Skip to content

Abortion

Who wants to be an abortionist?

By Lachlan de Crespigny

Dr. Evan James never wavered in his determination to become an abortion provider. But he is unusual – few trainee doctors have a driving ambition to become abortionists. The U.S. has seen a 40 per cent drop in the number of doctors who perform abortions since the early 1980s. Those in the field say there's likely a similar trend in Canada. Few Canadian hospitals provide abortions and numbers are dropping. Other countries, including Australia, have similar service provision problems.

Abortion is lawful in at least some circumstances in almost all western countries. Yet most have too few providers and current providers are aging with few replacements coming through.

Read More »Who wants to be an abortionist?

X Factor Abortion: Is it Wrong?

by Julian Savulescu

Paije Richardson's dreams of a new life were crushed tonight as the public voted him from the X Factor final rounds. On Dec 9, the fate of another young hopeful will be decided by the people’s choice. But this time it will be a life and death choice. A couple have allegedly given the life of their baby over to popular vote; they are considering having an abortion and have created a public poll which will decide whether they have an abortion or not (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1330860/Should-abortion–decide-U-S-couple-set-website-unborn-child.html) 

The abortion vote has been described as “spine-chilling.” The baby is 17 weeks gestation and a healthy boy called “Wiggles.” One pro-lifer was outraged:

'This is shocking.The first thing that came to my mind when I heard of this was the Roman Colosseum, when the mob picked who lived and who died. They are talking about a baby that is 17 weeks old, it has a beating heart, its brain is working and nerve endings throughout its body' 

Deciding human life by vote is shocking, but is it wrong?

Read More »X Factor Abortion: Is it Wrong?

Benefit cuts for large, workless families

The UK's culture secretary, Jeremy Hunt, has suggested that the state should limit the provision of social security benefits to large, unemployed families. Hunt said last week that

The number of children that you have is a choice and what we're saying is that if people are living on benefits, then they make choices but they also have to have responsibility for those choices . . . It's not going to be the role of the state to finance those choices.

Two quite different arguments might be offered in support of such a move.

Read More »Benefit cuts for large, workless families

Is it criminal not to breastfeed?

by Rebecca Roache

The Brazilian
model Gisele Bundchen recently—and controversially—claimed that mothers should
be required by law to breastfeed their babies for the first six months of their
lives. 
A few days later, she partially retracted the claim on her blog, insisting that her talk of a breastfeeding law should
not be taken literally.  It was simply a way of expressing her belief in the
importance of doing the best for her child. 
After all, legally enforcing breastfeeding would be madness, right?

Not
according to the Indonesian government. 
It recently passed a law giving babies the right to six months of
exclusive breastfeeding,
except in cases where medical problems prevent their mothers from breastfeeding.  Mothers who do not comply face a year in
prison or a fine of 100,000,000 Rupiahs (around £7,100), and those who prevent
mothers from fulfilling their breastfeeding obligations also face punishments.  Scientists and health professionals generally
agree that breastfeeding is healthier for babies than the alternatives (see,
for example, here),
that not enough mothers do it (see here),
and governments around the world invest huge sums trying to get mothers to
breastfeed.  But is criminalising non-breastfeeding mothers a good idea?

Read More »Is it criminal not to breastfeed?

Australians support women’s access to late abortion


by Lachlan de Crespigny, Thomas Douglas, Mark Textor and Julian Savulescu

Regular calls to limit numbers of abortions are a familiar cry. Yet people are outraged if a friend or family member with a serious complication in much wanted pregnancy reluctantly requests an abortion but encounters resistance. Or when a woman faces a criminal court, as will happen to Tegan Leach next month in Queensland.

Read More »Australians support women’s access to late abortion

An Ethical Approach to Abortion

by Julian Savulescu

Abortion should be decriminalised. Early abortion should be freely and easily available on request. Late abortion should be freely and easily available at least for those who have a valid justification: significant fetal abnormality, threat to woman’s health or a serious social reason, for example child pregnancy or rape. Family planning, including safe, free and open abortion services, is an essential part of a civilized society.

Read More »An Ethical Approach to Abortion

Special Edition: Should we allow late abortion?

There have been a number of articles in the media about abortion in the last few weeks. The British Prime Minister has suggested that the time limit for (relatively) unrestricted access to abortion should be reduced from 24 to 22 or 20 weeks. A survey published tomorrow in an Australian medical journal suggests that the public in Australia support legal access to abortion, and do not believe that doctors should be sanctioned for performing abortion in the later stages of pregnancy if there is a good reason to do so.

This blog collects together resources and media articles relevant to the debate

Read More »Special Edition: Should we allow late abortion?

Abortion for Fetal Abnormality?

Abortion remains a crime for most Australians. Laws are inconsistent between states. In contrast, long ago the UK Abortion Act 1967 repealed and replaced its antiquated legal statutes on which much of Australian abortion law is still based.

The government in the state of Victoria asked the Law Reform Commission to provide legislative options to decriminalize abortion. Law reform is expected later this year.

Read More »Abortion for Fetal Abnormality?

Legal Abortion Time-Limits: Arbitrary Limits Harm Women

By Dr. Lachlan de Crespigny, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Melbourne

The vote by the British parliament to keep the upper legal limit on abortion at 24 weeks was headline news around the world. An article in The Economist (1) considers that the British were spared America’s abortion wars partly because Britain is less religious than America, but also because abortion laws are made in Parliament, where shades of grey can be debated, not in the courts, where black or white usually prevails.

Interestingly much of the debate was about ‘viability’ – the minimum gestational age at which a newborn is said to be capable of surviving with modern intensive care facilities. This is a simple across-the-board week count. But the survival rate of newborns also depends on many other factors, including where they are born (2, 3), fetal health including the presence or absence of an abnormality (which remains lawful where the child will be ‘seriously handicapped’), plus the condition of the newborn. While around half or so of 24 week newborns in Britain may survive, many or most of the abortions at around that gestation are of problem, or unhealthy, pregnancies.

Read More »Legal Abortion Time-Limits: Arbitrary Limits Harm Women

Viability and the abortion debate – what really matters?

MPs in the House of Commons will debate tomorrow whether the cut-off for legal abortions in the UK should be reduced. Currently abortions are permitted up to the 24th week of a pregnancy, and some MPs have argued that this should be reduced to 20 weeks or below. Advocates and opponents of the change have pointed to scientific evidence about the viability of infants born extremely prematurely at 22, 23 and 24 weeks. They seem to believe that if we can answer the scientific question of whether such infants are viable, that will resolve the question about whether or not abortion is permissible at that stage.
That might be the case if there were a consensus on what viability means, and why it is important in questions about abortion time-limits. But, as this article will highlight, there is no such consensus, and it is not straightforward why viability should matter. So far in this public debate there has been little or no mention of the important questions – what is viability, and why is it important in abortion law?

Read More »Viability and the abortion debate – what really matters?