Abortion is the deliberate killing of an unborn human being before he or she is born. 

An abortion is also commonly referred to as a "termination of pregnancy”.

How is an abortion performed? (methods of abortion)

There are essentially two categories of methods for both first trimester abortion (up to three months) and later abortion, i.e. for the duration of the rest of the pregnancy.  These methods are loosely categorised as surgical and medical. Up to recent times, surgical abortion was the normal method. Since the approval and registration of users by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) for Mifepristone (RU486), this  method is becoming more widely used, usually in combination with Misoprostol for both first trimester and second trimester abortion as the so-called “medical” abortion method.

Medical Abortion 

In a medical abortion, Mifepristone is used as an anti-progesterone agent to chemically kill the unborn child by blocking the action of progesterone, a hormone essential for the well-being of the pregnancy. However, by itself is only about 70% effective in first trimester and less so in later trimesters. Misoprostol is a prostaglandin which mimics labour and causes strong uterine contractions to cause the unborn child to be expelled from the uterus. 

In one incident in the NT in 1998, an child of 22 weeks gestation, Jessica Jane, who was born alive weighing 515 g after a botched late-term abortion, with “good vital signs”, was left in a dish to die and was heard crying for 80 minutes until she died. This is the age under this bill at which abortion can be done for any reason and at which they are allegedly nonviable!

As part of the debate over the Pyne Bill, during Questions on Notice No 779 on 11th May 2016, Mark Robinson, Member for Cleveland (now Oordgeroo) asked the Minister for Health Cameron Dick:

“How many babies aged 20 weeks or more were born alive after a termination procedure in Queensland hospitals between 2005 and 2015?” The answer was 204!

Such is the inhumanity of abortion and the dehumanisation that it causes in the medical community that would leave a tiny child to die alone without any attempt to provide comfort or resuscitation if past the point of viability. In these instances, staff who become distressed by this are warned against intervention because the purpose of abortion is to produce a dead baby.   

To watch an animated video of a medical abortion please click here

Surgical Abortion 

There are a variety of techniques that fall under this category. The most commonly used one is curettage by suction, and this is the most commonly performed method of abortion in the western world. It is also used into the second trimester to varying extents depending upon the operator. In the Guidelines, this method is advised to be used up to 14 weeks but after that from 14-16 weeks only be used by experienced practitioners. However, the Guidelines also state it can be considered at any stage.

For this method, the cervix may be prepared beforehand to soften it using luminaria (seaweed) or misoprostol to make the abortion easier and to reduce damage to the cervix. A cannula (hollow tube) is attached to a suction device and inserted into the uterus. The abortionist acts blindly to dismember the foetus by tearing off pieces of tissue with the suction. Larger pieces that will not come through the cannula such as bone require removal with forceps.

There is a video of this procedure on a website called Abort67.co.uk during which tiny hands and feet can be seen coming out of the uterus as the abortion is occurring. 

For another account of a second trimester suction abortion, a previous abortionist Dr Anthony Levatino described to a US House of Representatives sub-committee on the District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Protection Act 2012 how he performed what is called there a suction D&E (meaning suction dilatation and extraction) abortion up to 22 weeks of pregnancy. After describing in detail how the softer parts of the body such as arms, legs spine, intestines, heart and lungs were removed, he went on to say:

“The toughest part of a D&E abortion is extracting the baby’s head. The head of a baby that age is about the size of a large plum and is now free floating inside the uterine cavity. You know you have it right when you crush down on the clamp and see white gelatinous material coming through the cervix. That was the baby’s brains. You then extract the skull pieces. Many times a little face may come and stare back at you.” (Testimony of Anthony Levatino MD JD before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Committee on the Judiciary, US House of Representatives on The District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (HR3803) May 17, 2012

Another similarly horrendous method of killing unborn human beings is the “cranial decompression” or partial birth abortion method, also known as D&X (dilatation and extraction). A previous practitioner of this method in Australia, Dr David Grundmann described it as “essentially a breech delivery where the foetus is delivered feet first, and then when the head of the foetus is brought down into the top of the cervical canal, it is decompressed with a puncturing instrument so that it fits then through the cervical canal.”( ABC 7.30 Report, 27 October 1994). In layman’s terms, the doctor puts scissors or another sharp implement into the back of the baby’s neck and uses high pressure suction to evacuate the brains. With the skull “decompressed”, the baby is removed. 

