“Parliament has
the responsibility
to protect life, especially
the life of the defenceless.” -Owen Jennings MP ACT.
!! STOP PRESS!!
High - Court Action
Abortion Supervisory Committee (ASC) to betaken to court.
Right to Life New Zealand is committed to investigating laying an urgent complaint against the ASC with the High Court.The complaint would be for the failure of the ASC to fulfill its statutory duties by: allowing the violation of the right to life of unborn children permitting abortion on demand allowing a regime of unlawful abortions The court has the authority to order the ASC to comply with its duties.
IN THIS ISSUE...
President’s
Report Pg 2
The Exception Deception.......... Pg 4
RU 486 Pill.......... Pg 5
Society’s Report Pg 6
Legalised Prostitution.......Pg 6
Prostitution Reform Bill.......... Pg 7
World News.......... Pg 8
Stem Cell Debate Pg 9
From the Internet.. Pg 10
Abortion Law Review......... Pg 11
Notices.. Pg
12
Parliament Denies
Justice to the Unborn
It
is a damning indictment of our Parliament that it has again turned its back on
New Zealand’s unborn children.
Parliament has appointed Drs. Rothwell and Reid of Wellington and
reappointed Marlene Lamb of Morrinsville to the Abortion Supervisory Committee.
Dr
Lesley Rothwell is a general medical practitioner and a clinical tutor in the
Department of General Practice at the Wellington Clinical School. Dr Rothwell is also a certifying consultant
at the Parkview Abortion Clinic, in the Wellington Public Hospital and has been
there since 1981. Dr Rothwell was also
appointed chairman. Dr. Pakaarangi Reid
is the director of the Eru Pomare Maori Health Research Centre in
Wellington.
It
was a tense and emotional Parliament, that on the afternoon of Thursday 30
August passed the motion of the Minister of Justice Phil Goff by 85 to 26, to
recommend to the Governor General that these appointments be made. There were 33 female MP’s who voted, all of
whom voted to support the appointment.
The committee was described by some members of Parliament in the debate
as a ‘charade and a travesty of justice.’ It is an appalling conflict of
interest to appoint a certifying consultant not only to the committee but also
as chairperson. Dr Rothwell derives a
considerable portion of her income from approving and authorising the killing
of unborn children by abortion. How can
she be expected to supervise the abortion industry and be an advocate for the
unborn, when she is a major participant in an industry that provides abortion
on demand? It is worthy of note that
Parliament in 1977 when it was committed to protecting the unborn child
appointed Judge Augusta Wallace as the first chairperson. Parliament’s objective then was to ensure
that the unborn child received the full protection of the law.
The
appointments are a sad indictment of Parliament which has again failed to
address the plight of unborn children.
This is a day of shame in the history of our Parliament.
It
is now clear that Parliament has:
- Accepted the
failure of the committee to uphold the abortion laws to ensure that abortions
are authorised only after full consideration of the human rights of the unborn
child.
- Accepted abortion on demand and a regime of unlawful
abortion.
Parliament
is the highest court in the land it should be the defender of human rights and
the protector of the weak. These
appointments by Parliament are a disgrace that undermines the rule of law and
the credibility of Parliament. We
commend those 26 members who voted against the appointments.
Ten
members spoke against the appointments.
Eric Roy (National) decried the fact that we have no statute
that gives status to the unborn child.
Geff Braybrook (Labour) stated that he was concerned that abortion
was being used as a form of contraception.
Owen Jennings (ACT) stated “Here we are again appointing a
committee to carry on this travesty - committee that on its own admission is a
failure that is set up as a charade. We
have a law that is an ass, a law that is not working. The statistics are an abomination.” “The current programmes
operated by the Family Planning Association are not working, they are
hopeless.” He concluded by stating “ we have a right and a responsibility to
protect life.”
Alec Neill (National) said that he was “anxious that the laws at
this point in time are enforced as they should be.”
Phillip Field (Labour) said “This is a moral issue. From my point of view there is a Christian
ethical issue that relates to what we believe to be our Creator’s instructions
as to how life should be lived and the protection and sanctity of human life.”
Dr Paul Hutchinson
(National) and previously a member of the Abortion Supervisory
Committee in support of the motion said
“It is a great pity that the Government and Members of Parliament do not
wish to recognise that the law that was enacted in 1977 is no longer relevant
to women in the 21st Century” He
went on to say “It is relevant that since the law was enacted over 20years ago there has not been one death in New Zealand
from an abortion that was carried out legally” As an obstetrician and
gynaecologist he should be aware that with each abortion a child is
killed, in some instances twins. He may
not be aware that at least one woman has died from abortion after being given
in error a double injection of a prostaglandin to induce labour in a late term
abortion. This tragic death was subject
to a cover up.
Anne Tolly (National) speaking in support of the motion said
“Why do we not hear speeches in the House about ensuring free and easy access
to contraception for people of all ages and of both sexes?”
Gerry Brownlee (National) strongly opposed the motion said “I also
find it interesting to look at other societies that have existed in the world
at various times. I am speaking of
societies that reached I supposed one would say, a degree of sophistication,
then slipped back and were lost - societies such as the Roman society and the
Greek society…. There should be no
reason for us to assume that our current Western civilisation will, in the
whole anthropological scale of the world, be any different. One of
the things we can point to as unique about this particular civilisation at the
moment is that we kill our children.”
Brian Neeson (National) opposed the motion saying that the
committee was “…really always was a farce. Every time there is an abortion, somebody
dies, yet we are a country struggling for a population base. We are getting poorer by the minute while
our prized possessions - people - go down the drain, literally. It is an absolute shame.”
Peter Dunne (United Future
NZ) stated that he opposed
the motion for different reasons. He
said that he was concerned about the issues of accountability and the lack of
information provided by the Minister of Justice on the nominees.
Wyatt Creech (National) supported the motion and said that the
names of nominees to the committee should be reviewed by a Parliamentary select
committee.
The
Minister of Justice advised our society that there had been 12 nominations with
five being registered medical practitioners.
He had then selected the tree candidates he considered most suitable and
submitted them to the Cabinet Appointments and Honours Committee who approved
the candidates. Once cabinet had
endorsed the appointments he then wrote to the Parliamentary parties not in the
coalition government seeking their support.
The nominations were then brought to Parliament on Thursday 30
August. Individual members could then
have made nominations of their own candidates, none chose to do so. The minister claims that the process is
rigorous and that each of the nominees is subject to private and public
scrutiny.
For
the first time in the history of the committee we have three women on the
committee and all from the North Island.
It is worth noting that the term of appointments of the previous
committee actually expired in December 1998 and have been rolled over because
of the reluctance of previous Ministers of Justice to bring this highly
contentious issue to Parliament.
From
early 1999 this society has vigorously and consistently lobbied to have the
issue of appointments brought to Parliament.
Following these appointments this society wrote to the Minister of
Justice seeking under the Official Information Act the names of the other nine
candidates. Copies of the CV’s of all
candidates and the names of the Members of Parliament who had nominated
them. The Minister refused to provide
this information citing privacy concerns.
We then immediately lodged a complaint with the Ombudsman seeking a
review of the Ministers decision. The
Minister advised our society that there had been 12 nominations, five being
registered medical practitioners. The
Minister claims that he has selected the best candidates for appointment who
were referred to the Cabinet Appointments and Honours Committee which made a
recommendation for consideration by Cabinet.
The names were then referred to the caucuses of parties outside of the
coalition government seeking their support.
