary experiences demanding to be “lived”, become things to be merely “possessed” or “rejected”. Conscience then calls “evil good and good evil” – moral blindness!
Hence the most pressing urgency there is of movements and initiatives that raise awareness in defence of human life. One such movement is the very one we are part of this evening – “Right to Life NZ”. All who work so hard within this movement, and in all other movements working so well for the cause of the Gospel of Life, must be thanked sincerely. When in accordance with their principles, such movements act resolutely, but without resorting to violence, they promote a wider and more profound consciousness of the value of human life, and evoke and bring about a more determined commitment to its defence. There is an inescapable responsibility upon us all to be unconditionally pro-life.
The deepest element of God’s commandment to protect human life is the requirement to show reverence and love for every person and the life of every person….. “You shall love your neighbour as yourself.” We might well add to that command of the Lord, “especially the neighbour when at his/her weakest, mostly at the beginning and end of life.”
Among all the crimes which can be committed against life, procured abortion has characteristics making it particularly serious and deplorable. Given such a grave situation, we need now more than ever to have the courage to look the truth in the eye and to call things by their proper name. Consider, for example, how “termination of pregnancy” hides abortion’s true nature. Procured abortion is deliberate killing by whatever means it is carried out, of a human being in the initial phase of his/her existence, extending from conception to birth. In no way could this human being killed ever be considered an aggressor, much less an unjust aggressor. He/she is weak, defenceless even to the point of lacking that minimal form of defence consisting in the poignant power of a new-born baby’s cries and tears….. though, in the actual killing of the unborn babe, the cries and tears might well be present, though not perceived.
Abortion and euthanasia are crimes which no human law can claim to legitimise. There is no obligation in conscience to obey such laws; instead there is a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection.. “We must obey God, before man.” (Acts 5.29)
“Even unwanted children should be welcomed into life and protected by law,” said President Bush recently. And when saying that he went on to quote President Jefferson’s timeless principle where that President said, “We are obligated to pursue a civil society that will democratically embrace its moral duties, including defending the elderly, strengthening the weak, protecting the defenceless, feeling the hungry, and caring for children – born and unborn.” And what about the abuse of the human embryo today? Pope John Paul II states clearly, “The human embryo is one of us.” The president of the Italian Bioethics Commission also said, when referring to the Pope’s statement, “I continue to think that the proposal of the pro-life movement is valuable, not because it is able to resolve miraculously and once and for all so many bioethical questions, but because it is the bearer of a simple but symbolically high and strong message: the human embryo is one of us.”
Yes, indeed, human life comes from God; it is his gift, has his image and imprint, a sharing in his breath of life. God, therefore, is the sole Lord of this life. People cannot do with it as they will.

With these few words I wish to preface this address.
“A human with complete dimensions is one who acts in the grace and knowledge of God”……. A thought attributed to the great Thomas Aquinas.
In this address you will find I make quite some reference to God. I cannot make any apologies for that, for, as Christian and Catholic priest, I can never view human life with all its implications, without the term- of- reference being God.
Then I must base my beliefs upon the time honoured canons of the Church whose teachings I both believe and profess.
I don’t think this will be any difficulty for any here tonight, though we might be of different Church traditions.
“Human Life – Miracle of God’s Love” is the title I have chosen for this address. I develop this talk from such Church teachings as these – and I quote;
Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognised as having the rights of a person – among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life. (2270)
Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion…… (2771)
The inalienable right to life of every human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation. (2273)
Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable. (2277)
THE DIGNITY OF THE HUMAN PERSON
The dignity of the human person is rooted in his/her creation in the image and likeness of God…… (1700)
Endowed with “a spiritual and immortal” soul, the human person is “the only creature on earth that God has willed for its own sake.” From his/ her conception he/she is destined for eternal beatitude. (1703)

Messages from our Patrons

Bishop John Cunneen
Bishop of Christchurch
I value and support Right to Life New Zealand Inc. as it seems human life is sacred since it involves the creative action of God and it remains in a special relationship with God as creator. The choice is Lord of life from its beginning to its end. No one can under any circumstances claim for him/herslef the right directly to destroy an innocent human being.

Fr. Patrick J. Kennedy
I thank you for again offering me the privilege to be a patron of your Society. It is with gratitude I accept your invitation. I shall endeavour to serve as Patron as best I am able.
With right regard and respect for human life from conception to natural death seemingly ever on the decrease in New Zealand, how important it is a Society such as yours exists. To your credit this Society has already made profound impress both in Christchurch and well beyond in it.
May your good work “for the cause of human life” prosper. I pray that God, the giver of all life, will bless you and your work abundantly.

The Hon. H.J. Walker.
Thank you for your letter of 6th March 2001 and your invitation to continue my patronage of your gallant and very necessary work for the ensuring year. Be assured, I accept with pleasure.
I am aware your task is not always an easy one and that a minority of others, for reasons of their won, hold views contrary to ours. However a challenge never hurt anyone. Our work is for the benefit and welfare of present and future generations. We must never give up our crusade.
I recall reading an incident in British history which may give us strength and encouragement in our work. In the mid 1600’s a British General led a small contingent of troops against overwhelming enemy odds. His message to his troops as he led them into battle was, “Have faith in God, Stick to your guns, and keep your powder dry.” The general won a resounding victory.
Be assured our members will win our battle for the benefit and welfare of all people. We must never give up.
Keep up the good work.

Rev. John A. Haverland.
Thank you for your letter inviting me to continue my patronage of the Society. I am pleased to accept that and count it an honour and privilege to be a patron.
“This Society performs a necessary and valuable function in our nation – that of acting as a salt and light for the sanctity of life, from conception to natural death. Such a task is all the more urgent in the light of the moral decline in New Zealand and trends in proposed government legislation on matters relating to the family and values. Over the last few decades the Christian ethic has receded into the background and does not guide or inform public or private decision making. Now we (as a nation) are reaping what we have sown. Those who trust in the Triune God and believe the Bible must continue to uphold and proclaim Christian truth and virtues. And we must pray for this country. May God bless the efforts and witness of this Society to the truth that is supremely evident in the Lord Jesus Christ.”

Graham Capill
Thank you for your letter dated 9 March 2002, inviting me to continue as a Patron of Right to Life. I would be honoured to do so. I consider it a privilege and believe that protecting human life from exploitation is one of the most pressing issues facing the world. I am happy to fulfil any role or responsibility to help address the outrage. Thank you for asking me again. I feel privileged to be associated with your organization.

