Unborn Girls Are Missing — And Queensland’s Abortion Laws Are Enabling It
Sex-selective abortion, that is the practice of ending the life of an unborn child based on that child’s sex, is often thought of as a distant problem confined to other parts of the world like Asia. However, new research has revealed that this lethal form of discrimination is not only happening in Australia, it is also likely happening right here in Queensland. Devastatingly, there is currently nothing we are doing to stop it.
Newly released study
A groundbreaking peer-reviewed study published in PLOS Global Health analysed over 2.1 million births in Western Australia and New South Wales between 1994 and 2015.[i] The authors found consistent, statistically significant patterns of male-based sex ratios at birth among certain population groups, particularly at the second or third pregnancy following one or more daughters.
In natural conditions, the sex ratio at birth (otherwise known as the SRB) is about 105 boys for every 100 girls. However, this study showed that the SRB exceeded expectations for children born to Indian, Chinese and Vietnamese mothers. For mothers from China, the SRB was 1.09 at second birth and markedly higher (1.34) at the third birth when the first two were female.[ii] This pattern was also observed for mothers from India. Indian and Chinese mothers had much higher induced abortion rates in early pregnancy than their Australian counterparts, which also coincided with the introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing. The authors concluded that this provided observational evidence that linked the male-biased SRB with prenatal sex determination followed by selective female-biased abortion.[iii]
So what is non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT)? This is a semi-recently introduced blood test that can reveal the sex of a baby as early as 10 weeks gestation.[iv] This timeline also conveniently falls well within the legal window for abortion-on-request in most Australian Jurisdictions. What this means is that parents can find out the sex of a baby early enough to legally terminate the pregnancy if they are disappointed.
While this data came from WA and NSW, the same cultural and legal conditions exist in Queensland, meaning that there is every reason to believe that similar sex-selection practices are occurring here.
Queensland’s permissive abortion laws fuel the problem
Since the passing of the Termination of Pregnancy Act 2018 (Qld), abortion in Queensland is legal for any reason up to 22 weeks gestation.[v] Beyond 22 weeks, it can still be performed with the agreement of two doctors.
There is:
- No requirement to give a reason for seeking an abortion
- No restriction on terminating based on the sex of the baby
- No delay in disclosing the baby’s sex via NIPT
- No data collection or monitoring of why abortions are performed in Queensland
This legal environment effectively created the perfect storm for sex-selective abortions to occur undetected and unchallenged. Parents can learn the sex of their unborn child early, and if they are hoping for a boy but find out it is a girl, they can legally and quietly abort the baby. We must acknowledge this for what it is, gender discrimination.
Let’s be clear: this is gender-based discrimination
Sex selective abortion is not a fringe concern. It is a form of gender-based violence that targets girls at their most vulnerable stage: in the womb. It says to girls, before they take their first breath, that they are not wanted or valued.
This practice has contributed to millions of “missing girls” globally, especially in China, where widespread sex-selection has created dangerous demographic imbalances and human rights crises.[vi] The United Nations has even condemned sex-selective abortion as a violation of women’s rights.[vii] However, in Australia we are turning a blind eye.
We cannot claim to uphold gender equality while permitting a legal system that allows girls to be aborted for simply being girls.
A glaring double standard: IVF vs abortion
Here’s the irony: in Australia, it is illegal to select the sex of a baby through IVF unless there is a medical reason (such as avoiding a sex-linked genetic disorder).
The National Health and Medical Research Council guidelines, which govern reproductive technology, explicitly prohibit non-medical sex-selection. The reasoning is sound: allowing parents to choose the sex of their child for personal or cultural reasons would entrench gender bias and commodify children. And yet, while sex-selection through IVF is banned, sex-selection through abortion is entirely legal. This contradiction is staggering.
In one context, the government rightly says: you cannot choose your child’s sex – because girls and boys are of equal value. But in another says: you can end the life of your unborn baby if the child is not the sex you want – and we won’t ask why.
This is not just a loophole, it’s a fundamental failure of consistency and principle and it is costing baby girls their lives. How can we ban sex-selection in the lab while turning a blind eye to it in the womb?
The lies used to justify it
Pro-abortion advocates often justify unrestricted abortion laws by invoking tragic scenarios – claiming that if abortion were restricted in any way, women would be denied care for miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy. This is false.
In Queensland:
- Miscarriage care is completely legal and is routinely provided
- There is no law that prohibits health professionals from offering and administering life-saving treatment.
This argument is a scare tactic, used to distract from the fact that our current laws allow for abortion purely because the child is the “wrong” sex. This is not about reproductive healthcare, it is about ideological dishonesty and legal cowardice.
So, what needs to be done?
If Queensland is serious about protecting women and girls, we must take urgent steps to end sex-selective abortion. At a minimum the Queensland Government should:
- Ban the disclosure of a baby’s sex before 20 weeks unless medically necessary
- Prohibit abortion on the grounds of a baby’s sex
- Introduce mandatory reporting requirements, including collection of data on reasons for abortion and a baby’s sex at termination
- Implement clinical protocols in line with ethical standards that prevent misuse of NIPT for non-medical sex-selection.
Equality must begin in the womb
Sex-selective abortion is happening in Australia. It is enabled by silence, fuelled by ideology, and ignored by the very laws that claim to protect women. If we care about gender equality, we cannot look away.
Every unborn girl deserves the same right to life and dignity as a boy. Equality must begin in the womb. It’s time Queensland faced the truth – and acted to protect all of our babies.
[i] Gebremedhin AT, et al. (2025) Indirect evidence of sex-selective abortion practices to the imbalanced sex ratio at birth in Australian migrant populations. PLOS Glob Public Health 5(5): e0004672. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0004672 Accessed 7 August 2025.
[ii] Gebremedhin AT, et al. (2025) Indirect evidence of sex-selective abortion practices to the imbalanced sex ratio at birth in Australian migrant populations. PLOS Glob Public Health 5(5): e0004672. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0004672 Accessed 7 August 2025.
[iii] Gebremedhin AT, et al. (2025) Indirect evidence of sex-selective abortion practices to the imbalanced sex ratio at birth in Australian migrant populations. PLOS Glob Public Health 5(5): e0004672. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0004672 Accessed 7 August 2025.
[iv] Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), Pregnancy birth & baby https://www.pregnancybirthbaby.org.au/non-invasive-prenatal-testing-nipt#:~:text=Non%2Dinvasive%20prenatal%20testing%20(NIPT)%20is%20one%20way%20you,genetic%20conditions%20in%20your%20baby. Accessed 7 August 2025.
[v] Termination of Pregnancy, Queensland Government. https://www.qld.gov.au/health/children/pregnancy/termination-of-pregnancy Accessed 7 August 2025.
[vi] Sex-selective abortions over the past four decades in China. (2025). Population Health Metrics, 23(6). https://pophealthmetrics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12963-025-00368-y Accessed 7 August 2025.
[vii] Joint Statement by OHCHR, UNFPA, UNICEF, UN Women and WHO. “Son preference” must end. https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2011/06/joint-statement-ohchr-unfpa-unicef-un-women-and-who?utm_source=chatgpt.com Accessed 7 August 2025.