Members of Parliament during the debate could have nominated other
candidates, they chose not to. The Minister
claims to have selected the best candidates for appointment but how does the
public know this when they are deprived of the names of other candidates and
information on their qualification? We
believe the public have a right to know.
The procedure followed by the Minister allows for the selection of
candidates who will comply with the political agenda of the government. There is therefore little prospect of a
candidate being selected who will seek to promote increased legal protection
for the unborn child.
This
society will continue to vigorously lobby Parliament to have the committee
conform to its statutory duties to ensure that the rights of the unborn child
receive the full protection of the law.
Our society has written to the 26 members of Parliament who voted
against the appointments congratulating them for their stand. We have also written to the 85 members who
voted for the appointments expressing our concern and disappointment. A media release was made by this society to
30 media outlets which included TV, radio and newspapers. Radio interviews were given to Independent
Radio news and Radio Pacific.
n
ASC
Appointments 30/08/01
Action members are encouraged to support the unborn child by writing to their electorate and list MPs on this important issue. Letters may be sent to Parliament Building, Wellington, no stamp required. The names of the Members of Parliament who voted on the appointments are as follows. It is timely to remember that unborn children are the precious infants of God our creator. God has said that, “if your mother should forget you I will not forget you.” God will not be mocked! Can a nation that kills its own children expect a blessing from God?
FOR
Labour (41) Barker Dyson Mallard
Barnett Gallagher O’Connor
Benson-Poke Gosche
Hawkins Okeroa
Beyer Hobbs Peck
Burton Hodgson Petti
Clark Keall Sutton
Cosgrove Helly Swain
Cullen King Tamiher
Cunliffe Laban Tizard
Dalziel Mackay Turia
Duncan Maharey Yates
National (22) Bradford Rich Tolley
Creech Ryall Vernon
Hasler Scott Williamson
Hutchison Shipley Wong
Kidd Shirley Wort
Luxton Sincock Young
Mapp Steel
Power Tisch
Act (4) Eckhof Newman
Hide Prebble
NZ
First (1) Jennings
Greens
(7) Bradford S Fitzsimons Tanczos
Donald Kedgeley
Ewen-Street Locke
AGAINST
Labour
(5) Braybrooke Field Robertson
Dynhoven Hawke
National
(14) Anae Heatley Simich
Brownlee Herlihy Smith N
Carter D Kyd Sowry
Carter J Neeson Roy
English Neill
Alliance (Nil) Anderton
Bunkle
Campbell
Gillon
Gordon
Lee
Harre
Jackson
Robson
Wright
ACT (1) Franks
NZ
First (5) Brown Mark Woolerton
Donnelly Peters
United
Future NZ (1)
Dunne
FOOTPRINTS
is the quarterly publication of the
Right to Life New Zealand Inc.
Editor: Ken Orr
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
The Officers:
President: Phillip
Creed
Vice
Pres: John Bryant
Ken Orr
Secretary: Tarcille
O’Connor
Treasurer: Paul
Christenhusz
Other Committee Members:
Br
Laurence Cole
Peter
Coleman
Bede
Cosgriff
Herman
Jansen
David
Malcolm
Chris
O’Brien
Henry
Allison
PATRONS
Bishop John Cunneen
D.D.
Bishop M.L. Wiggins B.A.,
L.Th.
Father Patrick Kennedy
Hon H.J. Walker C.M.G.,
J.P., K.C.L.J.
Rev J.A. Haverland B.A.,
B.D., Th.M
Mr Graham Capill B.D., LL.B.
Prof. Scott Davidson M.A. (CANTAB)
Councillor Carol Evans QSO, JP
Dr
Norman MacLean, O&G
Subscription
Ask a friend? !
Subscription
to this Newsletter is free with membership of this Society.
YES
I would like to JOIN
.....
$10 Single ..... $12 Family
.....
$15 Group
(Please print clearly)
NAME: ..........................................................
ADDRESS:..................................................
............................................................................
PHONE:........................................(Home)
................................................................(Bus)
Cheques
to be made payable to
and subscription may be
sent to:
Right to Life New
Zealand Inc.
PO Box 668, Christchurch
Phone:
(03) 359 4326
Fax:
(03) 386 0447
Email: rtl@right-to-life.org
Web
Page: www.right-to-life.org
DEADLINE
NEXT ISSUE
Any
articles, reflections, notices or other pro-life material for the next
newsletter to be submitted for consideration to FOOTPRINTS
at the above address before February 31.
Message from the President
Members will note elsewhere in this issue of
Footprints, that we are continuing to lobby Parliament and have appeared before
a Parliamentary Select Committee, to state the case against the Prostitution
Law Reform Bill of Christchurch Central M.P. Tim Barnett. We encourage all to
write to your local member of Parliament and ask them to vote against this Bill
when it is debated at the second reading next year.
Recent activities of our Society have included a
garage sale, which raised over $200.
Also we have been campaigning against the appointment
process to the Abortion Supervisory Committee, and have made a recent
submission to the Minister of Justice outlining where and how we would like to
see Abortion laws changed, including the makeup and representation on the ASC.
When the Contraception, Sterilisation and Abortion Act 1977 was passed, and
allowed for the setting up of the ASC, nobody could have predicted how many
abortions would be performed in 2000 – over 16000 babies killed in their mother’s
wombs.The fact that this committee presides over the appointment of certifying
consultants, who allow this carnage, is
shameful.We have also recently taken a poll of candidates for several hospital
boards, for the local body elections. These included Auckland, Lower Hutt,
Wellington, and Christchurch, where most abortions are performed.Our
questionnaire was designed to ensure that only prolife people answered yes to
all our questions. The results were not spectacular, but we wanted to provide you with a voting guide
for suitable candidates.
I encourage you to attend the next prolife vigil, to
be held at St. Mary’s, Manchester Street, on December 12th. This vigil is
organized by Family Life International.
Finally, Christmas greetings to all of our members,
and thank you very much for your support during this year.
n Phillip Creed
District Health Board (DHB) Elections
Our society sent a
questionnaire to 349 candidates who sought election to their local DHB. The DHBs were Auckland, Waikato, Capital
Coast, Hutt, Canterbury and Otago.
These are the DHBs where the great majority of abortions are
performed. The questionnaire was say Yes/No to the following:
1. Would
you, if elected to the DHB, uphold the Judeo/Christian Sanctity of life ethic
which recognises the inalienable right to life of every human being from
conception to natural death?
2. Do you support increased legal protection
for the unborn child?
3. To promote protection for unborn children
and their mothers. Would you support operating surgeons employed by the DHB being made accountable to the
DHB for their pattern of authorisation for abortions to ensure:
- that the
rights of the unborn child are given full consideration.
- that a
regime of unlawful abortions with abortion on demand does not operate in the
Board’s Facilities.
- that all
abortions are authorised in accordance with the Crimes Act Sect 187A and that
the certifying consultants authorising abortions have “honest belief” in the
grounds.
- that
abortions comply with the declarations of Oslo as stated in the ethics of the
New Zealand Medical Association.
4. Would you support a decision of whether or
not to apply to the Abortion Supervisory Committee for the renewal of the
annual licence to perform abortions should be resolved by resolution at a
public meeting of the Board?
A
total of 72 candidates responded to the questionnaire. The responses of the candidates were
advertised on our society web page. On
the 20th
September posters showing the responses of local candidates were sent to nearly
200 churches for display on a church noticeboard. Church-goers were encouraged to vote only for candidates who had
made a public commitment to uphold the sanctity of life ethic, and who
supported increased protection for the unborn child etc. and who were otherwise
suitable.