Few greater issues face NZ, or indeed the world, than the pursuit of protecting innocent life from death and exploitation. It is a sad indictment on any society when the weak and vulnerable are the target of abuse. The vulnerability of infants and the killing of the sick, and old are the hallmarks of an uncivilized, non-Christian society. That NZ is now embroiled in both is an unmitigated evil that must be challenged and changed.
As the Leader of the Christian Heritage Party (CHP), I want to assure members of Right to Life that we will do all we can to stop abortion and euthanasia. CHP believes that human life is sacred and that no person, family member or the State, has the right to take innocent human life. The challenge for pro-lifers will be to apply these principles when it comes to voting in the ballot box at the General Election. The quickest way to reverse the status quo is to vote a large team of pro-life MPs into office. Please help to do this.
I am greatly encouraged by Right to Life. It is an effective organisation that is not afraid to take a stand and act decisively for life. I hope that it will soon be a truly national force to be reckoned with. It is a matter for great thankfulness that there are compassionate solutions to all perceived and real problems. Stand fast.

Dr. Norman MacLean.
Dear Friends,
Recently in Invercargill I had the privilege to hear Mrs Carolina Gnad of Christchurch speak on Post Abortion Stress and the Post Abortion Trauma Healing Service (P.A.T.H.S). Her presentation was compelling and transfixed the more than 30 health professionals in attendance. How exciting it was to hear the tragic truth of the pain and suffering, usually hidden, of induced abortion at last coming out into the open – it was a major step forward in our willingness to confront the reality of induced abortion. And even more importantly, to hear of the face to face support for post-aborted women and men through a ten step healing and recovery programme. The good news is that there is hope and healing for the hurting and it is available and free. Continue your support of this just cause and be part of the solution.

PHOTO TO BE INCLUDED
Jack McCann 1914-2002 – Eulogy by Bruce Joslin (Son-in-Law)
I believe that in the recent passing of Jack McCann, we have lost one of our great unsung heroes. Jack was a truly great man, the likes of which we rarely see. I speak not of military heroes, scientists, or statesmen, of those we have seen many, but of the meek and humble spirit seeking to serve the Lord, fighting injustice at the most basic level.
Jack was a retired farmer, not long widowed from his wife of over 50 years, Ngaire, who was well known in music, church, St Vincent de Paul, and shared his pro-life enthusiasm. Together they raised a son and eight daughters and enjoyed what seems like multitudes of grandchildren. It has been a privilege and honour to know and serve with a man who was just another defenceless old bloke who could have been anybody’s grand-dad.
In his retirement years, Jack took very seriously the words from Proverbs 24:11, and applied them. [“you shall not stand by and watch the innocent led away to the slaughter..”] He firmly believed that we were to defend the most innocent of our society, the babies in the womb. Soon each visit to the McCann home became an intense questioning time… “what message should we put on this sigh?”, accompanied with a four by two foot board, a pot of red paint and the enthusiastic waving of a paint-brush. Jack used his family as a verbal spring-board, to thrash out any conceivable issue or connotation arising from an issue or action, in any pro-life field of interest anywhere in the world. He kept himself very well informed at all times.
The McCann’s took every opportunity to travel and present the baby in the womb model display at fairs, churches etc, passing out pamphlets as they went and engaging the unwary passers-by in suddenly life-challenging discussions.
For over ten years of retirement Jack McCann travelled to Lyndhurst abortion clinic from his Rangiora home, and stood with his signs from seven a.m. until often five p.m. , sometimes accompanied, often alone. He fasted and took no breaks, and was only forced to give up due to failing health in latter years. He said that “he was there to provide a guard of honour for those children that were going to be killed that day.” During this time of passive action, Jack was there in all weathers, on ‘operating’ days, where in the course of time he was pushed, shoved, assaulted, ridiculed, jeered at and cursed. Someone even tried to run him down with a car on the footpath. Days became weeks, became years, and when babies were being killed Jack was there. Many were saved. Just the night before his funeral we heard another story, of a young woman who was able to say that she was here as a result of the presence of “that old man at the gate.”
Jack’s presence did not go un-noticed by the wider community, and even work-mates have said to me “is that old guy your father-in-law? Man, he’s a legend.”
Jack had no sense of his own self-importance or the merit of what he was doing, he simply did it because it was the right thing to do, and often felt inadequate in the doing. He is, and will be missed. His service to society was inestimable, and I have no doubt that his reception in haven would have been quite an occasion, imagine with me, row upon row, thousands in their numbers, the children who had only one person standing for them, calling out… “Hey Pops! It was me! Here I am!!”

What is Imposed Death?
A personal account of a loved father’s time in hospital
On October 14th 2001 (Sunday morning), our father, who is a very fit and active 80 year old man, was cutting down a tree, when he slipped and fell hitting his head on the concrete. He was taken by ambulance to Middlemore Hospital, accompanied by our mother.
After many tests and a CT Scan, the family was informed that our father had sustained massive brain damage and was in a very deep coma. He was transferred to intensive care that afternoon, where he was put on life support. It was made very clear to us, that our father would die from his injuries within the next few days. As a family, we were devastated, and we had no reason to disbelieve the doctors. Over the next few days, we kept watch over him, and by Thursday 18th, Dad was still alive and still in a coma.
He was taken off life support and the doctors performed a tracheotomy so that they could clear his chest from all congestion.
We were told that day that a neurosurgeon from Auckland Hospital was coming to assess our father, but by late afternoon, he still hadn’t arrived, so my sister and myself decided to return later that evening. We arrived back by 7.30pm and we asked if the Auckland Specialist had been in, the nurse didn’t know but went and got one of the doctors on duty who came and spoke to us both. The doctor introduced himself and said: “No the specialist hasn’t been, but we as a team have made a decision:
“Tomorrow being Friday October 19th, we are going to transfer your father to Ward 4 and we will leave him just as he is (because it is the weekend), but starting Monday, we will remove the tracheotomy, and within a few days your father will develop pneumonia – which we won’t treat and he will die.”
I couldn’t believe what he had just said, so I asked him to repeat it – I was so taken back that all I could say was “that’s murder”. The doctor replied “Madam, we are not in the habit of murdering people.” This whole conversation took place whilst we all stood over our father whose heart rate went up from 90 to 190 as we spoke, and then we were asked to leave.
The doctor knew that my sister and I were very upset and he said to us in a kind sort of voice; “You don’t have human beings for pets.”
Dad was transferred to Ward 4 on Friday and when we visited him on Saturday, we all noticed a huge change. He was coming out of the coma, we were so excited and we rang one of our brothers to tell him the good news.
My brother arrived on the Saturday evening to find that my father (by the hospital’s decision) was in a drug induced coma, so he asked the head nurse in charge of my father’s care “What is going on?”
Her reply was “that as a family you have to accept the face that your father is here to die, and we would appreciate it if you could have a family meeting to discuss if you will agree to all food and water being stopped.”
This would mean Dad would die more quickly. (He was being fed through a tube).
Never had we felt such anger, here was a man who had worked all of his life, paid all his taxes and was a trained nurse himself, but because he was old, taking up a bed, he was worth nothing: Well my sister and myself fought back! We demanded that our father be taken off all drugs, and then we threatened them with legal action, and public exposure – that got their attention! And the outcome of this was several meetings with the doctors and nurses.
As I am writing this, our darling father has recovered, he does everything for himself. His long term memory is excellent, but his short term memory is not so good. Our father is a miracle. If my sister and myself did not fight back, our father would have been executed by dehydration and starvation, or would have just died of untreated pneumonia – all for the crime of being old and brain damaged! Whether we call it “euthanasia” or “mercy killing” or “assisted suicide” we are talking about killing another human being by “Imposed Death”
*On Dad’s recovery, he asked to become a Catholic
*Monday 22nd April 2002, our father is 90% back to normal, and also today has passed his drivers test.
Article by Dianne Black and Sheryl Hickman who are both counsellors at Family Life Pregnancy Centre.
The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 states in section 1: Life and Security of the Person, “You have the right not to be deprived of life”
This article was first published in the Family Life Report, and is published in Footprints with the permission of Family Life International.

