British Section of the World Federation of Doctors Who Respect Human Life

MADRID — Private clinics in Spain, which perform most of the country’s abortions, began a five-day strike on Tuesday to protest what they said was persecution by anti-abortion campaigners and government inspectors, who have swept clinics in recent weeks to crack down on illegal terminations.

The strike, which involves about 40 clinics, revives a debate about Spain’s abortion rules at an awkward moment for the Socialist government of José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, which is trying to avoid inflammatory issues before elections in March.

The strike could affect as many as 2,000 women, according to Francisca García Gallego, a regional director of the Association of Accredited Abortion Clinics, which organized it. She said striking clinics, which account for a majority of abortions in the country, would accept only emergency cases. The number of abortions in Spain has doubled in the past decade, to about 100,000 a year.

Spain decriminalized abortion in 1985, and under current law women can have an abortion during the first 22 weeks of pregnancy if there is a risk of fetal malformation and the first 12 weeks in cases of rape. However, they are allowed to abort at any point if they can demonstrate that their mental or physical health is at risk.

Ms. García said the central government had done nothing to protect abortion clinics or patients from a wave of aggressive protests by anti-abortion campaigners and raids by the local authorities that resulted in a dozen arrests in December. In recent weeks, clinics had been vandalized and doctors and nurses insulted and, in one or two cases, hit by protesters, she said.

The raids followed the arrest in December of Carlos Morín, a gynecologist who ran a group of clinics in Barcelona and who was secretly filmed by a Danish journalist apparently agreeing to her request for an abortion in her seventh month. Dr. Morín is in jail, according to local news reports.

Ms. García said by telephone that cases of illegal abortion were extremely rare and that 90 percent of terminations in Spain happened in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.

“There is a cloud of suspicion hanging over us ever since the Barcelona clinic was closed,” she said. “We feel physically threatened, but nobody in the government has come out in our defense.”

Dr. Morín’s arrest also set off a flurry of news media reports of “abortion tourism.” They offered macabre details of late-term abortions at clinics in Barcelona and Madrid. One private television producer released a video, said to have been made in a Madrid clinic, that showed an abortion at 21 weeks.

In December, prosecutors in the Netherlands said they had arrested a Dutch woman who was accused of having had a late-term abortion in a Spanish clinic. Dutch law allows abortions up to the 24th week and illegal abortions are virtually unknown, according to a report by the International Planned Parenthood Federation.

Abortion-rights advocates say the law should be more flexible, allowing women to terminate a pregnancy before a certain number of weeks on the basis of social or economic pressures, as is the case in many European countries. Critics say existing rules are routinely flouted by doctors.

Mr. Zapatero said after the Barcelona arrest that an overhaul of the abortion law would be part of the government’s election campaign, but almost immediately backtracked, saying simply that the law should be reassessed.

REGRET: “I hadn’t given it a thought,” Mark B. Morrow, shown with son Ross, said of long-ago girlfriends’ abortions. “ Now it all came crashing down on me — look what you’ve done.”

'We had abortions,' say men whose lovers ended pregnancies. It isn't just a women's trauma, they insist. But critics see a political calculation.

By Stephanie Simon, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
January 7, 2008

SAN FRANCISCO -- Jason Baier talks often to the little boy he calls Jamie. He imagines this boy -- his son -- with blond hair and green eyes, chubby cheeks, a sweet smile.

But he'll never know for sure.

His fiancee's sister told him about the abortion after it was over. Baier remembers that he cried. The next weeks and months go black. He knows he drank far too much. He and his fiancee fought until they broke up. "I hated the world," he said.

Baier, 36, still longs for the child who might have been, with an intensity that bewilders him: "How can I miss something I never even held?"

These days, he channels the grief into activism in a burgeoning movement of "post-abortive men." Abortion is usually portrayed as a woman's issue: her body, her choice, her relief or her regret. This new movement -- both political and deeply personal in nature -- contends that the pronoun is all wrong.

"We had abortions," said Mark B. Morrow, a Christian counselor. "I've had abortions."

Morrow spoke to more than 150 antiabortion activists gathered recently in San Francisco for what was billed as the first national conference on men and abortion. Participants -- mostly counselors and clergy -- heard two days of lectures on topics such as "Medicating the Pain of Lost Fatherhood" and "Forgiveness Therapy With Post-Abortion Men."

The most striking session featured the halting testimony of men whose partners aborted. Baier, who now lives in Phoenix, told the crowd he suffered years of depression and addiction. "I couldn't get the thought out of my head about what I had lost."