An advert was
placed in the Christchurch Star which is delivered free to over 116, 000 homes
in greater Christchurch. The advert
listed the 10 candidates for the Canterbury DHB whom our society were
promoting. This advert cost $500 and we are grateful to our members whose
generous donations made this important project possible. The NZ Catholic also carried a prominent
article presenting the candidates responses.
It was disappointing that none of the candidates who had responded to
our questionnaire with a pro-life response were elected. This important exercise was however
considered a success because: It has
raised the awareness of all candidates who received our questionnaire to the
plight of the unborn child.
A
two page letter was sent to each candidate which explained that the human
rights of the unborn children were being violated, that we had abortion on
demand and a regime of unlawful abortions.
We
stated that it would be proper and essential for DHBs to require that
consultants employed by the Board to perform abortions be questioned on their
patterns of authorisations to ensure that abortions performed in the Board’s
facilities are lawful. In no other area
of medicine are doctors unaccountable for their clinical judgements.
We have made a start in having the community recognise that DHBs have to accept a major share of the responsibility for the killing of unborn children in our public hospitals. A growing recognition of the duty to vote for candidates for DHBs who will uphold the sanctity of life ethic and promote protection for the unborn child. Our society’s intention is to now to pursue these objectives with the DHBs.
Bequests
Members and
supporters who wish to continue supporting the work of defending life after
their death are encouraged to consider remembering the Society in their will.
For those who have arranged a bequest in their will for this Society they may
need to amend their will to record this Society’s new name, Right to Life New
Zealand Inc.
The Exception Deception
Why flawed incrementalism can never achieve victory for the preborn.
n
By Patrick Delaney (First published in “Celebrate Life,” the journal of
the American Life League)
Since
the 1973 Roe v. Wade / Doe v. Bolton decisions, abortion has been the focal
point of a broader culture war where two mutually exclusive worldviews contend
for dominance. By classifying an entire
segment of our human family as “non-persons,” Roe and Doe secured the
ascendancy of a new culture-of-death ethic that denies moral absolutes and
embraces moral relativism.
The
new atheistic ethic recognises no restraints outside the arbitrary will of
man. In other words, human rights are
no longer recognised as being invested in man by the benevolence of a loving
Creator. These rights are now subject
to the whims of those in political power.
The
goal of the pro-life movement is to provide protection for all human persons
from the moment of conception/fertilisation.
This is the cornerstone in building a culture of life. We, therefore, must counter the atheistic
lies of Roe v. Wade/Doe v. Bolton with a culture-of-life ethic founded on one
scientific and philosophical principle: “All beings are human persons from
conception/fertilisation and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable
rights - first and foremost, the right to life.” We call this the “personhood principle.”
Though
virtually all prolife groups share the goal of reestablishing personhood,
debates arise regarding how to pursue it.
The merits and kinds of incremental approaches are the main points of
contention.
Questions about tactics
In
his 1995 encyclical letter, Evangelium Vitae, Pope John Paul II acknowledges
the value and morally licit nature of certain forms of incremental measures
that don’t violate fundamental moral standards. Those incremental measures include legislative proposals that do
not permit abortion in cases of rape,
incest, or the life of the mother. The
advancement of these measures is called pure incrementalism.
Pure
incrementalism works toward full protection of the preborn human person. Such legislative proposals work first to
protect all innocent human life from the moment of conception. If this objective cannot be achieved, other
advances that never contradict or detract from the foundational truth of
personhood may be accepted. Examples
include total bans on third trimester abortions, embryonic experimentation, and
human cloning.
Such
proposals strive to limit abortions and build genuine momentum toward the reestablishment
of a culture-of-life ethic. They
educate the public on the proper distinctions between truth and falsehood,
personhood and non-personhood, pro-life and pro-death, without conceding that
there could be any reasons for killing a preborn child.
Exceptions undermine
foundation
Unfortunately,
over the last 28 years, many pro-life organizations have abandoned the
personhood principle in their legislative and political efforts and have
employed flawed incrementalism. Such
efforts stray into the culture-of-death mentality. Though they may be well intentioned, such measures explicitly
sacrifice the truth and affirm the errors of moral relativism.
If
innocent preborn children can be legally killed in “exceptional” circumstances,
then certainly they cannot be considered persons in the legal sense. This flawed approach therefore affirms Roe
v. Wade/Doe v. Bolton and relegates preborn children to a false “non-person”
status.
When
pro-life organisations support candidates or legislation favouring exceptions, their leaders are forced to
capitulate on the fundamental principle that all human life is sacred, because
they explicitly endorse the direct killing of certain innocent human
persons. The specific acceptance of
aborting persons in cases of rape, incest or threat to the life of the mother
affirms the relativistic culture-of-death dogma that the right to life is not
after all, “inalienable,” but rather, very negotiable.
‘Tolerance’ of some
abortions?
Since
flawed incremental approaches have become the dominant strategy in much of the
pro-life movement, public acceptance of legal abortion has increased. National and regional polls demonstrate that
when “exceptions” candidates are allowed to run for public office under the
bogus “pro-life” banner provided by certain right-to-life Political Action
Committees (PACs), perceptions in the electorate shift toward a greater public
acceptance of legal abortion. These “right-to-life” PACs defend their actions
by promising to advance better candidates and stronger legislation when the
political climate is “friendlier to our cause.” But is it reasonable to anticipate a friendlier political climate
in the future when such grave compromises have consistently sowed confusion and
hostility in the past? Can we expect a public
that is more accepting of legal abortion to elect representatives who will be
“friendlier to our cause”?
Indeed,
the politician who takes a position in conformity with the simple truth of
personhood has become an endangered species.
Since a few major “pro-life” PACs have classified the tolerance of some
legal child killing to be an acceptable “pro-life” position, these courageous
candidates have been characterised as “extremists” by their more moderate
opponents. Quite often, such statesmen
receive little or no assistance from these pro-life PACs due to their
annoyingly “divisive” public image.
For
the last 28 years, the deadly cycle of compromise has fostered a cultural and
political environment ever more hostile to the protection of the preborn. The debate over abortion has consistently
deteriorated over time from whether it is ethical to kill preborn children, to
when such a murder can take place, and how.
Strategy must rely on
truth.
It
is, therefor, only reasonable to ask if such an “exceptions” strategy
that: 1) denies personhood, 2) affirms the moral relativism secured by
Roe v. Wade/Doe v. Bolton, 3) confuses the public, and 4) engenders greater
acceptance of legal abortion can ever be successful at achieving total
protection for every human being as a person from the moment of
conception. Can promulgating lies ever
help our culture to establish truth? It
seems only logical to conclude: no, never.
Our
movement must return to a strategy of promoting only those candidates and
measures that embody the fullness of truth and uphold objective moral
principles. When it is clear to an
elected official who is totally opposed to procured abortion that full
protection is legislatively impossible, he may work to save children and
advance our cause through pure incrementalism; but we are never allowed to
propose, promote or advocate even one abortion.
When
we consistently witness to the simple truth of personhood and the
culture-of-life ethic, we wield a power exponentially greater than mere
diplomatic skills could ever hope to achieve.
Indeed, we become conduits for the grace of Jesus Christ, who says, “I
am the Truth,” and “without Me you can do nothing.”
Patrick
Delaney works with American Life League’s divisions of public policy and youth
outreach.