This latter method was banned by the US Senate in 2003 as being “gruesome, inhumane and never medically indicated” with obvious implications for foetal pain, but there is actually no reason why this method of abortion could NOT be performed in Queensland under the provisions of this Bill. 

David Grundmann performed partial birth abortions in Queensland until his activities were exposed and while this state was controlled by its “nineteenth century legislation” so despised by advocates of this Bill. It would only take another abortionist like David Grundmann to set up practice in this state were this bill to be passed into legislation. 

After 22 weeks gestation, some guidelines recommend “feticide” by the injection of potassium chloride into the heart using ultrasound guidance. This method is also listed for use for so-called “selective reduction” where one unborn child is selected to be killed in multiple pregnancies for whatever reason is considered acceptable under the current situation.

To watch an animated video of the most common type of surgical abortion please click here

Foetal Pain during an abortion

In Queensland, and in no Australian state or territory for that matter, there is no requirement that a baby is anethesised prior to an abortion. This is particularly heart-breaking when considering that there is a wide and increasing body of evidence that unborn babies feel baby from as young as 10 weeks could experience pain as they respond to external stimuli and it’s agreed that by 18 weeks gestation (about 4 months old in the womb) babies definitely feel pain. 

It is also important to know that bodily pain is generated or experienced at different levels of the nervous system, not just the most superior level, the cortex. The degree and nature of pain experience will change and develop as the foetus’ nervous system matures, not be an “all -or-nothing” phenomenon. Inhibitory pathways to pain experience develop later than the receptive pathways. The following quotation may be of assistance in putting these concepts together.

“To experience pain, an intact system of pain transmission from the peripheral receptor to the cerebral cortex must be available. Peripheral receptors develop from the seventh gestational week. From 20 weeks’ gestation, peripheral receptors are present on the whole body. From 13 weeks’ gestation the afferent system (ie system receiving stimuli from the body) located in the substantia gelatinosa of the dorsal horn of the spinal cord starts developing. Development of afferent fibres connecting peripheral receptors with the dorsal horn starts at 8 weeks’ gestation. Spinothalamic (the thalamus is in the midbrain) connections start to develop from 14 weeks’ and are complete at 20 weeks’ gestation, whilst thalamocortical connections are present from 17 weeks’ and completely developed at 26-30 weeks’ gestation. From 16 weeks’ gestation, pain transmission from a peripheral receptor to the cortex (the entire pathway) is possible and completely developed from 26 weeks’ gestation. It is important to note that serotonin-releasing inhibitory descending pain fibers only develop following birth.” Further on, the paper notes that   “a physiological fetal reaction to painful stimuli occurs from between 16-24 weeks.” Marc Van de Velde and Frederik De  Buck,” Fetal and Maternal Analgesia/Anaesthesia for Fetal Procedures” Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy 31(2012): 201-209

This article is used as a reference for the suggested amount of anaesthesia required for in utero foetal procedures ranging from minor to major operations now performed such as closure of a spina bifida defect.  Further on, the paper notes that “a physiological fetal reaction to painful stimuli occurs from between 16-24 weeks.” This refers back to previous comments that a hormonal stress response is evident from four months gestation and connotes a level of response to pain that has already developed well before the cortex may be able to appreciate pain simply because the full pathway is not complete.

