Abortion in the Media

The ABC broadcasted a short but intense debate on 'Questions and Answers' (Q and A) on Thursday, October 29.

Panellists included:
Bill Shorten - Labor's Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Childrens' Services
Tony Abbott - Shadow Minister for Families and Community Services
Jonathan Biggins - Satirist
Catherine Deveny - Comedian and columnist, The Age
Bettina Arndt - Commentator and author, The Sex Diaries

Tune in at 27 mins 27 secs here.

In this section of the show, comedian and columnist for The Age, Catherine Deveny, proudly stated that she had had an abortion herself and rudely mocked Tony Abbott for his faith, attempting to disqualify his opinion. In response, Tony Abbott remained composed (as always) and conveyed his ongoing support and concern for women and families facing unplanned pregnancies.

Ms Deveny argued for greater access to chemical abortions, stating they are "incredibly easy, incredibly safe"!!  There was a lot of misinformation, such as this, presented in this one sided debate and as usual, not a single mention of the more than 100,000 babies inhumanely aborted annually in Australia nor any feedback from women who have experienced abortion and suffered as a result.

Reference was (yet again) made to the case of 19 year old Teagan Leach who has been disgracefully exploited by pro aborts lobbying for liberal abortion laws in Queensland. At one point a speaker made the comment about "women taking to the streets" if Ms. Leach is charged (for importing an illegal, unapproved drug to procur an abortion - raising issues of safety). Thousands have marched through the streets of Melbourne in 2008 and this year in October, opposing the legalisation of abortion, but again....not a mention!

Even Queensland Premier, Anna Bligh was criticised for not supporting changes to abortion law, as she was "pro abortion in her university years"...perhaps Ms. Bligh has come to understand the issue of abortion more than she did as a nineteen year old uni student!

Mr. Abbott stated his concern about Australia's enormous abortion rate and stated that by legalising abortion, it sends a message that "more is okay".

As can be seen, we have a lot of work to do to inform (and challenge) our leaders, the media, women and society of the risks of abortion, the reality of abortion procedures and the damage abortion does to society. Women, families and society deserve better than abortion. 
 

Feedback to Q and A may be sent here.

Marissa Calligeros ('Abortion women told: 'see a lawyer first',October 26, 2009) reports that a Queensland Health consent form (draft) was sent to obstetricians last week. This draft form advises patients of the medical risks  and outlines the "psychiatric risks" , including depression and "anxiety disorders", associated with abortion. The draft consent form also encourages women to seek independent legal advice.

Abortion is currently unlawful in Queensland unless it is performed to "preserve the woman from serious harm to her life or physical or mental health".

The article makes (yet another) mention of Tegan Leach, a 19 year old Cairns woman who was "charged earlier this year for procuring her own miscarriage, while her partner Sergie Brennan, 21, was charged for procuring a miscarriage and supplying a drug, namely misoprostol". The ongoing exploitation of this young couple by the pro abortion lobby is inexcusable. The young couple were, in fact, charged with importing an illegal drug, not approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration, to induce an abortion, which raises issues of safety. The situation of this young couple in crisis has been splashed on newspapers all around the world in what can only be described as a heartless campaign by those pushing for liberal abortion laws in Queensland.

Ms.Calligeros reports that "Since Leach's arrest, doctors have lobbied the State Government to include medical abortions, using labor-inducing drugs, in the criminal code, which previously accounted for surgical abortions only".  It is questionable whether the financial beneficiaries of abortion should have any input into what is (or isn't) included in the criminal code.

The Queensland Health Consent form (draft) states that "When all of the requirements of this consent form have been fulfilled, Queensland Health considers that the treating team may lawfully perform the termination of pregnancy." 

Caroline de Costa, Cairns gynaecologist, in opposition to the consent form draft, stated that  "the form would only alarm women already facing the trauma of a termination" and that "It would be very disconcerting at the least and probably quite frightening to be confronted with this."

Ms de Costa also commented that "It's very hard for a woman to make a decision about abortion for herself anyway and to be confronted with the news that she may be committing a crime and she needs to understand this as well as the medical implications of having the procedure or not having it is a huge burden to place on her".

Many doctors, groups and individuals oppposed to abortion have argued strongly that women are often not aware of what the procedure entails, possible risks, or of options other than abortion and that the abortion industry is thriving due to this lack of knowledge and information. The burden placed on women is even greater, often unbearable, when the implications of having an abortion are realised too late.

Cairns doctor, Dr. Tim Doyle asked "What is so wrong with giving women all the information on abortion?" He applauded the Queensland Government saying  "Full marks to the State Government for giving women all the facts on abortion so that they can make an informed choice, particularly when under pressure from abortionists or a male friend to have an abortion. The current abortion law in Queensland empowers women to make the choice to choose NOT to have an abortion when under such pressure".

Other feedback on the Brisbane Times website also expressed frustration at the lack of opinion sought (by media outlets) from anyone other than those supportive of the abortion industry, in this case Caroline de Costa.