Broadcasting Standards Authority – Complaint
Family Planning Association (NZFPA)
Dr. Sue Bagshaw of the NZFPA on 27 Feb in an interview on News Talk ZB stated “there are some who believe that life begins when the sperm enters the egg but at present life begins when the fertilised egg attaches itself to the lining of the uterus,” she went on to say “contraception is before implantation, abortion is after it.”
These statements are scientifically incorrect. Right to Life responded immediately with a formal complaint to Mr Russell Hubber manager of News Talk ZB. Our complaint stated, “Dr Bagshaw stated that human life began at the implantation of the human embryo in a woman’s womb and not at conception. The Broadcasting Act 1989 requires broadcasters to maintain standard consistent with: balance, fairness and accuracy. Dr Bagshaw’s statements were inaccurate and contrary to accepted medical knowledge. The Royal Commission on Contraception, Sterilisation and Abortion in its report to Parliament in 1977 stated: “From a biological point of view there is no argument as to when life begins. Evidence was given to us by eminent scientists from all over the world. None of them suggested that human life begins at any time other than conception.”
Dr Bagshaw’s statements are both inaccurate and dangerous. As a medical practitioner and spokesperson for the Family Planning Association her statements have a perceived authority that would seriously mislead those listening to the programme that she was upholding accepted biological knowledge.
Dr Bagshaw’s statements undermine the respect that is due to the human embryo from conception.
This is a very important issue and we trust that in the interest of the common good you will give earnest consideration to this complaint.”
BANNER
“Life begins when the fertilised egg attaches itself to the lining of the uterus and contraception is before implantation, abortion is after it.” – Dr Sue Bagshaw, New Zealand Family Planning Association.
Mr Hubber replied, “Dr Bagshaw is the Medical Training Co-ordinator for the Family Planning Association and is highly respected nationally for her experience knowledge and expertise in the are of women’s sexual health… Dr Bagshaw has made a number of factual statements consistent with Family Planning policy.”
Our complaint was not upheld. A formal complaint was then lodged with the Broadcasting Standards Authority. We presented statements from five internationally renowned doctors, including a submission from our society patron, Dr Norman MacLean O&G who quoted a further ten authorities including the Declaration of Geneva, to confirm that human life began at conception. It should be noted that the statements made by Dr Bagshaw are consistent with Family Planning Policy. The NZFPA is an affiliate of the International Planned Parenthood Federation IPPF.
Since the introduction of oral contraceptives in the 1960’s the IPPF and others have been endeavouring to gain acceptance of the falsehood that human life begins at implantation and that contraception includes the prevention of implantation.
The reason for this is that many oral contraceptives are abortifacient in nature and destroy a human embryo after conception and before implantation. The successful promotion of contraception among women depended on convincing women that human life did not begin until implantation and that therefore they were not responsible for destroying their own child before implantation by using an oral contraceptive.
This is a very important issue about the commencement of human life and the respect and protection we should afford to the human embryo not a potential human being but a human being with great potential.
This complaint is presented to you in the interest of our community and the women of New Zealand. We believe that women have a right to behold the truth.
It is of great concern to this Society that Dr Bagshaw is permitted to use the public broadcasting service to deliberately propagate dangerous untruths on important life issues to promote the policies of the NZFPA and the IPPF.

Queens Birthday Honours
Dr Margaret Sparrow MBE. DCNZM.
It was announced in the Queen’s Birthday Honours that Dr Margaret June Sparrow of Wellington has been granted the high honour of appointment of the New Zealand Order of Merit for services to medicine and the community.
Right to Life deplores this honour, which is shameful and inappropriate. Our society issued a media release to 20 media including the major newspapers, radio and TV on this important issue. The following is an exerpt: “Dr Sparrow, a Family Planning doctor, was for many years employed to perform abortions at the Parkview Abortion Clinic where more than 2000 abortions were performed each year. This is not a service to unborn children, to medicine, to the community or to women. Dr Christine Forster, previously chairperson of the Abortion Supervisory Committee stated in November 2000 that Parkview was one of the centres where abortion on demand was available. Abortion on demand is a violation of New Zealand’s abortion laws.
Dr Sparrow is also a director and major shareholder of Istar Ltd. The Wellington firm set up to import and distribute the French Abortion Pill into New Zealand. The sole purpose of this lethal drug is to destroy innocent and helpless children before birth. This is also not a service to medicine, the community and to mothers and their unborn children. The Labour Alliance government has honoured Dr Sparrow for work which is seen by many New Zealanders as promoting a culture of death.”
Dr Sparrow has previously said that she is proud to provide abortions for women. We readily acknowledge her sincerity, dedication and desire to help women, it is sad that she is misguided and is another tragic victim of Parkview and a culture of death.
Right to Life has written to the Prime Minister Helen Clarke, who is the chairperson of the Cabinet Honours Committee that prepares the Honour’s list for the Queen’s approval to express our disapproval. A reply was received from Mr Ross Douglas for the Executive Council who provided the following biographical note, “Dr Sparrow, a medical practitioner, is a leading venereologist and leader in the Family Planning movement. In these fields she enjoys a high international reputation. She has been involved with and held office in a variety of organisations including the New Zealand’s Medical Women’s Association, Abortion Law Reform Association and the New Zealand Family Planning Association. She has been a member of delegations to international conferences, including the United Nations Conference of World Population, the World Health Organisation Conference on the Reproductive Health of Adolescents and the World Population Conference.
Dr. Rex Hunton
Former abortionist was made a member of the New Zealand Order of Merit for services to public health. Dr Hunton championed the cause to break down New Zealand’s abortion laws advocating that abortion was a women’s choice. He helped establish New Zealand’s first abortion clinic in Remuera, the Auckland Medical Aid Centre.
Action
If you are offended by the honouring of Dr Margaret Sparrow which in effect is honouring the killing of unborn children, the abortion industry and the activities of the Family Planning Association, please write to the Prime Minister to express your concern.