RU 486 Murder Pill
Consent under
the Medicines Act in 1981 to use this lethal drug was
granted by notice in the Gazette
of Thursday 30 August. Consent was
given by the Minister of Health Annette King.
This marked a further shameful chapter in the history of our
nation. This was the first time in the
history of New Zealand that a government had given approval for the use of a
drug for the specific purpose of killing another human being. The New Zealand government is a signatory to
the international agreement outlawing chemical warfare. Why then is the government conducting
chemical warfare against its own children?
The Minister of Health in a media statement that day said “I
have approved RU486 because it is a safe and sound medication” Our society in a media release of the same
day stated: “pregnancy is not a disease, RU 486 is not a medicine, nor is it
safe. It is a human pesticide, it has
no therapeutic value and its sole purpose is to destroy an innocent and
helpless unborn child.” We strongly
urged the Minister to revoke her decision.
To recapitulate, how does Mifepristone RU 486 work? It is an abortifacient drug that kills an
unborn baby up to 7 weeks gestation and requires four visits to the doctor.
w
The first visit is to confirm pregnancy and to ensure that there are no contra
indications for the use of RU 486 such as obesity, high blood pressure,
diabetes or heavy smoking. She is then
given three 200mg RU486 pills. RU 486
is an artificial steroid that interferes with the action of progesterone a
hormone crucial to the nourishment of the child. The child starves to death.
w
Two days later she returns to have a prostaglandin, Cytotec Misoprostole which
is taken orally or by vaginal insertion.
The woman experiences powerful and painful uterine contractions which
begin to expel the dead baby. In US
trials about half 49% aborted during the four hours they are required to wait
at the facility. Between 20-30% aborted
sometime over the next 20 hours away from the facility. The rest who aborted did so over the next
two weeks.
w
A third visit some 14 days from the woman’s initial visit allows the doctor to
confirm whether or not the abortion is complete. If it’s not complete, the abortionist will encourage the woman to
undergo a surgical abortion to guard against the possibility that she will give
birth to a child that may have been injured by the drugs.
It is highly significant that
the Minister in compliance with an opinion provided by the Solicitor General
made it a condition that women undergoing an RU 486 abortion were required
after taking a prostaglandin to stay in the licensed premises until the dead
baby was expelled.This is to meet the requirement of section 18 of the
Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion Act that abortions take place only in
institutions licensed for that purpose in accordance with that Act.
It is mentioned that 20 to 30
% of women after taking the prostaglandin abort away from the facility. What the Minister is ignoring is the fact
that about 6% of women abort after taking Mifepristone RU 486 and prior to taking
the prostaglandin. In the view of this
society these abortions would also be unlawful.
What action has the society taken?
On the 1st
September we wrote to the Minister of Health advising her of our belief in the
unlawfulness of these abortions. We
also sought under the Official Information Act a copy of the report on RU 486
given by Medsafe to the Minister.
The report was provided, it
revealed that the committee believed that there was insufficient data to
conclude that RU 486 is teratogenic ie. a cause of abnormalities in
children. This conclusion is contrary
to the international evidence available.
The committee also stated that there was no evidence of any
abnormalities in future generations.
The truth is that no research has been done on this subject as a
consequence we just don’t know.
On the 13th
September our Society wrote to the Minister of Health requesting under the
Official Information Act a copy of any memoranda she may have sent to District
Health Boards on the use of RU 486. The
Minister replied on the 8th October
that “no memoranda or advice had been
provided to District Health Boards on the use of RU 486 following my approval
for its use.”
On the 26th
September the Minister of Health advised our Society that “the consent process
for the medicine does not affect section 18 of the CS&A Act. Any change to that provision is the
responsibility of the Minister of Justice.
Ministry of Justice officials are looking at that matter in the context
of a proposed amendment Bill for that Act.”
Our Society has now written to the Minister of Justice expressing
opposition to the proposed amendment and presenting a case to support our stand
which is:
w
Amendment to the Act will allow 20-30% of women to deliver a dead baby in the
privacy of their own home. We believe
that this will be a traumatic psychological experience for many women. It will deprive women of the support of
medical treatment should there be complications such as excessive bleeding
which may require a transfusion.
wThe
proposed amendment could ultimately have serious consequences for the
performance of abortions in New Zealand.
In the future medical science may produce an abortion pill that could be
prescribed by a general practitioner for a woman to take in her own home. An abortion could then be a private matter between
a woman and a doctor of her choice.
This situation would conflict with the duty of the state to provide
legal protection for the human rights of unborn New Zealanders. It could lead
to increased pressure for the decriminalisation of abortion.
District Health Boards (DHBs)
Following the approval for
the use of RU 486 our society has written to the Chief Executive Officers of
the Auckland, Waikato, Capital and Coast, Canterbury and Otago DHBs (these are
the DHBs where most of the abortions in New Zealand are performed) to request
that they don’t introduce RU 486 abortions in their clinics and hospitals.
Auckland
District Health Board (ADHB) Says NO to French Abortion Pill
In a letter to our society dated 23rd October, Cathy Handley,
General Manager of the National Women’s Hospital, stated “In the foreseeable
future the ADHB is not considering the introduction of RU 486 for use in
abortion during the first trimester of pregnancy. If the ADHB decides to use RU 486 within the second trimester of
pregnancy then a number of issues of process and protocols would have to be decided prior to the
introduction of RU 486, and the ADHB has not initiated that review.” This is good news. It means that the Epsom Day Abortion Clinic which is situated at
the National Women’s Hospital will not be using RU 486. Epsom Day is the busiest abortion clinic in
New Zealand with more than 5, 800abortions per year.
The
Otago District Health Board
Also advised this society
that “the Board has not introduced the procedure and has not made a decision
whether RU 486 will be introduced.”
These replies followed
letters from this society to the DHBs in Auckland, Wellington, Waikato,
Canterbury and Otago in September, asking them not to introduce chemical
abortions with RU 486 and presenting them with reasons why they should not do
so in the interest of the unborn child and women’s health.
The Canterbury DHB
Has acknowledged our letter
and advised that a response would be made in the near future. A follow-up letter have been sent to the
Capital and Coast DHBs.
The Waikato DHB
Has advised us that a
decision has not yet been made whether or not to use RU 486.
It is encouraging that RU 486
is unpopular in the United States. A
year after the drug had been approved by the Federal Drug Administration a
survey conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation revealed that only 6% of
gynaecologists and 1% of general practitioners say they have used RU 486. Of those gynaecologists who perform surgical
abortions only 12% of them provided a chemical abortion with RU 486. After
one year abortions have not increased with RU 486 in the USA. Women are not buying it, doctors are not
buying it and the American public is not buying it. RU 486 represents chemical warfare against our unborn. Our society is steadfast in its resolve to oppose the use of RU 486 in
New Zealand.
Action
Please
support the unborn child and mothers by 1. Writing to the Minister of Justice
to oppose the proposal to amend section 18 of the CS&A Act to allow
abortions to take place outside of licensed hospitals. 2.Write to the CEO of
your District Health Board to oppose the use of RU 486 in your hospitals.
SOCIETY’S REPORT
NATIONAL MEDIA
Since
August our society has made four media releases to 30 media including TV, radio
and major newspapers. The subjects were
1.
Stem cell research
2.
The delay in the review of the abortion laws announced by the
Minister of Justice.
3.
The appointments to the Abortion Supervisory Committee (ASC)
4.
Approval for the use of the French Abortion Pill RU 486 by the
Minister of Health.