Another expert on fetal sensation and pain perception, Dr. Jean Wright Professor and Chair of Pediatrics at the Mercer School of Medicine, gave evidence to the US House Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution on fetal pain development on November 1, 2005. She said in part:

“As early as 6 weeks of development, tiny pain fibers pepper the face and oral mucosa (lining of the mouth). The spread of these unique fibers proceeds in a head to toe fashion until by the 20th week, they cover the entire body. Not only do these fibers exist, they do so with greater density per square inch than in the adult. Studies at 16 weeks and beyond show hormonal responses to painful stimuli that exactly duplicate the response that the infant and adult possess. The critical difference is that the unborn lacks the ability to modulate itself in response to this pain. This ability to down regulate the response in light of painful stimuli will not exist until the unborn is nearly full term in its gestational age.

“After 20 weeks of gestation, the unborn has all the perquisite anatomy, physiology, hormones, neurotransmitters, and electrical current to ‘close the loop’ and create the conditions needed to perceive pain. The hormones and EEGs (electroencephalograms) and ultrasounds record the pain response, and our therapies with narcotics demonstrate our ability to adequately block them.”

Assumptions about the amount and extent of pain experienced by the unborn from abortion can be erroneous, as is the contention that maternal anaesthesia provided through an abortion will necessarily block any pain felt by the unborn. The antipathy or disinterest exhibited by the abortion lobbyists towards the first victim of abortion is ideological and not founded upon any of the science we now possess.

What about a women’s “right to choose” or a “right to their body”?

Nowhere else in our legal structure, is someone given a right to choose to kill another. Nor is the unborn a part of the woman’s body. The unborn baby is a distinct individual with it's only DNA and a unique genetic code from conception.

For most women distressed by pregnancy, the issue is not about being pregnant itself, but the circumstances surrounding it which are making them consider abortion as their only “choice”. 

The old argument "my body, my choice" is flawed, as the unborn baby has it's own body, it's not the woman's body. 

If you are pregnant, please know that you are not alone and there is a lot of help available to you for free. Both government and private agencies. There are also many alternatives to abortion. Remember, you are not alone, and millions of women around the world deeply regret their abortion, but almost no women regret having their child.

Thank you for being part of making history!

View the results of our national Put Labor Last campaign here

Cherish Life Queensland is overjoyed with the life-valuing outcome of the federal election.

“Labor boasted about its extreme late-term abortion policy platform at its national conference late last year. What Labor promised meant that if Bill Shorten won government, through the threat of withholding federal health funding, all legal protection from the unborn would have been removed right across Australia and taxpayer-funded public hospitals would have been forced to perform abortions on request - even late-term abortions of healthy babies of healthy mothers.

“This policy was absolutely disgraceful and abhorrent, and as advocates for the right to life and protectors of unborn human life we simply had to act, and act big,” Ms Teeshan Johnson, executive director of Cherish Life Queensland said.

“We designed a national ‘Put Labor Last’ campaign to educate Australians on Labor’s disturbing open-slather abortion mission. (Campaign details including the 25 target seats are below.)

“Our multi-faceted pro-life campaign was run in 25 marginal seats across Australia. Of those seats 17 were Liberal/LNP/Independent and 8 Labor. Of the Coalition seats, we were successful in helping to retain all but 2, and helped oust pro-abortion Labor in 5 seats plus help transfer the seat of Chisholm back to the Liberals.

"Queensland had particularly good results. Our investment per seat was biggest in Queensland, so too our network being a state-based organisation. Many people in Queensland are still angry at the Queensland Labor Government for legalising late-term abortion up to birth, for any reason last year – and a number of these people quickly became "Put Labor Last" activists, in turn influencing whole communities to vote Labor and Greens last.

"The fact is, the truth about Labor's policies hurt them, and quite frankly they deserved it. Politicians and parties who advocate blatant savagery do not deserve to be in Parliament and all efforts will always be made to remove them or to stop them taking power.

“In some seats where we worked extensively there has been over a 11% swing towards to Coalition. While the counting continues - we can already see the success of the campaign is quite incredible in some areas. In the Forde electorate in Queensland, which was sitting on a 0.6% margin, we ran a concentrated and local Put Labor Last campaign, which no doubt helped usher in the swing of over 8% against Labor. Another particularly pleasing aspect of this wonderful election result was helping to oust EMILY’s List pro-abortion activists in Herbert, Longman and Braddon.