New Zealand Doctors for Life
(New Zealand section of the World Federation of Doctors who Respect Human Life.)
Following are exerpts from a pamphlet prepared by NZ Doctors for Life.

Doctor’s Rights and Responsibilities and New Zealand Abortion Law
“I solemnly pledge myself to consecrate my life to the service of humanity. I will give to my teacher the respect and gratitude which is their due; I will practice my profession with conscience and dignity; the health of my patient will be my first consideration; I will respect the secrets which are confided in me; I will maintain by all means in my power the honour and noble traditions of the medical profession; my colleagues will be my brothers; I will not permit considerations of religion, nationality, race, party politics, or social standing to intervene between my duty and my patient; I will maintain the utmost respect for human life from the time of conception; even under threat, I will not use my medical knowledge contrary to the laws of humanity. I make these promises solemnly, freely, and upon my honour.”
The Declaration of Geneva
Modern Hippocratic Oath
World Medical Association 1948

Question for General Practitioners
Must a General Practitioner refer a patient requesting termination of pregnancy to a Certifying Consultant?
Answer: No
Reason: 1. Ethical 2. Legal
NZMA Ethical Committee Statement
…at all times a doctor must act in a manner he believes at that time to be in the best interest of the patient…
…a doctor should not participate in a system of medical practice in which he does not retain professional independence…
In the CSA Act it defines the action of a doctor who after considering the case believes there be grounds for carrying out an abortion – there is no mention of action to be taken where a doctor believes there not be grounds for abortion…
A doctor need NOT refer a patient requesting a termination of pregnancy to a certifying consultant provided the doctor carefully considers the case and the doctor believes that no lawful ground is present
Practical Response
-Assess patient’s request carefully and sensitively;
-Consider request and the relevant law
-If, after careful consideration, patient’s request is not considered lawful then do NOT refer to Certifying Consultant;
-Offer counselling by self or Pregnancy Counselling Services or sympathetic colleague;
-Consider merit or ultrasound scan;
-Always invite return for reassessment in one week

Question for Hospital Doctors and Staff
Must a hospital doctor or a health worker admit/assist/expedite a patient undergoing termination of pregnancy?
Answer: No
Reason: 1. Ethical 2. Legal

The Law and Conscientious Objection CSA Act 1977 – Section 46
1. Not withstanding anything in any other enactment, or any rule of law, or the terms of any oath or of any contract (whether of employment or otherwise), no registered medical practitioner, registered nurse, or other person shall be under any obligation: A) To perform or assist in the performance of an abortion or any operation undertaken or to be undertaken for the purpose of rendering the patient sterile; B) To fit or assist in the fitting, or supply or administer or assist in the supply or administering, of any contraceptive, or to offer or give any advice relating to contraception,
If he objects to doing so on grounds of conscience
2. It shall be unlawful for any employer: A) To deny to any employee or prospective employee any employment, accommodation, goods, service, right, title, privilege, or benefit merely because that grounds of conscience to do any act referred to in subsection (1) of this section; or B) To make the provision or grant to any employment, accommodation, goods, service, right, title, privilege, or benefit conditional upon that other person doing or agreeing to do any thing referred to in that subsection.
3. Every person who suffers any loss by reason of any act or omission rendered unlawful by subsection (2) of this section shall be entitled to recover damages from the person responsible for the act or omission.
Conclusion
-You may REFUSE any involvement which will expedite an abortion
-The LAW will protect you

Right to Life has been given information that some registrars in public hospitals are not being advised of their legal rights to refuse to be involved in the killing of unborn children. This society has written to major District Health Boards to ensure all medical staff are advised their legal rights.
If you are interested in further support, information or membership, please contact:
Dr John McArthur
113 Donald Street
Karori
Wellington, 5
or
Dr Norman MacLean
203 Conyers Street
Invercargill
Phone 03-216 8464
or
Dr John Crowley
40 Heretaunga Road
Palmerston North

Embryo Research and Destruction
It is understood from media statements that Dr Peter Benny, Medical Director of the Christchurch Fertility Centre, proposes to seek ethical approval from the National Ethics Committee on Assisted Human Reproduction (NECAHR) for DNA research on human embryos.
Dr Benny has stated that there are an estimated 3,000 healthy embryos in storage left over from IVF treatments.
Scientists at Otago University with the Fertility Centre are conducting research to develop a genetic blueprint of a healthy baby using a procedure called a DNA chip.
Fertility experts hope to use this blueprint when selecting embryos during IVF improving the chances of a pregnancy for couples who can’t have children naturally.
The Fertility Centre will supply the embryos and has already obtained ethical approval from NECAHR to use “non viable” embryos that are deemed so imperfect that they will not come to birth.
Dr Benny has stated that there were many parents who wanted to donate their spare embryos to research.
An application to use these embryos would be made as soon as the DNA chip was working. That was expected to be before the end of the year.
The research would entail the extraction of all the nucleaic acids from the embryos, totally destroying them.
The proposal of Dr Peter Benny to destroy live human embryos is opposed as it is a violation of the human rights of the embryo. Human life begins at conception and every human being has an inalienable right to life. The human embryo is a member of the human family and is entitled to respect and protection. Every human embryo has a right to be conceived in its mothers womb. The child has a right not to be frozen and stored and not experimented on.
The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 states in Section 1 under Life and Security of the Person that “You have the right not to be deprived of life.”
Human embryos are human beings, they are not a commodity and are not the property of parents. Parents have a duty to protect and nurture their children from conception. Parents do not have a right to give their embryos to scientists to conduct research that will destroy their children. This is an important issue concerning respect for life, which raises many important questions for our community. It is understood that the Christchurch Fertility Centre is registered as a company with half of the company shares being held by the Canterbury District Health Board. A submission opposing the research and asking the following questions was sent in May to the Board.
Does the Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB) still have a 50% shareholding in the Christchurch Fertility Centre (CFC)?
Does the CDHB approve of research at the CFC on “non-viable” embryos that entails their destruction?
Does the CDHB approve of the proposed DNA research on “healthy” embryos?
Does the present and proposed research entail the use of funding form the CDHB?