Interviews
were given to Radio Pacific and Independent Radio News on the ASC appointments
and RU 486.
Press
The Press published
comments from our media release on RU 486.
Four letters were send to The Press on important life issues, none were
published. The last letter from our
society that was published was in July.
Challenge Weekly
Published our
society’s media releases on the ASC appointments and stem cell research.
NZ Catholic
Carried an article
on the society’s survey of candidates for District Health Boards. They also published comments from our media
release on RU 486 and published our letter on IVF sex selection.
Regional TV
An interview was
given and broadcast on Now TV on embryo stem cell research. An interview was also given by Peter
Coleman, of our executive on the Prostitution Reform Bill. An interview was also published on this
subject in the “Citizen” newspaper.
Important Correspondence
Minister of State Services
A letter was sent
to the Minister Trevor Mallard requesting under the Official Information Act, a
copy of the State Services conditions of appointment relating to conflict of
interest. Our society contends that
there was a conflict of interest in Parliament appointing a certifying
consultant as chairman of the Abortion Supervisory Committee.
New Zealand Medical Council
Our society wrote
again to the council opposing the application of Dr Philip Nitschke, of
Australia, to practise medicine in New Zealand presenting new evidence that he
was promoting a suicide pill.
National Ethics Committee on Assisted Reproductive Technology (NECAHR)
A letter was sent
to NECAHR opposing ethical approval for the proposal of Dr Fisher, that the sex
of embryos be selected in IVF procedures.
This proposal would allow for the rejection and destruction of embryos
not of the desired sex; a reply is awaited.
Minister of Health
A letter was sent
to the Minister following her approval of RU 486, requesting under the Official
Information Act copies of any memorandum from her to District Health Boards
(DHBs) on the use of RU 486.
The Minister
replied that no directions had been given to DHBs but that guidelines for the
use of RU 486 were being prepared by her Ministry’s officials. A letter was then sent requesting under the
Official Information Act, a copy of the guidelines. A reply is awaited.
Ombudsman
A complaint was
lodged under the Official Information Act for the refusal of the Minister of
Justice to provide the names and CVs of the candidates for appointment to the
Abortion Supervisory Committee. A reply
is awaited.
District Health Boards (DHBs)
Following the
approval of RU 486 by the Minister of Health, letters were sent to the
Auckland, Waikato, Wellington and Canterbury DHBs requesting that they don’t
introduce chemical abortions with RU 486.
Political Lobbying
Meetings have been
held with Wyatt Creech, MP, John Wright, MP, and Pansy Wong, MP, seeking their
support for opposition to the Prostitution Reform Bill and to discuss the
failure of the Abortion Supervisory Committee (ASC) to protect the unborn
child.
A meeting was also
held with Alec Neill, MP, to discuss the ASC appointments. We are grateful to him for providing our
society with the full Parliamentary Hansard report of the debate on the
appointments of the ASC.
Say No to Tim Barnett’s Prostitution Reform Bill
Taking a Stand Against Legalised Prostitution
the 12th October Rally in The Square
A second reading of the
Prostitution Reform Bill has been pushed forward to sometime after the
election. We hope that a rally supported by Right To Life NZ, and held on Friday 12th October at 7pm in
Cathedral Square helped to contribute to this. The rally also brought the issue
to the attention of the media.
The rally organiser, Peter
Coleman, was interviewed on Now TV on the Friday afternoon prior to the rally.
Harriet Logan also wrote a report of the rally in the newspaper ‘The Citizen’. Here is an excerpt from this
article. ‘ “This bill will make it legal for pimps to freely advertise and will
allow for brothels to be set up in suburbs,” says rally organiser Peter
Coleman’…..Coleman fears the bill will be accepted without much debate or
research’. Despite phone calls and
research material on the adverse effects of legalised prostitution in Australia
the ChCh Star and the ChCh Press declined to produce any media coverage of the
rally and have kept very quiet about the Barnett Bill.
It was sad to see that when
the rally organiser approached some Christian Churches there was a luke warm
response to the stand against legalised prostitution in this country. The bill is also supported by youth health
workers, The NZ Prostitutes Collective, feminists, LAVA (Lesbian Action for
visibility in Aotearoa, The NZ Aids
Foundation and 87 out of a total of 120
MPs (that’s 73 %) who voted for the bill in the first reading ( source-from an
article entitled ‘Stella’s Sex for Hire’ by Harriet Logan, published in the October 27 issue of the The
Citizen.)
However there is opposition to the Bill. It is on
record that at least two councillors are appalled by the Barnett Bill. Both Cr
Gail Sheriff and Cr Carol Evans, publically spoke against the Bill (ChCh Press
Sept 24). It is also indicative that many prominent leaders in our city have
not spoken out against the Bill. This would include the Mayor, doctors lawyers,
School Principals and the list goes on.
The rally was attended by Rev Mike Coleman, the Vicar
of St Ambrose Church in Aranui, who lead the singing with his guitar. The Light
Church pastor Robyn White, who has first hand experience of prostitution
outreach work spoke against the Bill.
Right To Life spokesperson, Ken Orr talked about the political nature of
the battle against the Barnett Bill.
The rally included Christian songs and prayer. At the
end of the rally people were left with a peaceful feeling that when Christians
assemble in a public place and pray the walls come crumbing down. Thanks go to Henry Alison for arranging the
sound system, to the Light Church for their generosity in allowing us the use
of their sound system, to Christchurch City Council, to Chris O’Brien for poster production.
n
n
The rally organiser (left) and Vicar Michael Coleman
(right) from St Ambrose Church in Aranui, testing the speaker system prior to
the rally. Rally supporter and Right to Life Committee member Henry Allison
(far right) holding a banner “Say No to the Prostitution. Reform Bill”
n
Prostitution Reform Bill
Our society has
been advised by a reliable source that it is the Government’s intention to
delay the second reading of this Bill until after the next general
election. We welcome this delay as it
will now give our society more time to encourage Parliamentary opposition to
this Bill. We conclude that this delay
is because the Government now realises that there is a growing community
concern and opposition to the Bill with the danger that the government may lose
support at the next election. This is a
positive response to our society’s lobbying of Parliament.
On the 22nd August a representative of this society
presented oral evidence in support of our written submission on this Bill to
the Justice and Electoral select committee at the Millenium Hotel in the
Cathedral Square. There was ten minutes
allowed for giving evidence and a further ten minutes to answer questions from
the members of the committee. The
members of the committee were Wayne Mapp chairman, Tim Barnett, Stephen Franks,
Peter Brown, Ann Tolly, Judith Tizard, Sue Bradfordand and Manaia Mahita. The focus of our presentation was that
prostitution, was sexual violence against women, and was a violation of the
dignity and human rights of women.
The whole function
of the current legislation dealing with prostitution was to protect women from
exploitation. We asked, if Parliament
really cares about the status and welfare of women in society, why would it
want to repeal the current
legislation? Stephen Franks of ACT in
question time commented, “I believe your
society reflects the values the community used to have.” It was encouraging that our oral evidence
was very well received. Our society has
obtained copies of a number of submissions made by other churches and
organisations.
Excellent
submissions were made by the New Zealand Educational Development Foundation
(NZEDF) The Christian Voice, a division of the National Party, Catholics United
for the Faith (CUF), the Society for the Promotion of Community Standards
(SPCS) and the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland.
It was disappointing that Linda Watson of Adelaide was unable to come to Wellington to give evidence to the select committee due to severe illness. Linda’s moving evidence about the damage done to women by prostitution was recorded on a video and given to the committee who gave an assurance that they would view it with great interest.