“It's been a great victory for life which will no doubt go down in the history books. Overall, it’s fair to say Cherish Life’s national Put Labor Last campaign played a small but significant role in a miraculous election victory,” Ms Johnson said.

This federal election, Labor has made nationwide open-slather “free” abortions part of its policy platform.

While it’s heart-breaking that the war on unborn human beings rages stronger still, there is a small silver lining: Labor’s killing agenda, no doubt largely EMILY’s List driven, is no longer a dirty little caucus secret – it’s been proclaimed to the world! Hopefully, this cruel killing agenda will cost them the election.

Over the years, Labor state and territory governments have made unrestricted access to late-term abortion a policy priority, as evidenced by their successful implementation of brutal late-term abortion laws in Queensland, Victoria, ACT, Tasmania, Western Australia and the Northern Territory (see table below for details). A Labor victory in the federal election would herald unprecedented pressure on the states and territories to provide abortions at all taxpayer-funded public hospitals, so abortion is free across Australia. Labor has openly threatened it could withhold up to billions of dollars worth of health funding to the states and territories in the event of non-compliance.

Labor’s abortion plans also include pressuring the NSW state government to decriminalise abortion, and to build an abortion clinic in Tasmania courtesy of the humble taxpayer, as well as pressuring the SA state government to fully decriminalise abortion – as that state operates under a hybrid model.

Of course, this extreme accessibility is unnecessary from a purely supply perspective, as the abortion industry is already thriving in Australia. There are around 70,000 to 80,000 abortions a year – tragically Australia’s abortion rate is one of the highest among developed nations. In comparison, the US abortion rate is 30% lower than ours and Germany’s abortion rate is 70% less. Even in NSW where abortion is still technically  under the Criminal Code, abortion access is high, evidenced by the 20,000 aborted babies in the state every year.

Offering free abortion is sure to be a vote-winner for Labor, because everyone loves free stuff, right? Not so in the case of abortion. 51% of Queenslanders are opposed to public funding of abortion (ref question 21). And it’s a safe bet that the typical taxpayer won’t be wildly excited about the estimated $80 million plus cost to the public purse to fund the killing of more babies. Under Labor, public hospitals will be tasked with the nightmare of aborting unborn babies on demand, even full-term healthy babies to healthy mothers, as is already the case in Victoria.

At present, only about 10% of terminations in Australia are performed in public hospitals, so increasing that to close to 100% of abortions (because why pay when it’s free elsewhere) would put a tremendous strain on our health care system. It’s likely that wait times would blow out further, and that all trainee doctors in public hospitals would have to train in performing surgical and medical abortions. Obviously, the idea of performing an abortion is repugnant to many, particularly those of a monotheist faith (Christianity, Judaism or Islam) – which represents well over 50% of the Australian population according to the 2016 census. The thought of performing an abortion is likely to deter many people of faith from studying medicine. In time this would lead to a decrease in the quality of students studying medicine (as typically only the best students are accepted) and more doctor shortages, which would no doubt be mostly felt in rural regional areas. The ramifications of making abortion free and on demand with no restrictions is far-reaching and culture-shifting - it would undeniably corrupt the life-saving ethos of public hospitals.  

Federal Shadow Health Minister Catherine King, who is also an EMILY’s Lister (surprise!) said a Labor federal government would fix the “patchwork of inconsistent laws” across Australia. Crudely put, she wants abortion like McDonald’s - wherever you go in Australia you can get exactly the same thing. In practice, this would mean pressure on the states and territories with comparatively less extreme abortion laws to loosen them further to be in line with the most extreme jurisdictions  – namely Victoria, Queensland and the ACT where abortion to birth has been legalised for any reason. This is consistent with the objective of EMILY’s List’s, and now Labor’s, philosophy of having unrestricted access to free abortion right through pregnancy. In other words, abortion would be legal to birth for any reason in every state under Labor’s intended totalitarian abortion regime. 