The Board replied that they had not looked into the issues of approval for the research and had no formal view on the issues. The Board confirmed that they had a 50% shareholding in the Fertility Centre. A further letter was sent to the Board stating;
“As the Christchurch Fertility Centre is substantially owned and funded by the Canterbury District Health Board it is the view of our Society that all the activities of the Centre should require the approval of the Board. We assume that as the Board has not looked into this specific issue and has no formal view that the Board was not advised of the proposals. This raises important issues concerning the governance of the Board. It would be appreciated if you would oblige by providing our Society with further information.
Do the directors of the Centre appointed by the Board report to the Board on the operations of the Centre?
Was the Board formally advised by the Board’s directors or the Centre of the proposal of Dr Benny to conduct research on “non- viable” human embryos that entailed their destruction and of his proposal to have research conducted on “healthy” embryos?
It is unclear from your letter whether or not this research is funded by the Board, it would be appreciated if you would advise if the Board’s funding is used for the research in question.
It is the opinion of this Society that these proposals should not proceed without the specific approval of the Board. We are also unaware of any public consultation on these proposals and note that there has been no public debate on these important issues.
We would respectfully request that these important issues concerning the research and destruction of human embryos be fully considered by the Board and that our society be given the opportunity of presenting a submission on this issue for the Board’s consideration.
We would voice the concern of many citizens in our community that in spite of ethical approval by the National Ethics Committee on Assisted Human Reproduction the current and proposed research be prohibited by the Board as being unethical and a violation of the sanctity of life ethic.”
It is noted that in the United States there are adoption agencies that arrange for the placement of embryos from IVF. This is a loving option that could be followed here as there are thousands of families who would like to adopt but can’t because there are few available because of abortion.
Action
Write to the Canterbury District Health Board to express your concern and opposition to the research and destruction of human embryos the address is: The Secretary, Canterbury District Health Board, PO Box 1600 Christchurch.

Vasectomy
In the previous edition of Footprints and article written by the editor on the subject of human sterilisation was included. Several members have asked if Right to Life has a policy on vasectomy. The answer is ‘no’. Our society’s focus at this time is on the defence of the right to life of every human being from conception to natural death. The article was written to inform and to promote discussion on an important issue. The complications arising from surgical and chemical sterilization for women are well known. The effects of a vasectomy on men are not well known. There is a conspiracy of silence. Men have a right to know what happens to their bodies following a vasectomy. In a vasectomy when the duct is closed off, sperm continues to be produced at a rate of 50,000 per minute. The sperm has to go somewhere so they burst out into places they were never meant to go and eventually enter the bloodstream. Sperm cells are very active and have very strong enzymes to enable them to eat through the outer layers of egg cells. They also have only half the DNA strand, which would normally join with the egg cell and create a new person. This is why a man’s immune system therefore, regards these strong active sperm cells in the bloodstream as a major infection that needs to be destroyed. The autoimmune system’s response to this invasion is to begin making antibodies to attack this own cells. His body goes to war against itself. This affects not only the sperm cells themselves, but other cells and tissues as well. It is known that 75% or more of the men who have had a vasectomy will begin to produce these anti-sperm antibodies. The presence of sperm anti-bodies correlates with nearly every pathological condition of the male reproductive tract. The list of diseases studied for links with vasectomies over the past 30 years include prostate cancer, rheumatoid arthritis, chronic testicular pain, chronic inflammation, epididymitis, prostatitis, and testicular cancer. Other reports have vasectomies resulting in increased incidences of recurred serious infections, atherosclerosis, non Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, and several other forms of cancer, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, migraine, liver dysfunction, generalised lymph node, enlargement and adrenal gland malfunction. According to H.J. Roberts, MC, who has researched extensively for more than 25 years, “… not other operation performed on humans even approaches the degree and duration of multiple immunologic responses that occur in the post vasectomy state.” It is noted that vasectomies may often be reversed.

Issues Update
Emergency Contraceptive Pill ECP
The Minister of Health recently advised that the ECP was permitted to be sold over the counter at pharmacies without a prescription. The Minister in a letter to this society on 30 May stated “Levonorgestrel for emergency contraception has been made available to registered nurses and pharmacists recognised by their respective professional bodies as being competent in the area of sexual and reproductive health. Training and certification of nurses and pharmacists and maintenance of competence are to be the responsibility of their respective professional bodies. Only those nurses and pharmacists who are formally recognised as competent in the appropriate field may dispense the ECP. It is important that women are provided with information to enable them to give informed consent. I understand pharmacists who wish to take on the role of dispensing the ECP are receiving training through the Family Planning Association. Women going to an accredited pharmacist will be given a 10minute consultation before the ECP is dispensed, if appropriate. The Ministry of Health does not determine what information a pharmacist or nurse will provide. The package insert on Levonelle, the product intended for sale by pharmacists and nurses, informs the consumer that it may act by preventing implantation of a fertilised egg. However, as the pill is not regarded as an abortifacient, the insert will not include information along the lines you suggest. I am aware your organisation’s views differ from the legal definition of an abortifacient.
This letter was in reply to our society’s letter of 20 April where we stated: We believe that we have a duty to bring to your attention an article entitled “Post fertilization effect of hormonal emergency contraception” on the ECP, which was published in the March 2002 issue of the Annuals of Pharmacotherapy (an international Pharmacy journal).
This article stated that the ECP might cause the death of a living embryo by blocking its implantation in the womb. The authors describe how the drug sometimes fails to prevent ovulation and relies on an after fertilization effect. Even under “highly optimistic” assumptions, the abortive effect could account for “13-38 percent of the estimated effectiveness.” There is a considerable difference in preventing conception and destroying a human embryo before implantation. Human life begins at conception. A human embryo is not a potential human being, but a human being with potential. Each one of us was once a human embryo and we believe that we have a duty to respect and protect life from its very beginning. Our society totally supports the principle of informed consent and believes that failure to inform a woman that the use of an ECP could destroy her embryo would amount to a lack of informed consent. We request that in the systems your Ministry is planning to put in place to allow over the counter sales of the ECP, provision be made to provide information to women on the abortifacient action of this drug.
Postinor is the trade name for the ECP manufactured and distributed by Schering AG the German drug company. Right to Life has obtained a sample of the instruction pamphlet that is included with Postinor and given to the woman purchasing the drug. There is no information relating to its abortifacient action in preventing the implantation of a human embryo and its subsequent death and destruction. This is contrary to the assurance given by the Minister of Health. Women have a right to know that this drug could kill their human embryo. This important issue of informed consent has been taken up with the Minister of Health.