New
Zealand a Dying Nation
New
Zealand continues to have a birth rate that is below replacement level. Figures released by Statistics New Zealand,
show that the total number of live births for the year ended September was 55,
900 down 1600 or 3% from the previous year.
The largest drop was for births to teenagers (15-19years) with a
decrease of 5% from 29.6 to 28 births per 1000 women. The figures also show a trend towards delayed parenting with the
25-29 year age group having the highest birth rate of 116 per 1000 women. This rate was closely followed by the 30-34
year age group, with 114 per 1000. The
average age of women giving birth is 29.4 years. The Government Statistician Brian Pink said that 20 years ago the
highest birth rates were in the 20-24 year bracket. Annual birth rates also suggested that women were on average
having two births each - about 5% below the level required for the population
to replace itself without migration.
The number of deaths registered for the year was 27 600, up 4% or 1000
from last year. The decreasing birth rate,
combined with the increasing death rate, saw the natural increase in population
drop by about 2500 to 28 300. Any
increase in New Zealand’s population is dependent on migrants and refugees. It is a sad commentary on New Zealand
society that while we welcome migrants and refugees, that more than 16 000
unborn New Zealanders each year are denied their right to be born and live
here.
n
n
Sexual Health
Strategy
The Minister of Health has
released the Government’s new sexual health strategy. The strategy sets four
goals:
î Increasing society’s understanding of sexuality and sexual
behaviour.
î Improving personal knowledge
of sexual health
î Improving access and quality
of sexual health services
î Improving information and
research into sexually transmitted infections
Dr MacDonald of the Ministry
of Health said that if strategy’s goals were to be met, more money was
needed. The Government currently spent
more than $26 million on sexual health services.
Minister of Health Annette
King stated “The identification of vulnerable
groups and the removal of legislative barriers were vital, but decriminalising
sex between men only became possible by challenging society’s norms.In the same
way society needs to accept the value of safer sex practices and the importance
of planned pregnancy for service to work in the way we want them to work.” This
is a tragically failed strategy that is bringing physical, emotional, and
spiritual damage to many young people.
We can evaluate this strategy by its fruits. The promotion of the so called “safe sex” with condoms has
resulted in the number of abortions in New Zealand doubling in the period
1982-1999. We have an epidemic with Chlamydia cases reported at sexual health
clinics having increased from 1579 a year to about 2860 from 1995 to 2000 while
the number of gonorrhoea cases went from 384 in 1999 to 492 in 2000. So-called
sexual freedom has been purchased with the blood of the 16,103 innocent unborn
children that were killed last year by abortion. This is a price too high.
The message that an
enlightened Government should be promoting to the youth of this nation is
chastity before marriage and
faithfulness within marriage. The “safe sex” message and philosophy
undermines the family, the foundation of a sound and healthy society.
Morning-after Pill Trial
Dodgy?
The Lancet
has published a letter warning of adverse reactions to the abortifacient
morning-after pill, sometimes referred to as ‘emergency contraception’. The
letter objects to a statement from a previous issue which claimed the pill was
safe. Several writers have commented on the scarcity of safety data. The letter
notes that the WHO trial on the drug was flawed because it recorded the
experience of only 100 women taking the regimen only once. Moreover, of that
sample “one woman died of meningitis and 21 were lost to follow-up… Such a
short trial is clearly inadequate to assess safety,” the letter says. The
writer says five per cent of women are genetically susceptible to breast and
ovarian cancer and another five per cent to thromboembolic disease, making them
ineligible recipients of the pill. However, the relevant tests will generally
not be done before a pharmacist hands over those chemicals.
n
n
World Newz
Switzerland. The Zurich Health Department has given official approval to
assistance in the suicides of residents in its retirement home for the elderly.
Active euthanasia is still illegal in Switzerland but the removal of
life-sustaining equipment/treatment is permitted and assisted suicides are
condoned. The head of the Health Department stated “In a changed society, which
places a high value on the right to self-determination there is no longer room
for such prohibitions”. To date only 1 per cent of residents had expressed a
desire for suicide.
California. The California Nurses Association
recently voted to support doctor assisted suicide because ‘long term patient
care is simply too costly.’
Britain:
Euthanasia. A terminally ill British woman has lost a landmark court battle to
‘die with dignity’. Mother of two Diane Pretty 42 who has Motor Neurone Disease
had wanted her husband Brian to be immune from prosecution if he helped her
commit suicide. I’m a test case that underscores Britain’s longstanding legal
block on euthanasia. Three High Court judges dismissed Mrs Pretty’s case and
denied her permission to appeal against their ruling except to the House of
Lords. The Pretty’s said that the refusal to allow the assisted suicide,
infringed their human rights. Lord Justice Tuckey said her human right was to
“live with dignity not die with dignity.”
England:
Withdrawal of Food & Hydration.
The General Medical
Council of Britain has proposed ‘the removal of tube hydration from non-dying
patients so that they would die of dehydration. This is a cruel and painful
death. The Council states that artificial food and hydration are a form of
treatment and may be withdrawn in the interest of patients.
China. The Chinese government has given orders to a remote
poverty-stricken province to have 20,000 abortions to be conducted by the end of
the year. A recent national census revealed that the average family in the
Huàiji province was having five or more children. Many of the abortions will be
forced after women are arrested for being pregnant without a licence. The
United Nations Population Fund praises
and supports China’s one child policy.
New
York. Planned
Parenthood, following the attack on America of 11 September, as a gesture of
concern for the community, offered the women of New York abortions free of
charge from the 18-22 of September.
Suicide
Pill Suggested for Elderly The Dutch Health Minister has said she is
open to allowing elderly persons who are ‘tired of life’ to take a suicide
pill. “I am not against it, as long as it can be carefully enough regulated so
that it only concerns very old people who have had enough of living,” Els Borst
said. Dutch Christian Democratic Party
leader Jaap de Hoop reacted to Borst’s comments saying, “It’s only a couple of
days since the euthanasia law was voted in, and already the minister wants to
go a step further.”
Bush
Stops Funding.
President George Bush
has sent a budget to Congress which eliminates taxpayer funding of prescription
contraception coverage for federal employees, a programme implemented by his
predecessor, Bill Clinton. The government
already refuses to fund abortions for the 1.2 million female federal employees.
Critics said Bush was guilty of hypocrisy for opposing abortion and then
cutting access to free contraceptives. However, as federal employees, most are
well above the poverty level and able to afford contraceptives.
Officials
Kill Woman. A woman in south-east China’s Fujian
province was beaten to death by birth-control officials, who wanted to
sterilise her against her will, her relatives say. Sun Zhonghua, 34, from a farming
family in Xiapu country near the provincial capital of Fuzhou, was taken away
by birth-control officials from her home by daybreak on Thursday, a relative
said. She has two boys.
Quake
Victims Get Abortion Kits. The UN Population Fund (UNFPA) has replied
to the homelessness and destruction caused by earthquakes in El Salvador by
sending abortion kits to the mainly Catholic country, according to Steven
Mosher of the Population Research Institute (PRI). Two devastating earthquakes
hit El Salvador a month apart in January and February, leaving about a third of
the population homeless and 1159 people dead. About 70,000 are without drinking
water. But Mosher said, the UNFPA’s response has been to send their standard
“reproductive health” kits to the country. “Leave it to UNFPA to offer a
traumatised woman an IUD rather than water, food and clothing for herself and
her displaced family,” he said. “It seems that the UNFPA never misses an
opportunity to try to reduce the population of the Third World.” Mosher quoted
Julia de Cardenal, president of the pro-family group Si a la Vida, as calling
the action ‘demographic imperialism.” El Salvador amended its constitution in
1999 to officially recognise that life begins at the moment of conception,
banning abortion.