Sonja Couroupis, President of Life Network Australia, also welcomes the move by the Queensland Government, stating that "Women and families deserve to know all the facts and they deserve better support and options than they are currently being provided with - this is a huge step forward to empowering women who in many cases feel overwhelmed by the lack of information and support made available to them in difficult circumstances".

Addiction experts have described abortion as a form of self harm when contesting the claims made by Irene Vilar that she is an "abortion addict", according to The Age.

'Impossible Motherhood' is a newly released book in which Ms Vilar compares her 15 abortions in 17 years to the addictions of "a druggie".

According to the article, a senior lecturer in media and communications at the University of Sydney, Fiona Giles, believes "the addiction portrayed in the book is not to abortions but to an abusive relationship".

The article quotes Dr. Giles as saying that “Her problem is that she was addicted to a relationship with a much older man who was also her teacher so not only was there an age difference, there was a strong power difference." “My main feeling was that she … was inflicting self-harm as a way of coping through that time.”

Leslie Cannold, president of Reproductive Choice Australia and a medical ethicist at Monash University and at the University of Melbourne, dismisses the case, stating that "This woman's story is anomalous. That's why it was seen as worthy of a book".

However, of paramount importance is that this situation can occur in the first place.  Where is the accountability of abortion providers to all women? Where is the duty of care to the patient and why wasn't anything done to provide psychological care for Ms Vilar?  And not a mention of the 15 babies needlessly destroyed!

In saying "What Vilar's story clearly shows is the importance of access to safe and legal abortion", Ms Cannold  demonstrates the abortion lobby’s disregard for women, the difficult situations they face and their welfare. Women in situations like Ms Vilar’s need access to professional, confidential support and care, not more ready access to abortion. Legal abortion (no abortion is safe) only continues the cycle of abuse and loss.

Ms Vilar is yet another example of women deserving better. 

By Debbie Garratt, Real Choices Australia
Used with permission.

We have had unprecedented interest in our secondary school’s program Choices Decisions Outcomes … thanks mostly to the program itself, but at least in part to the latest media contribution by Leslie Cannold. I am confident, however this wasn’t her intent. The aspects of our program that Ms Cannold appears to find so disturbing, are precisely the aspects that parents are telling us they want for their children. They want their children to understand their value and worth, to have self respect and to understand sexuality as an important and valuable aspect of themselves, not simply a ‘recreational’ activity.

Far from teaching young people that peer pressure causes teen sex, as Cannold suggests, our program teaches young people that, as with any other activity they may not want to participate in, that they can develop strategies for saying ‘no’. The fact is that the majority of Year 10 students are still virgins, yet the sex education most of them get is what one young student described as ‘totally humiliating’. At an age where she already felt bombarded by messages that ‘everyone is ‘doing it’’, she was coerced into demonstrating the application of a condom on a phallic object in a classroom. She rightly asks, ‘where was the education for me… and most of my friends, who don’t want to have sex, or handle a condom?’.

Sex is not just about physiology, it is also about relationship, and about our emotional selves. Teaching the physiology of sex in the absence of a relationship context, and in the absence of also teaching about possible consequences, is both irresponsible and dishonest.

Our program does not push a particular view on young people. What it does is encourage young people to be critical thinkers, to think ahead to the consequences of their actions, and these consequences do include the possibility of pregnancy and of sexually transmitted infections, some of which are lifelong diseases, not just a short lived ‘love bug’.

It seems to me that rather than be so critical of a program which values the integrity and intelligence of young people to develop responsible decision making abilities, Cannold might question the motives behind the world’s most prolific abortion providers teaching our kids that they can just ‘do it’ because it ‘… can be rewarding and enjoyable..’ and that they can do it ‘safely’. All education has a values base… I guess it’s a matter of deciding which values we want to be driving the education of our kids.

The secondary school education program Choices, Decisions, Outcomes, is an innovative value based education program encouraging adolescents to make healthy lifestyle choices regarding their sexuality. 

An estimated one million people marched in Madrid, Spain, protesting proposed changes to abortion law, according to christianpost.com. The Bill proposed by socialist Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero included allowing abortion for any reason during the first 14 weeks of pregnancy and to allow girls as young as 16 to have an abortion without parental consent.
 
Currently abortion is only allowed in the cases of rape, foetal abnormality, or when the mother’s physical or mental health is at risk. 

The relentless push by those in favour of abortion continues with another pro abortion article this week. Yet another journalist in support of the liberalisation of abortion laws in Queensland, Adele Horin ('Right to choose abortion wins strong support', Brisbanetimes.com.au, October 4, 2009) writes that "57 percent of Australians support a women's right to obtain an abortion readily when they want one", that "one-third supports abortion 'in special circumstances', and only 4 per cent opposes abortion outright".

To gain a more accurate account of the study undertaken, it would be necesaary to know the questions posed. For example, for the "one third", what constitutes "special circumstances"?  Rape? Incest? Disability? Such "special circumstances" account for relatively very few abortions. 

Ms Horin states that "Queenslanders in particular, hold liberal views on abortion, yet politicians' fear of small religious minorities appears to have stymied decriminalisation of the procedure in some states, a study shows" and that "the findings, from the Australian Election Study, are based on polling 1873 electors at the 2007 federal election". 