President’s report June 2002
As you read this, the General election will be only a couple of weeks away. Every three years, we have an opportunity to elect a new government, and by choosing wisely, we can elect a good government. The choice is all ours, as we have 2 votes to cast, one for our electorate candidate, and the other for a party list candidate. WE are fortunate to live in a democracy where we have the freedom to vote, and to ensure that we use this freedom well, we should vote responsibly. For the pro-life movement, the way to vote responsibly is to vote for candidates who support greater legal protection for the unborn child, and who are sincerely committed to reducing and stopping the carnage of abortion in our country. In New Zealand since 1977, there have been over 250 000 abortions performed, with our taxpayer’s money, since abortion was legalized. Also, to use our votes responsibly, we should vote for list candidates who stand for a party which has a pro-life policy clearly explained. At present there is only one political party which has a clearly stated policy which is opposed to abortion and is pro-life, and this is the Christian Heritage Party.
As in 1999, we will support this party, morally, and hopefully some of our members may support CHP financially, or by joining the party.
As part of the lead-up to the elections, we are attempting to gather information from a questionnaire which has been sent to most of the candidates standing for parliament. As the election is only a few weeks away, we are unlikely to gather responses from even a majority of candidates. However, if there are sufficient replies, the results will be published in major daily newspapers. Also the replies will be posted on our website, which will be accessible at this address: www.right-to-life.org If you have an internet linked computer, we encourage you to lookup our website, and see for yourself the names of those candidates whom we believe to be pro-life, and to vote for them at this election. If there are insufficient responses to the questionnaire to publish the names of the pro-life candidates, then our society website www.right-to- life.org will be the only place where you can view these candidates’ names.
Really, the choice is simple, to vote for a politician who will continue to ignore the plight of the unborn child, or to vote for someone who is willing to try to change the current unjust laws. Our questionnaire looks at the issues of legal consent, changing the Guardianship Act, and euthanasia. We believe that you will find the results valuable and trust that you will use them as a guideline when voting.
Over 16 400 young New Zealanders were killed last year – an indictment on our country’s refusal to respect the most basic right there is – the right to life.
When our nation begins to realize what has been done to our unborn children, then we must repent of the wanton taking of life, and put an end to it.
Philip Creed

News in Brief
NZ Birth Rate
New Zealand is a dying country. The number of children born in New Zealand in 2001 is the lowest in a decade. There were 54 700 live births registered in NZ for the 12 months to March this year. The birth rate is 1.97 births per woman about 6percent below the 2.1 births needed for a replacement level. In 1992 the total births were 60 300. The average age of New Zealand women giving birth is 29.5 years. Migration accounted for 49% of the population growth and natural increase for 51%.
Pro-life MP ousted
Mr Brian Neeson, National MP, for Waitakere, has lost the nomination for the next election by 32 to 28. Mr Neeson has been an outspoken defender of life and the unborn child for many years. This society is grateful for his outstanding contribution in promoting a culture of life.
Family Planning seeks representation in Parliament
The Labour Party has selected Family Planning Association executive director Dr Gill Greer, as its candidate for Ohariu Belmont. Peter Dunne holds the seat with a majority of 12 557.
June Dunn RIP
June Dunn died on 2 June aged 83. She was the devoted wife of the late Pat Dunn, internationally renowned pro-life doctor. Together, they were instrumental in founding the Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child, and Pregnancy Help. June was the mother of seven children including Bishop Pat Dunn, Catholic Bishop of Auckland. We are grateful for their love, integrity and inspiration.

World News
London
The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists London in March 2000 issued abortion guidelines for its members, which stated that “the guidelines confirm that abortion is safer than continuing a pregnancy to term and that complications are uncommon.”
London
New research in a 14-year study published in the journal of Health Economics reveals that sex education in schools leads to more, not fewer teenage pregnancies. The research also found that as you increase access to Family Planning pregnancy rates increase.
Rome
Fifty-five thousand children have been saved from abortion in the 25 years of work by Life assistances 127 Centres. There is a 24-hour free phone line in this initiative of Italy’s pro-life movement.
London
Professor Ian Wilmut the co-creator of Dolly, the first cloned sheep has stated that everyone of the world’s cloned animals is genetically and physically defective.
Philippines
Pro-life activists in the Phillipenes have succeeded in having the government ban of the importation sale or use of the “emergency contraceptive pill” (ECP). It contravenes the country’s abortion laws as the drug is an abortifacient. Chile is another country that has banned this lethal drug.
Belgium
Belgium has become the second country after the Netherlands to decriminalize euthanasia. The Parliament vote was 86-51 in favour. The law allows those who have an incurable disease but who are not dying to apply to be killed by their doctor.
London
The Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child UK has had its court action to stop the sale of the abortifacient emergency contraceptive ECP over the counter without a prescription rejected by the court.
Salt Lake City USA
When Susan MacGuire was shot and killed a year ago, her 13-15 week old unborn child died too. A District Court Judge siding with prosecutors decided that the unborn child was a person and that the alleged killer be charged with double homicide. The judge said a plain reading of the law led him to conclude that “the legislature intended to protect unborn children from the outset of pregnancy.”
London
The Court of Appeal in London ruled that the BBC was guilty of censorship when it refused to show “shocking images of abortion” in a film the Pro-Life Alliance made to be shown during the 1997 general election. The BBC banned the film on the grounds that it was, “grossly offensive.” Summing up for the Appeal Court Lord Justice Laws said, “I hope the broadcasters recognize unblinking that censorship is exactly what this case is about,” he added “Words alone cannot convey the essential human character of the fetus and the nature of its destruction by abortion. The groups leader told BBC news, “This judgment signals the beginning of the end of legal abortion in the UK…”
China – Where have all the Girls Gone?
China has a one child family policy with compulsory abortion and sterilization. China is paying a terrible price for two decades of restrictive family planning policies. It has resulted in a drastic gender imbalance – the country is missing 50 million girls who would have been born if not for sex – based abortions and female infanticide. Sons are valued far more than daughters in China because males maintain the family line and care for parents when they grow old. Chinese demographers estimate that in some rural areas, 80% of children between ages five and ten are boys. A UN official based in Beijing said “you think the problem seems terrible now, but wait until all the kids from the one-child policy years have grown up.”
No one knows exactly what the impact a surplus of tens of millions of men will be on society. Gods plan for procreation provides for an equal number of males and females. Man interferes with that plan at his peril. The government expects a rise in crime and prostitution.