Victory
Welcomed. Pro-life groups in the UK have warmly
welcomed the victory of the Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child in
the High Court earlier this month. SPUC went to the High Court to try to stop
over-the-counter sales of the morning after pill at pharmacies, saying that
because the drug is a method of early abortion it should be subject to abortion
legislation.” Bruno Quintavalle, a spokesman for the ProLife Alliance,
congratulated SPUC. Student LifeNet said it was ‘delighted’ to hear the result,
and noted that the description of the morning-after pill as a contraceptive
deceived women by ‘obscuring the devastating effects both to their unborn child
and to their own health.” The Department of Health said the British government
would strongly contest the result.
Adult
Stem Cell Research Shows Promise. A
new study reveals that stem cells taken from the bone marrow of adults may be
as versatile as stem cells taken from embryonic unborn children, avoiding the
ethical complications of that process. The discovery made by Dr Neil Theise of
New York University and Dr Dian Krause of Yale University is the second recent
study that may obviate the need to kill unborn children for their stem cells,
which researchers believe may lead to cures for a variety of diseases. Researchers have been able to make stem
cells from fat cells taken from adults. Theise said the finding provides the
strongest evidence to date that the adult body harbours stem cells that are as
flexible as embryonic stem cells.
n
The Great Stem Cell Debate - The
Defining Life Issue.
n
There
is an intense world-wide debate raging on stem cell research. It has even succeeded in splitting the
pro-life movement, why is this? There
are some in the movement who while accepting that human life begins at
conception do not accept that the child has a right to life until implantation
in its mother’s womb.
What are stem cells?
These are cell
which have the ability to continuously divide and develop into various kinds of
tissue and are called stem cells. This
ability to grow into different kinds of healthy tissue makes stem cells
especially interesting for medical research.
The source of stem cells
Stem cells may be
obtained from early embryos, the bodies of aborted unborn children, unbilical
cord blood and adult tissues. At the
moment the only source of stem cells that can grow into all types of tissue is
from early embryos, up to 14 days old.
There are two possible sources for these:
1. Embryos
remaining after infertility treatment.
2. Embryos
created for use in research.
In New Zealand
there is no regulation in this area.
Some genetic screening research on human embryos has been approved by
the National Ethics Committee on Assisted Human Reproduction (NECAHR). There is no stem cell research being carried
out in New Zealand at present. The
practice of assisted reproduction raises many important ethical issues such as
the human rights of the child. There
are two Bills before Parliament currently being considered by the Health select
committee that seek to regulate experiments on embryos.
Ü The Human
Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill (1996) a private members Bill of Dianne
Yates Labour.
Ü The
Assisted Human Reproduction Bill (1998) a Government Bill. In May 2001 the Government announced that
new legislation would be drafted that would encompass the recent developments
in stem cell technology cloning and issues raised in the earlier Bills.
The Independent Biotechnology Advisory Council (IBAC) which was set up in 1999 by the
Government, to help New Zealanders to consider and explore issues in
biotechnology has produced a discussion booklet.
The discussion
booklet can be obtained from:
IBAC, PO Box 530, Wellington
Phone 0800 504 222 to leave a message
Email info@ibac.org.nz
The important questions facing our community are
Ü Is it
acceptable to use early embryos to provide stem cells?
Ü Do embryos have human rights?
Ü Is it acceptable to create an embryo by cloning in order to provide
stem cells to be used in medical research?
Ü Is it acceptable to use early embryos remaining after IVF treatment
which would otherwise by destroyed or perish to provide stem cells for
research?
Ü Is it acceptable to use stem cells from aborted babies for medical
research?
Human life begins
at the moment of conception, it is the commencement of life’s journey on earth
that will end in natural death. Each
one of us was once a human embryo who could not be seen with the naked
eye.
This society is
opposed to embryo research which entails the destruction of a human being, it
is a violation of the sanctity of life ethic and a rejection of the inviolable
right to life endowed by God on every human being at the moment of
conception.
Human beings are
not commodities to be created and destroyed.
Every human embryo has a right to be born and not to be frozen, stored
and experimented on. There are
thousands of embryos frozen and stored at IVF clinics in new Zealand that are
discarded after 5 years as “unwanted.”
There should be no
such thing as an unwanted human being.
In our society’s media release of 13th August following President Bush’s
statement on stem cell research we stated: “This society applauds the decision
of President Bush to refuse Federal funding for research on tens of thousands
of discarded human embryos obtained from fertility treatment.
We are however
disappointed that he approved Federal funding for research on 60 existing lines
of stem cells taken from embryos. Stem
cell research on human beings is a violation of human rights and a denial of
the inalienable right to life of the embryo.
We fully support
research with stem cells derived from ethical sources ie. Adult tissue, body
cells and from the blood of the umbilical cord of newborn babies. We look forward to the day when medical
sciences will be able to assist people suffering from Alzheimers, Parkinsons
and other diseases.
Pope John Paul II in support of the sanctity of life
ethic confirmed the Church’s teaching that opposed the destruction of human
embryos said “Embryonic cells are a form of human life and must be protected at
any cost.”
Our society will
continue to monitor developments in this important issue. When the Government brings legislation to
Parliament on this issue we will send a submission to the select Committee
dealing with the Bill.
n
n
n
From the Internet
China Bans RU 486 Abortion Drug
Beijing
China – China’s State Drug Administration
recently issued a notice ordering pharmacies in the country to stop issuing
dosages of Mifepristone, an abortion-inducing drug. “In order to guarantee patients’ safety and protect their health,
it is decided that no matter whether patients have a doctor’s prescription or
not, retail drug stores are forbidden to sell Mifepristone tablets,” the notice said, according to the October 9.
Beijing Chenbao (Beijing Morning Post).
The newspaper said that some Beijing -area hospitals have reported
treating women suffering dangerous side effects from the Mifepristone abortion
drug.
In
October of last year, the Los Angeles Times reported that Shanghai Hua Lian
Pharmaceutical Co., the Chinese manufacturer of Mifepristone, had been cited by
the U.S. House Commerce Committee for
“bringing mislabeled an impure drugs into the United States.”
News in Brief: The Cost
of Abortion to the Economy.
It is estimated
that the annual loss to the New Zealand economy through abortion is in excess
of $41066.5 million. This figure is
based on a Land Transport Safety Authority (LTSA) evaluation which put a value
of $2.55 million on each life lost, which was calculated on the average loss of
wages for the natural life of a road accident victim.
n
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 a 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 Domincan
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 and 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 hyperstimulation,
rupture or perforation requiring uterine surgical repair, hysterectomy or
salpingo-oophorectomy; amniotic fluid embolism; sever vaginal bleeding,
retained placenta, shock, foetal bradycardia and pelvic pain.”
Taking
Misoprostol on its own only induces abortion about 40% of the time, so many
babies are born after failed abortion attempts. Several studies in Brazil, where up to 75% of abortions involve
Misoprostol, suggest the drug causes birth defects such as fused joints, growth
retardation and a condition know as Mbius syndrome, which is characterised by a
paralysis of the face.