It’s painfully clear that Labor’s plans would put upward pressure on the incidence of abortion, and there’s no doubt that under a under Labor there would be more abortions, including late-term abortions. Late-term abortions in Victorian have gone up on average by 40% year since the passing of Labor’s abortion-to-birth Bill there in 2008.  Also of concern is that there is no proposal to increase the accessibility and funding of alternatives to abortion like adoption. So much for so-called “choice” that Labor espouses. Australia’s adoption rate is shamefully bad - in the financial year 2017/2018 there were 32 local adoptions while there were approximately 80,000 abortions. That is an abortion to adoption rate of 2,500 to 1. This would only get worse with a Shorten Labor government.

This federal election, like no other federal election in Australia’s history, everyone’s vote will be for life or death. A vote for Labor or Greens will be a vote for more abortion, including the legal taxpayer-funded termination of babies to full term.

Preferences are likely to be crucially important at this election, as the result may well come down to the wire. In practically every election, preferences determine which party has the numbers to win government.

Please number each box on your ballot paper carefully, as in this election preferences may well have the power to save or kill.

It’s crucially important that all of us who love life spread the word: A vote for Labor this election will mean more babies killed and more women harmed by abortion.

Please vote for life, by putting Labor and Greens LAST this federal election.

SUMMARY OF AUSTRALIAN ABORTION LAWS – LABOR’s ABORTION OBSESSION

1. Australian State & Territory Termination of Pregnancy jurisdictions

2. Expanded summary of abortion laws

Thank you for your commitment to life and all you did during this critical campaign. A vibrant and growing prolife community, Cherish Life Queensland:

• Marched and rallied five times across Queensland — twice in Brisbane, and in Cairns, Toowoomba and Mackay. The Brisbane March for Life attracted a record crowd of more than 4,000, almost five times bigger than any “pro-choice” or pro-abortion rally in Queensland
• Delivered educational flyers on the Bill to almost 300,000 letterboxes in 15 targeted electorates across Queensland, encouraging people to lobby their state MP against the Bill
• Wrote thousands of submissions to the Queensland Parliament Health Committee against the Termination of Pregnancy Bill — of the 4,800 listed on the committee website, 78% were against the Bill
• Helped to organise thousands of letters and emails to MPs — one of our wonderful supporters organised more than 3,000 letters to be written by constituents in Brisbane Labor seats!
• Helped to obtain almost 40,000 signatures on an online and paper parliamentary petition against the Bill sponsored by ACL state director Wendy Francis
• Distributed more than 50,000 information handouts to supporters and churches across Queensland, equipping people on how to oppose the Bill.
• Co-commissioned with the Australian Family Association a 21 question YouGov Galaxy Poll to establish what Queenslanders really think about abortion — the most comprehensive poll on abortion in Queensland ever, which found only 6% of Queenslanders agreed with abortion past 23 weeks gestation (the entire report is available at www.cherishlife.org.au)
• Had scores of letters published in The Courier-Mail and other newspapers
• Met with almost all MPs on this issue
• Made thousands of phone calls to MPs’ offices (in conjunction with ACL and AFA)
• Hosted a parliamentary briefing for MPs on abortion coercion
• Co-hosted a parliamentary panel on abortion with ACL and AFA, to which all MPs were invited. The livestream video of this event can be viewed at www.cherishlife.org.au/resources/videos

In addition:

Many people earnestly prayed and fasted for the defeat of this Bill. Thank you!

The Brisbane Catholic Archdiocese conducted a survey with about 25,000 respondents, of whom 98% were vehemently opposed to the Bill — particularly in Labor seats. These people were encouraged to write letters or emails to their MPs.

A special thank you to two pro-family groups, AFA and ACL, which ran complementary campaigns against this abhorrent Bill.