Since the concept of post-abortion syndrome first emerged in the early 1980s, some women have recounted similar stories -- and learned to leverage them into political power. They speak at legislative hearings and rallies organized by the Silent No More Awareness Campaign. They write affidavits detailing their years of emotional turmoil, which the Justice Foundation, a conservative advocacy group, submits to lawmakers and courts nationwide.

Last spring, the Supreme Court cited these accounts as one reason to ban the late-term procedure that opponents call "partial-birth" abortion. The majority opinion suggested that the ban would protect women from a decision they might later regret.

Women's testimony was also used to justify a sweeping abortion ban passed in 2006 in South Dakota. (Voters overturned the ban before it could take effect.)

"It's a rule of thumb that if you want to get a law passed, you have to tell anecdotes that grab people," said Dr. Nada Stotland, president-elect of the American Psychiatric Assn. Antiabortion activists have done that well, she said. "They've succeeded in convincing a lot of the American public" that abortion leaves women wounded.

Although the Doctors' Federation is based on Hippocratic ethics, not religious faith, we totally support the stand taken by the Lawyers' Christian Fellowship against the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill.

Below is their latest information.  Please come to their rally in Old Palace Yard at 2pm on 15th January 2008 if you can.

TIME TO STAND - HFE Bill Rally

Date: 8/Jan/2008

Date: 15th January 2008
Time: 2-3.30pm
Place: Old Palace Yard (opposite the House of Lords)

The House of Lords is meeting on 15th January for the first day of the Report stage of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill to vote on the proposed amendments to the Bill. This Bill strikes at the very heart of our civilisation and questions what it means to be human.

The issues the Lords will be voting on include:

- The creation of animal-human hybrid embryos
- Tissue typing to create ‘saviour siblings’
- The ‘need for a father’ consideration in IVF treatment

While the Lords are meeting on 15th January, we will be holding a rally outside the House of Lords in Old Palace Yard, SW1P 3JY at 2.00pm - 3.30pm, to take a stand to protect the family, the unborn child/the embryo and human dignity.

This rally will be the first in a series of rallies called ‘Time To Stand’. We hope to hold rallies on each of the days that important votes are taken on issues that strike at the heart of God’s purposes for our society, in the Lords or the Commons. It is important that as many people as possible attend Parliament for the rallies on the days when votes are being taken on these issues. We need to send the message that these issues cannot be swept under the carpet, and that the dignity of the human embryo, and the family are things that the public care deeply about and will have a massive future impact on the well being of the Nation.

Please put this date in your diary. It would be helpful for us to have an idea of numbers that are coming and we would be grateful if you would email Simone Lamont or call 020 7407 6157 if you would like to attend.

From The Times. Read the original here.

November 30, 2007

Thomas Catan in Madrid and David Rose

Police investigating four abortion clinics in Barcelona used frequently by British women have been horrified to find purpose-built machines attached to the drains that were used to crush foetuses.

The clinics allegedly performed illegal abortions on women into their eighth month of pregnancy. Police have arrested Carlos MorÍn, the Peruvian head of the clinics, his wife and four other colleagues after a lawsuit by a Christian organisation, e-Cristians. Mr MorÍn reportedly has refused to answer police questions.

Because they were so loud, the machines – which fed into public drains – were switched on only during the early hours of the day to avoid drawing attention to the illegal arrangement, police sources said. Officers gathering evidence at the clinics this week have been testing the machines and drains for traces of DNA, which may be matched with that of past clients, according to reports.

Press release from Comment on Reproductive Ethics.

(17 November, 2007)

‘The decision to give up on human cloning by the best known mammalian cloner in the world, Prof Ian Wilmut, is good news for us all and very good news for the integrity of science,’ said Josephine Quintavalle from Comment on Reproductive Ethics.

‘For years now the evidence has been mounting that cloning is a very difficult to achieve safely and successfully, and that the number of human eggs required is so high as to represent an insuperable hurdle in itself.

‘The work of Prof Yamanaka, developing patient-specific stem cells without the use of embryos, is the stream-lined way forward and it is great credit to the professionalism of Wilmut that he is able to acknowledge the benefits of this route forward. To be willing to change one’s mind in science is a sign of great integrity and real intelligence and we congratulate Prof Wilmut for his stance.

‘If full human cloning can be rejected on scientific grounds, what to make of some of the nonsense going before the House of Lords as we speak? A debate this Monday on the new Human Fertilisation & Embryology Bill will focus on all manner of interspecies embryos, created from animal and human tissue, and using the cloning processes. None of this research is necessary or desirable.