QUOTES
“To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men” – Abraham Lincoln
“We hear the familiar cry that morals can’t be legislated. This may be true, but behavior can be regulated. The law may not be able to make a man love me, but it can stop him lynching me.” – Martin Luther King
“Once you permit the killing of the unborn child- you are setting off a chain reaction that will eventually make you a victim” – Dr R.A. Gallop
“Always pick justice above the law and when the law is unjust, challenge it directly” – William Penn

From the Internet
RU 486 Abortion Drug Linked With Birth Defects
Washington, DC – Failed attempts in other countries to induce abortion using an ulcer drug called misoprostol may be causing an epidemic of birth defects around the world. Misuse of the drug is increasingly common as it is improperly used as part of the RU 486 abortion drug process.
In Colombia, Brazil and the Philippines, the drug is readily available. An informal survey by the British magazine New Scientist has also revealed that abortions with the drug are taking place in the Dominican Republic, Argentina, Spain, Nigeria, South Africa and Indonesia.
In Britain and the US, those dispensing the abortion drug RU 486 also give misoprostol to induce contractions to expel the dead unborn child, although it is not licensed for this purpose. Searle, the maker of misoprostol, has condemned its use in chemical abortions methods.
Searle, a unit of Pharmacia Corp. sent a letter to doctors last year warning that misoprostol has been approved only to prevent ulcers caused by aspirin in similar drugs, not to help induce abortion. They warned women would face severe medical problems if the drug was misused as a part of the RU 486 chemical abortion process. It is legal however, for doctors to prescribe FDA- approved drugs for unapproved uses – so called “off label” use. The Searle letter noted: “Serious adverse events reported following off-label use of Cytotec in pregnant women include maternal or fetal death; uterine hyper stimulation, rupture or perforation requiring uterine surgical repair, hysterectomy or salpingo- oophorectomy; amniotic fluid embolism; severe vaginal bleeding; retained placenta, shock, fetal bradycardia and pelvic pain.
Taking misoprostol on its own only induces abortions about 40 per cent of the time, so many babies are born after failed abortion attempts. Several studies in Brazil, where up to 75 percent of abortions involve misoprostol, suggest the drug causes birth defects such as fused joints, growth retardation and a condition known as Mbius syndrome, which is characterized by paralysis of the face.
One recent study found that out of 93 children with defects associated with Mbius syndrome, 34 percent of those infants had been exposed to misoprostol, compared with just 4.3 percent of the 279 infants in a control group. Another revealed that 49 percent of infants born with Mbius at seven hospitals in Brazil had been exposed to misoprostol, whereas only 3 percent of 96 infants born with neural tube defects had been exposed to the drug. “I think (these results) are real. Statistically they are highly significant,” says Fernando Vargas of the University of Rio de Janeiro, who took part in both studies. Because the abortion drug is used secretly, it is hard to find out how many birth defects might be caused by it, Vargas adds.

Judge Drops California Abortion-Breast Cancer Lawsuit
San Diego, CA – A San Diego judge has thrown out a lawsuit filed by a Michigan based pro-life law firm demanding that Planned Parenthood inform women of the link between abortions and breast cancer. Superior Court Judge Ronald Prager ruled that the suit should be dismissed because of a state law that prohibits litigation designed to infringe on someone’s free speech rights. Prager ruled Monday that the Ann Arbor based Thomas More Law Center’s suit infringed on Planned Parenthood’s First Amendment rights and that the pro-life law firm had failed to demonstrate a likelihood that they could prevail had the case gone to trial. The Thomas More Law Center filed the suit in August, arguing that “preponderance of medical evidence” established a link between abortions and breast cancer. In a press release, the pro-life law firm said it will appeal the ruling. “I am deeply disappointed,” said Pat Gillen, associate counsel of the Thomas More Center. “This decision was handed down despite the testimony of 6 experts, including the author of the only comprehensive review and meta analysis of scientific studies concerning the link between induced abortion and breast cancer risk. In addition, the plaintiff’s claims were supported by the testimony of five medical doctors, one from each specialty required to deal with the increased risk of breast cancer caused by induced abortion over the life of a woman. Those experts agreed that induced abortion does increase the risk of breast cancer and that Planned Parenthood’s statements on this issue were false and misleading.”
Planned Parenthood officials in San Diego and other parts of the country vigorously disputed the abortion-breast cancer link, claiming no such scientific evidence exists. An attorney for the San Diego chapter of Planned Parenthood hailed the judge’s decision as an important victory for abortion-rights supporters.
The Michigan group was using the legal system to “intimidate women with junk science,” pro-abortion attorney James McElroy said yesterday. “We hope this decision will put an end to this type of meritless lawsuit,” he said. Richard Thompson, Chief Counsel with the Thomas More Law Center commented: “The Defendants’ effort to avoid a hearing on the merits is to be expected. Big Abortion has spared no expense to conceal the truth about this grave risk to women. We believe Judge Prager’s ruling is incorrect. Although disappointing, it is not that surprising. Just as it took big tobacco several decades before they acknowledged the risks associated with their products, so too big abortion appears willing to sacrifice the health of women for the sake of profits. The politics of abortion and big money has hijacked the science on this issue.”
The suit was filed in San Diego Superior Court on behalf of three California women, one of them from Chula Vista, California. Although none of the three women fall into the category of women who have had abortions and developed breast cancer, an attorney for the Thomas More Center said they have the right to file the suit as state citizens.
The three plaintiffs were not seeking any monetary damages and would not have profited from this suit in any way, the pro-life law firm explained. They viewed the issue as a women’s health issue and the lawsuit as a way to ensure that women had truthful and accurate information about the risks associated with abortions.