Download here

Queensland’s Termination of Pregnancy Act passed in October, 2018, under a Labor State Government.

It one of the most brutal and extreme abortion laws in the world. It's to our state’s great shame that a full-term healthy baby of a healthy mother can be legally aborted for any reason - such is the sick extremity of our laws.

• Abortion “on request” (no questions asked) to 22 weeks gestation.
• Abortion from 22 weeks up to birth for any reason provided a second “doctor” signs off. But the second “doctor” can be a second abortionist - there is no requirement for impartiality. The "sign-off” by the second doctor can be merely a phone call or email - there is no requirement for the second approving doctor to see the woman. There is no legal penalty if there is no second doctor - a law without a penalty is no law at all. 
• Sex-selective abortion is legal.
• Doctors are compelled to refer for abortion. 
• Absolutely NO “safeguards” for women considering abortion. 
• No ban on the particularly brutal partial-birth abortion technique.
• Babies born alive in failed abortions are left to die.
• No comprehensive data reporting on abortion.
• No requirement to anaesthetize a baby prior to an abortion (including no pain relief given to late-term babies prior to an abortion).

We are determined that these laws will not stand. Join the fight today.

Find out how your Queensland MP voted on the abortion laws here.

Despite the Queensland Labor Government having passed some of the most extreme abortion laws in the country, Queenslanders are far more pro-life than you think!

According to YouGov/Galaxy polling conducted in August 2018 - 60% of Queenslanders oppose abortions past 13 weeks and 75% agree that abortion harms women's health.

Cherish Life proudly opposes these radical abortion laws which are out of step with the people of Queensland and we look forward to helping elect solidly pro-life candidates in the 2020 state election.

View the rest of Queenslanders attitudes towards abortion here

Reading the recent news surrounding the new non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) procedure, a simple blood test in the first trimester of pregnancy that can detect Down syndrome with 99% accuracy, I came across a 2013 news.com.au article titled “Is this the beginning of the end for Down syndrome?”

It included a statement by geneticist Professor Jane Halliday that stopped me in my tracks. In regard to prenatal testing, she called it “just another choice”.

This statement was in response to a claim by an organisation in New Zealand called Saving Down Syndrome, who believe this is a form of eugenics, a breeding out of “inferior” humans.

“Just another choice” is a powerful statement. It suggests that all choices are equal, but is this really true or should it matter what we choose and what the consequences are of those choices, for ourselves, for others and for the social fabric of our society?

People do indeed make all sorts of choices every day. Trivial choices like what we choose to eat for lunch, what we choose to wear, whether we choose to brush our teeth. All of which have little impact on another human being.

People can choose to care for or neglect their kids, to love or abuse their spouse, to obey the law or to break it. But they are not equally good. Such choices powerfully demonstrate how one person’s choice can lead to the harm or destruction of another.

Not all choices are equal, so it does matter what is being chosen!

While Halliday claims people make all kinds of choices in life and therefore prenatal testing is just another choice, this isn’t true. Terminating a human being because they happen to have a disability is not just. If this is permissible, why not allow aborting babies because they are the wrong gender?

Given NIPT can accurately predict gender as well as Down syndrome, Professor Halliday would be unlikely to share the concerns of Queensland fertility doctor and gynaecologist Dr David Molloy who said there was a “real ethical risk” that expectant parents who are given the NIPT procedure might terminate their unborn children if they were not happy with the gender.

Gender selection abortion and infanticide is due to many cultures believing women are “inferior” to men.

The choice to terminate the unborn who happen to be female has resulted in the world missing 200 million women, close to 1,500 of them from Australia according to a 2015 SBS investigation.

Pre-natal testing is resulting in unborn children who happen to have Down syndrome being screened out of existence because they are believed to be, while many may not say it, “inferior” to able people. How many people with Down syndrome is the world missing?

Is eliminating people with Down syndrome through prenatal testing a moral good that will somehow make the world a better place by decreasing the perceived work and expense of those who are able?