‘As a country we must follow the Wilmut lead and put behind us all meddling with human cloning and animal/human hybridisation. There are other ways to cure patients, and they are not only safer and simpler, but they are also ethically acceptable to us all.’

See: Daily Telegraph

Speaking on 21 November in the debate on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [HL], Lord Ahmed made the following comments:

"My Lords, on the basis of my scientific qualifications, I am the least qualified Member of your Lordships’ House to speak in this debate. However, I speak with my religious, ethical and moral convictions.

"I begin by thanking all those who have written to me by either e-mail or letter. It would be impossible for me to reply to each member of the community, as on Monday it took six hours for my research assistant to open all the letters and e-mails and I am still receiving correspondence on this issue.

"I realise that the UK’s position as a world leader in reproductive technologies and research requires regulations. Therefore, I welcome the commitment to ensuring that all human embryos outside the body, whatever the process used in their creation, are subject to regulation. Reference has been made to designer babies, and I also welcome the ban on the selection of the sex of offspring for non-medical reasons. However, I remain deeply concerned with other aspects of the Bill and therefore will support amendments, such as those to the clause that will remove the reference to the need for a father.

"I remain deeply concerned at the notion of abortion as a form of contraception, although I accept the need for abortion to save a mother’s life where there is a medical complication. As we heard from the noble Lord, Lord Alton of Liverpool, on Monday, abortion has, sadly, been used for many other reasons.

The following images are from the Christian Concern for our Nation website. They show the protest that took place in Parliament Square during the debate in the House of Lords on the HFE Bill. The protest was against the legalisation of animal-human hybrid embryos, and consisted of girls in bunny masks and boys in cow masks holding up signs reading "No animal human hybrids".

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill began its second reading debate in the House of Lords on MONDAY, NOVEMBER 19.

The bill allows for the creation of human/animal hybrid embryos by transferring human DNA to animal eggs, by fertilising animal eggs with human sperm and by adding animal genes to human embryos.

Pro-abortion MP’s want to add amendments to the bill which will make it legal to have an abortion without two doctors’ signatures, as at present, for nurses and midwives to perform abortions and for abortions to be carried out on unlicensed premises – but please note these amendments about abortion have not been added yet.

The battle over this bill is likely to be the biggest battle over life issues in 40 years.

It is vital to contact members of the House of Lords to ask them to vote against the bill. Point out your objections to the creation of hybrid embryos.

For names and e-mail addresses of members of the House of Lords, log on to www.spuc.org.uk/lobbying. click on Parliamentarians’ emails, then click on Peers.

From Lawyers Christian Fellowship:

Many of the speakers at the debate on 19th November spoke against Government plans to remove the requirement that IVF providers consider the need of a child for a father when considering IVF applications. Further controversy was sparked last night when it was reported that Gordon Brown would not allow Labour MPs to have a free vote on this issue of conscience. One Labour MP, Geraldine Smith, stated that she would deny any order to back the legislation, saying “Can you imagine a child who has a birth certificate with two females as mother and father? It’s nonsense. It’s madness. “The Conservative Party will allow a free vote on the issue.

It is now important to continue writing to the Prime Minister asking him to allow a free vote on this, and on the hybrid embryo issue in the Bill. Also please write to David Cameron commending him on his decision to allow a free vote on fathers, and asking him to take a public stand for the family in how he votes.

This letter was sent to the Observer but was not printed.

The letter from Baroness Gould et al. about Education and abortion (4th November) cites lower abortion figures from Belgium and Holland to justify liberal contraception and comprehensive sex education even in faith schools. However, abortion figures from these countries cannot be directly compared with U.K. figures. The reason for this, according to my Dutch colleagues is that very early abortions brought on by medical treatment, wich they call "over time treatment" are not included in the figures as this is not obligatory.

Robert P. Balfour, FRCOG
President, Doctors Who Respect Human Life

Oct 31, 2007

The Alive and Kicking campaign issued the following press release today:

On the 27 October, 1967, the Abortion Act was officially passed in the UK Parliament. As Big Ben struck midnight it was the beginning of a day which marks the 40th Anniversary of this Act, an Act which has resulted in the loss of 6.7 million unborn lives, a figure which is rapidly approaching the total figure of the population of London.

An alliance of pro-life groups, united under the name ‘Alive&Kicking’, commemorated this tragic moment by projecting onto the House of Parliament, beside Big Ben, a reminder to the world of the appalling death toll of this Act of Parliament.