Allan Carman ('Have your say', Cathnews, October 5, 2009) responded by asking "Where do they get these results? How many people were surveyed and from what demographic?" He stated that "as usual, a story using skewed results from a secular media source".

Mr. Carmans comment is supported by the failure of the media to publish the results of a recent online poll in the Courier Mail in Brisbane asking whether Queensland abortion laws should be changed. Almost 10 000 people responded (ten times the number of respondents in the 2007 Australian election study). Of these 10,000 respondents, 71% opposed changes to abortion laws in Queensland.

It is time for the public to begin to question the reliability of media sources and their motivation for the distortion or omission of relevant information regarding abortion.

In an obscene challenge to the rights of parents and families, Leslie Cannold (theage.com.au, Sep 29) stated that our "children have a right to sex education" and argues that our kids are "getting plenty of sex, some of it unwanted, as well as sexually transmitted infections, unwanted pregnancies and, if they are same-sex attracted, a worrying dose of suicidal thoughts" . Ms Cannold goes on to argue that "Pro-life, abstinence-only sex education crosses the line, pushing religion into the secular school system where it doesn't belong". One must question the motives of the likes of Ms. Cannold, who appears hell bent on our kids receiving sex education that parents would be horrified by and who is also an enthusiastic advocate of abortion.

Dr. Roland von Marburg responded to Ms. Cannold's scathing criticism of  the sex education program 'Choices Decisions, Outcomes' stating that " She claims CDO is the project of a hidden prolife organisation, only to complain that their prolife agenda is not obvious in their course material.  Should we be disappointed that a group can teach objectively without referring to ideology as Leslie Cannold does?" 

Dr. von Marburg also states that "In her support of proabortion groups, such as Planned Parenthood and Marie Stopes,  she is happy to affiliate herself with organisations that are either founded  or heavily funded by eugenicists, bigots, and racists, but wants us to be alarmed that an education program that promotes "self worth" and  "respect" might be funded by the Catholic Church". 

In her article, Ms Cannold also makes reference to a NSW student who "came home from school to report that pashing makes you pregnant".  Dr von Marburg questioned the "level of academic rigor" Ms. Cannold applies to her work if this is the evidence she relies on to argue the ineffectiveness of the Choices Decisions Outcomes program.

In her ongoing attack on Choices Decisions Outcomes, Ms Cannold goes on to vaguely refer to an unnamed report stating that "the effectiveness of the US Government's significant investment in abstinence-only sex education found that youth delivered the program had as much sex with as many partners, and started having sex at the same time, as other adolescents". She ironically then accuses CDO of "presenting false information about the “side-effects” of abortion and either refusing to talk about contraception, or mentioning only (inflated) failure rates". There are a large number of research reports (named and referenced) to support the U.S. statistics and 'facts' quoted by CDO.

"Her only real academic argument against CDO quotes the possible limitations of an unrelated sex education program in another country.  Is that it? " asked Dr von Marburg.

Christine Kellett (Brisbane Times, Sep 12, 2008) stated that "Teachers are censoring sex education in Queensland schools amid fears of a parental backlash."

In what can only be described as getting their "hooks into our kids" and overstepping the line, Family Planning Queensland (FPQ),  visits 300 schools a year to provide sexual health advice to young people. The article goes on to say that "evidence showed teachers in the public and private sector were minimising, sanitising and in some cases simply skipping the subject altogether." "There's a fear that parents just won't like it," FPQ's director of education services, Cecelia Gore, told brisbanetimes.com.au.

Choices Decisions Outcomes is not the only program that has been attacked by the pro abort journalists. Recently a Primary School program "The Wonder of life (Before Birth)" was removed from the list of programs approved by the NSW Education Department when The Sydney Morning Herald published an article citing its creator, Bruce Coleman, had historic links to pro life groups. What is bizarre about the removal of this program is that it is merely footage and discussion of life in the womb, where we all originate from. One would think this would already be part of all school curriculums. At no time is abortion mentioned in this presentation.

Dr von Marburg concludes by stating that "Choices Decisions Outcomes is an unashamedly values based sex education program that should be judged on its content and merits, and subjected to appropriate high standard academic research.  It should not be judged on the emotive ramblings of an ideologically driven supporter of the abortion movement such as Leslie Cannold". 

It is not surprising that abortion advocates such as Leslie Cannold are keen to replace the role of parents in educating their children about sex, becoming the "sexperts" in their lives. With the recent rejection of the amendment for parental consent (for abortion) for under 18 years of age in Victoria, we as parents must fiercely guard the right and role that is ours, the informing and protection of our youth. Parents and teachers are rightfully wary and must maintain the rights that become ours when we became parents.

On one point, Ms Cannold is correct, that "State and federal politicians have questions to answer". However, they are answerable for allowing those who benefit financially, such as Marie Stopes, Planned Parenthood, Children by Choice, etcetera  to be allowed into Australian schools, undermining the role of parents and promoting their own businesses. Parents and their young people should not be dictated to by the likes of Ms Cannold who do not have the personal interest of our kids at heart.