"Parliament has

“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 21^st 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 20^th 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 1^st 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 13^th 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 8^th 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 26^th 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 23^rd 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 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”

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 22^nd 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.

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 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 13^th 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 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.

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 30^th 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 7^th 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 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.

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.