The world is not better by eliminating diversity, by reducing the need to serve others, or by being obsessed with our own personal wants. Choices have consequences and it matters how we live and what choices we make individually and collectively.

A world without Down syndrome would not be a better or more moral world. History clearly shows that when cultures devalue any group of people, based on gender, race, religion or disability, the result is destruction, not liberation.

Kara Thomas is Director of Research, Policy and Advocacy at Cherish Life Queensland.

It is with great joy that we see the launch of a website to help women seek legal justice for their unwanted abortions or abortions performed where they were not told the truth about post-abortion trauma.  

We strongly urge you to send the link below to all your friends.

www.abortionlegalsupport.com

You may not even know some of them have had abortions and are hurting.  Let’s help support them and get the word out there.

Ms Plibersek comment that RU-486 is giving women “more choice” is misleading — it is only a ‘choice’ between abortion and abortion, one using the misnomer “medical” and one being surgical.  That is hardly “choice”.  Choice would be offering other options such as help to allow the baby to be adopted, help to place the child in foster care, help to actually parent one’s own child.  There is no “choice” involving abortion (‘medical’) and abortion (surgical) — merely pressure and no real help nor option offered to the pregnant woman.

It is a total abuse of her power as health minister and misuse of our money as taxpayers that we should be financially aiding women to kill their unborn babies via the PBS subsidy.  Abortion-inducing drugs are not “like any other drug” — “any other drug” is not specifically designed to kill a pre-born baby as RU-486 is used and licensed for here in Australia.

It is untrue to state as she was reported as stating in The Sunday Mail (30.6.13) that “statistical evidence internationally shows the complication rates are very low”.  There is no way of truly knowing this — many women who suffer “complications” do not re-present at the abortion mill, may no mention to any emergency department of a hospital that they have taken RU-486, and if a woman actually dies from loss of blood due to a chemical abortion using RU-486, her death would not be put down as due to the abortion but due to the loss of blood, and not to what caused that loss of blood!  And there is often a lack of transparency or expedient and accurate reporting if a death does occur due to the side-effects of RU-486 as was evidenced in the two year delay in reporting on the death of a woman who died in 2010 here in Australia but the case only came to public attention in 2012 due to a lack of reporting!

The only state domestically to keep abortion statistics is in South Australia and a study done there showed 324 cases of women presenting to emergency with complications after using RU-486.  It is also true that a fair proportion of these women will need a surgical abortion after using RU-486 due to it not “doing it’s job” properly for whatever reason.   So the abortion industry makes even more money — and let’s make no mistake about it, the abortion industry is a money-making industry.  If fact we know that targets are set — one large abortion company here in Australia even advertises for staff stating that they will be paid bonuses if they “increase productivity and product margins”, “optimise client numbers” and “deliver on their (MSI i.e. abortion company) objectives…”

It is illogical to think that there will not be an increase in abortion numbers with the easy and cheap access to this abortion drug.  The whole point of any marketing strategy is to have ease of availability and easy-to-afford- costing.  Putting this shocking drug on the PBS achieves those deadly aims. 

Advertising for a Marketing Co-ordinator recently, the ad asked for someone who could “identify marketing opportunities” and “manage marketing campaigns”.  Bearing in mind that the largest part of the abortion industry’s money comes from abortions (no surprise), it is illogical to think that this (abortions and in particular RU486 abortions) would not be a major part of any “marketing campaign”.

To Tony Abbott, quoted in The Australian (26.4.13) as stating that he is happy for “due process to be followed” re taxpayer subsidies for RU-486.  If that quote is accurate, I am extremely disappointed that his “minders” have moved him away to this much weakened position in the hope it will capture a few more votes from the pro-abortion side.  All it will do is lose the pro-life vote!  Mr Abbott, our Australian women and their pre-born babies DESERVE BETTER PROTECTION THAT THIS!!!  Stop bowing to the feminazis and make a pro-life stand like we used to be able to count on you to do!