One recent study
found that out of 93 children with defects associated with Mbius syndrome, 34%
of those infants had been exposed to Misoprostol, compared with just 4.3% of
the 279 infants in a control group.
Another revealed that 49% of infants born with Mbius at seven hospitals
in Brazil had been exposed to Misoprostol, whereas only 3% 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.
New Zealand
Family Planning Association
Among the Honorary
vice Presidents of the
Association are the
following: the
Governor General,
Dame Sylvia
Cartwright, Rt Hon Helen Clark, Hon Lianne
Dalziel, Rt Hon Jenny Shipley, and Hon Judith Tizard.
For the financial year 30th
June 2000,
the NZFPA received the following grants:
Anonymous $6000
Community Funding Agency $8311
(Palmerston North)
Community Trust of Otago $15000
JR McKenzie Trust $20000
Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade $98500
Nelson Marlborough COGS $3000
NZ Lottery Grants Board $56000
Southland Community Trust $5000
Sutherland Self Help Trust $2000
Te Kuiti Rotary Club $2000
The Community Trust $30000
TocHNZ Bowerbank Trust $10000
Waikato Communtiy Trust $10000
The Rockefeller Foundation US$200000
William & Flora Hewlett
Foundation
US $75000
The grants have
been spent according to the conditions attached to each grant.
Freedom of Access to
Abortion Clinics.
A pro-abortion
organisation is currently lobbying Parliament to restrict members of the
pro-life movement praying or offering counselling to women from standing within
50 feet of an entrance to the clinic.
The proposed legislation would be similar to the American Freedom of
Access to Abortion Clinics legislation which would provide for a person praying
being arrested for harassment.
Euthanasia Bill.
Belgium
moved a step closer yesterday to legalising euthanasia when senators voted in
favour of a draft law setting conditions under which doctors may help
terminally ill patients end their lives.
After three days of debate, the 71-seat chamber voted 44-23 for the
controversial “mercy-killing” law. The
draft law must be passed by the lower chamber of Parliament before it comes
into effect, which could be before the end of the year. If approved it would make Belgium the second
country, after the Netherlands, to legalise euthanasia.
-Reuters
The “S.S Suicide.”
Inspired by the
publicity stunt of the pro-abortion group Women on Waves, Dr. Philip Nitschke
of Australia now wants to draw attention to the “mercy killing” debate. He is planning to launch a floating
euthanasia clinic off the British coast.
Patients on Dr. Nitschke’s boat would be administered lethal injections
or drug dosages. Euthanasia is banned
in Australia and the U.K., but Nitschke hopes that by registering his vessel in
the Netherlands, he will be able to perform these suicides legally.
SPUC Petition
It
is important that the pro-life movement is seen to be consistently upholding
the right to life and promoting a culture of life. The Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child is in danger
of promoting an unintended and misleading message to the churches and
community. Abortion sought by choice
should be a user-pays service according to the Society, reported in the NZ
Catholic 7th
October. Since when has a pro-life
organisation referred to the killing of children as a service?
At the Society’s
recent national conference it was resolved to organise a national petition
seeking such a change in how abortion is funded. The funding of abortion is of course an important issue,
currently it is funded by the taxpayer as a core health service. It is of course repugnant that our taxes are
used to fund the killing of children before birth. The focus of the pro-life movement should be on the needs of the
unborn child not on how abortion should be funded.
From the
perspective of the more than 16, 000 unborn children who will be killed in
their mother’s womb this year, the issue is life and rescue from imminent
violent death, the issue is not who is going to pay for it. The unintended message that the Society will
be promoting with the proposed petition is that the society tolerates the
killing of the unborn child but is opposed to taxpayers paying for
abortions. The implicit message that
this petition will give Parliament is that the pro-life movement has no
complaints about the abortion laws but would like abortion to be “user pays”. The message conveyed by the proposed petition is not in the best
interests of the unborn child. New
Zealand’s unborn children urgently need effective legal protection. SPUC is encouraged to reconsider their
petition to Parliament.
A petition seeking
increased legal protection for the unborn child would deserve the full support
of the whole of the pro-life movement.
n
n
Abortion Law Review
An eight page submission was sent to the
Minister of Justice in October on his proposed review of the abortion laws in
New Zealand.
The
submission was based on documents released by the Minister under the Official
Information Act which outlined the possible amendments that could be included
in Government Bills to amend the CS&A Act and the Crimes Act which would be
harmful to the unborn child. Our
submission presented a pro-life perspective on the proposals which sought to
provide increased legal protection for the unborn child. The subjects covered by our submission and
our stance were
â
That abortion be decriminalised. Opposed
â That the Crimes Act be amended to include socio-economic factors as
a ground for abortion. Opposed
â That the Abortion Supervisory Committee be abolished. Opposed
â That the fees paid to certifying consultants be abolished. Supported
â That the license holder for abortion facilities be the Medical
Superintendent of the hospital. Supported
â That the decision to have an abortion should be made only by the
woman and her own medical practitioner. Opposed
â That the CS&A Act be amended to allow abortions to take place
in other than hospitals or clinics licensed to do abortions. Opposed
â That all medical practitioners be appointed as certifying
consultants on full registration. Opposed
â That the
Crimes Act be amended to allow foetal abnormality to be a ground for abortion
after 20 weeks gestation and up to birth. Opposed
Our
society also included a submission for the following important issues to be
addressed by the Minister in his review of the law.
â That the status and rights of the unborn child be spelt out in
legislation
â That the Guardianship Act be amended to restore parental rights to
stop young women under the age of 16 having an abortion without the knowledge
or consent of parents.
â That all complications arising from an abortion within one week be
reported to the Abortion Supervisory Committee. At present only complications arising on the day of an abortion
are reported.
â That the rights of fathers of unborn children be recognised in law,
to allow them to be heard in defence of the life of the child.
Abortion Counselling
That the CS&A
Act be amended to make it mandatory that decision making counselling be
provided in another facility other than where abortions are performed.
The unborn child
has no voice but ours.
It is fervently
hoped that this submission made on behalf of the unborn child will receive the
consideration that it deserves and that it will have a constructive influence
in the review of the abortion laws. Our
society’s objective remains full protection for the right to life of the unborn
child. This objective will only be
attained with incremental steps.
Action
Please support this submission by writing
to the Minister of Justice requesting justice for our unborn in his review of
the law.
n
Bill
English MP
This society, which
is apolitical welcomes the election of Bill English as the leader of the
National Party, Parliamentary caucus.
He is from good Southland farming stock, one of thirteen children. His wife is Dr. Mary English, and they have
six children. Mary is a general medical
practitioner in part-time practice and also involved in pro-life and pro-family
work. Bill English is an outspoken
defender of life and on his election he unashamedly stated in the media that he
was opposed to abortion and euthanasia.
He is a strong defender of the family and Christian values. He has an outstanding pro-life record. In 1995 he lobbied strongly among his
colleagues to defeat the Michael Law’s euthanasia “Death with Dignity
Bill.” As Minister of Health, he
overcame concerted opposition from ministry officials to have the information
booklet “Considering an abortion, what are your options?” published and made
available to women. The Family Planning
Association after Bill English’ departure from the ministry, was later
successful in having the booklet stopped.
Bill English also voted against the introduction of the Prostitution
Reform Bill and voted against the recent appointments to the Abortion Supervisory
Committee. His new appointment will
enhance his ability to influence the social policies of the National Party and
ultimately, government. At a time in
history when the sanctity of life ethic, and the family is under increasing
attack, his leadership is welcome.
n
n
n