The Adoption Option Should Be Used for Frozen Embryos by Deroy Murdock
(Pro-Life Infonet Note: Deroy Murdock is a columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a Senior Fellow with the Atlas Economic Research Foundation in Fairfax, Virginia. He is a leading black conservative commentator.)
Sperm-pierced human ova have yet to yield baby chicks or puppies. If allowed to grow, such cells produce boys and girls. That’s why the vocabulary surrounding stem-cell research, human cloning, and other fertility issues is so eerie. Discussions of “surplus embryos” that will be “discarded anyway” are cruelly dismissive of Microscopic-Americans who – if their potential body parts are not “harvested” – will become citizens sooner than Thanksgiving turns to Labor Day.
While this truth escapes so many people these days, it propels Jo Ann Davidson, program director of the Snowflakes Embryo Adoption Program. From modest quarters in this Orange County community, she and two colleagues help couples adopt frozen embryos that often would be killed in the name of science or simply treated as so much medical waste. The path she has built to lead these souls on ice into loving families deserves reproduction from coast to coast. “Our end objective is to work ourselves out of our jobs,” says the 36 year old Texas A & M graduate. “Every embryo would be adopted and no new ‘extra’ embryos would be created.”
An estimated 188 000 embryos are suspended in liquid nitrogen canisters around America. Some fertility clinics help genetic parents donate their unused embryos to others who are trying to become pregnant. However, the process is usually anonymous with donors and recipients knowing little, if anything, about each other.
The Snowflakes program treats embryo adoptions just like open adoptions of children who scream and scamper. Those who relinquish their embryos can choose potential adoptive parents who have passed a rigorous “homestudy” process that Davidson calls “80 percent education and 20 percent screening.” This includes counselling with social workers on parental responsibilities as well as background checks for credit problems or evidence of criminality or child abuse. Snowflakes even submits prospective parents’ fingerprints for FBI clearance.
Genetic parents who work with Snowflakes, a project of Nightlight Christian Adoptions, tend to want their embryos to be raised in religious homes. However, Davidson says, “We wouldn’t stand in the way,” if a participating couple wished to donate to an theist, single mother. “We don’t define the criteria. It’s up to the genetic parents. But the nature of our name narrows the kind of people who come to us.”
Genetic donors and adoptive parents remain available to each other through the program (in case of medical emergencies). They also may stay in limited contact through the Snowflakes’ offices or can phone, e-mail or visit directly. They send us pictures of their kids, and we send them pictures of ours,” says Lucinda Borden of the genetic parents whose embryos she adopted. She and her husband, John, now have 11 month old boys named Mark and Luke after trying to get pregnant for six years. “It changed my life completely because I have twin sons,” says the Fontana, California resident. “The other option for them, other than being adopted, was to be destroyed. Knowing that there are tens of thousands like them in freezers waiting for their fates to be decided breaks a mother’s heart.”
After they had twins through implantation and a subsequent child naturally, Atlanta’s Susanne and Bob Gray offered for adoption 23 of the 27 embryos they and their doctor created. It’s easy to attach a face to an embryo when you can see the faces of its brothers and sisters that came from the same cluster of embryos,” Susanne Gray says. She adds that she and her husband “were actually shocked” when her doctor aspirated 33 eggs from her ovaries and fertilized all of them, thus producing more embryos than she ever would raise as children. Davidson urges prospective parents to tell their doctors to create only as many embryos as they would bring home as newborns. Overly aggressive fertility techniques are largely responsible for the crowded purgatory in which so many frozen embryos languish.
Snowflakes is doing its part to ease this crowding. To date, it has matched 36 genetic families with 27 adopting couples. Of the 186 embryos the program has had thawed, 94 were viable for uterine implantation. Of these, eight babies have been born, and seven more are on the way.
JoAnn Davidson’s office is festooned with snowflakes. Paper ones, that resemble doilies, cover her walls. Others – crafted from Styrofoam, wicker and pewter – dangle on strings from her suspended ceiling. They symbolize those she aims to help, each frozen, fragile and uniquely individual.

QUOTES

The Adoption Option Should Be Used for Frozen Embryos by Deroy Murdock
(Pro-Life Infonet Note: Deroy Murdock is a columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a Senior Fellow with the Atlas Economic Research Foundation in Fairfax, Virginia. He is a leading black conservative commentator.)
Sperm-pierced human ova have yet to yield baby chicks or puppies. If allowed to grow, such cells produce boys and girls. That’s why the vocabulary surrounding stem-cell research, human cloning, and other fertility issues is so eerie. Discussions of “surplus embryos” that will be “discarded anyway” are cruelly dismissive of Microscopic-Americans who – if their potential body parts are not “harvested” – will become citizens sooner than Thanksgiving turns to Labor Day.
While this truth escapes so many people these days, it propels Jo Ann Davidson, program director of the Snowflakes Embryo Adoption Program. From modest quarters in this Orange County community, she and two colleagues help couples adopt frozen embryos that often would be killed in the name of science or simply treated as so much medical waste. The path she has built to lead these souls on ice into loving families deserves reproduction from coast to coast. “Our end objective is to work ourselves out of our jobs,” says the 36 year old Texas A & M graduate. “Every embryo would be adopted and no new ‘extra’ embryos would be created.”
An estimated 188 000 embryos are suspended in liquid nitrogen canisters around America. Some fertility clinics help genetic parents donate their unused embryos to others who are trying to become pregnant. However, the process is usually anonymous with donors and recipients knowing little, if anything, about each other.
The Snowflakes program treats embryo adoptions just like open adoptions of children who scream and scamper. Those who relinquish their embryos can choose potential adoptive parents who have passed a rigorous “homestudy” process that Davidson calls “80 percent education and 20 percent screening.” This includes counselling with social workers on parental responsibilities as well as background checks for credit problems or evidence of criminality or child abuse. Snowflakes even submits prospective parents’ fingerprints for FBI clearance.
Genetic parents who work with Snowflakes, a project of Nightlight Christian Adoptions, tend to want their embryos to be raised in religious homes. However, Davidson says, “We wouldn’t stand in the way,” if a participating couple wished to donate to an theist, single mother. “We don’t define the criteria. It’s up to the genetic parents. But the nature of our name narrows the kind of people who come to us.”
Genetic donors and adoptive parents remain available to each other through the program (in case of medical emergencies). They also may stay in limited contact through the Snowflakes’ offices or can phone, e-mail or visit directly. They send us pictures of their kids, and we send them pictures of ours,” says Lucinda Borden of the genetic parents whose embryos she adopted. She and her husband, John, now have 11 month old boys named Mark and Luke after trying to get pregnant for six years. “It changed my life completely because I have twin sons,” says the Fontana, California resident. “The other option for them, other than being adopted, was to be destroyed. Knowing that there are tens of thousands like them in freezers waiting for their fates to be decided breaks a mother’s heart.”
After they had twins through implantation and a subsequent child naturally, Atlanta’s Susanne and Bob Gray offered for adoption 23 of the 27 embryos they and their doctor created. It’s easy to attach a face to an embryo when you can see the faces of its brothers and sisters that came from the same cluster of embryos,” Susanne Gray says. She adds that she and her husband “were actually shocked” when her doctor aspirated 33 eggs from her ovaries and fertilized all of them, thus producing more embryos than she ever would raise as children. Davidson urges prospective parents to tell their doctors to create only as many embryos as they would bring home as newborns. Overly aggressive fertility techniques are largely responsible for the crowded purgatory in which so many frozen embryos languish.
Snowflakes is doing its part to ease this crowding. To date, it has matched 36 genetic families with 27 adopting couples. Of the 186 embryos the program has had thawed, 94 were viable for uterine implantation. Of these, eight babies have been born, and seven more are on the way.
JoAnn Davidson’s office is festooned with snowflakes. Paper ones, that resemble doilies, cover her walls. Others – crafted from Styrofoam, wicker and pewter – dangle on strings from her suspended ceiling. They symbolise those she aims to help, each frozen, fragile and uniquely individual.