This afternoon thousands gathered outside the House of Parliament to call for a change in law.

www.aliveandkickingcampaign.org

Minority report MP’s blast Committee’s pro-abortion bias

By Hilary White

LONDON, October 31, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The UK’s Commons Committee on Science and Technology has issued its report saying that Britain’s abortion law should be further liberalised so that women can abort their children more easily. The report recommends scrapping the requirement of two doctors to sign an approval and says women should be allowed to use the deadly RU-486 abortion pill at home without medical supervision.

The Committee concluded that the gestational age limit of 24 weeks should remain in place and “that there is no scientific basis - on the grounds on viability - to reduce the upper time limit”.

“The Committee supports the removal of the requirement for two doctors signatures before an abortion can be carried out” and is “concerned that the requirement” “may be causing delays in access to abortion services.” In the British political system, a Commons Committee report is normally followed very closely in creating or amending legislation.

The Daily Telegraph reports that the Committee’s conclusions were “unusually” published at midnight after MP’s had already left for a week’s holiday leading to accusations of railroading its conclusions and cutting off debate.

News Release

An Inconvenient Analysis

New report discusses wide-ranging effects of abortion

The London-based Pension and Population Research Institute today (25 October) launched ‘Assessing the Damage’, a 32-page report by its Director of Research, Patrick Carroll, into the demographic impact on society, and the consequences for women’s health, of the 1967 Abortion Act.

Speaking at the launch, which took place at the Royal Society of Medicine in Wimpole Street, London, Mr Carroll said that the report discusses how national statistical data can be used to assess the effect of the 1967 Act.

“The 40^th anniversary of the passing of the Abortion Act is a significant opportunity to re-access the such a politically correct age, for many my report is probably a rather inconvenient impact on society that has resulted from this legal and cultural change. Given that we live in analysis, but it could however be a first step towards a restoration of the situation that will benefit many,” Mr Carroll said.

Through statistical analysis and comparison Mr Carroll, who is an actuary and statistician by profession, looks at the impact of nearly seven million legally induced abortions over the last 40 years, abortion’s bearing on family structure and its adverse health consequences.

MEDIA INVITATION 
REPORT LAUNCH

Assessing the Damage:  The Demographic Impact on Society and Consequences for the Health of Women of the 1967Abortion Act over 40 years 

Date: Thursday 25^th October 2007 

Time: 11.00 a.m. 

Venue: Robert Adams Room, Ground Floor, Royal Society of Medicine, Chandos House, 2 Queen Anne’s Street, London.

Available for interview:

Patrick Carroll M.A, F.I.A, Author of the Report

Dr. Joel Brind, Professor of Biology, Chemistry and Endocrinology at Baruch College, the City University of New York

Dr Greg Gardner, GP and member of the Medical Ethics Alliance (by telephone). 

You are invited to send a reporter, camera crew and/or photographer. 

For further information, please contact Terry McErlane on 07860862231

Nurses Opposed to Euthnasia are holding a National Study Day entitled 'Understanding the Mental Capacity Act' on Tuesday 20th November, 9:30-5:00 at Guys Hospital. If you would like to attend send a letter detailing your name, address, telephone number(s) and dietary requirements with a cheque for £60 made payable to Ms Teresa Lynch to:

Ms Teresa Lynch (Nurses Opposed to Euthanasia)
168 Earls Court Road
Earls Court
London
SW5 9QQ

(NEW YORK -- C-FAM) A group of nongovernmental organizations (NGO’s) from the United States, Europe and Latin America today delivered a letter to the UN and the organizers of the just concluded Women Deliver conference complaining that the conference was more about promoting abortion than caring for the real needs of women.

The joint letter was issued by the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM), United Families International (US), Concerned Women for America (US), World Union of Catholic Women’s Organizations, Institute for Family Policy (Spain), Instituto Mujer y Vida (Spain), Comite Nacional Provida de Mexico, the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (UK), and many others.

The letter said, “We wish to express our profound disappointment and dismay that the Women Deliver conference has failed to meet its stated objective of addressing Millennium Development Goal 5, which is to reduce maternal mortality and morbidity. Delegates were invited to attend a global conference on the causes, prevention and treatment of the complications of pregnancy and childbirth which lead to the deaths of so many mothers, particularly in developing countries, and to consider effective solutions. Regrettably, the conference agenda was so preoccupied with promoting the ideology and practice of abortion that the genuine healthcare needs of women and children were virtually ignored in the plenary sessions and overwhelmed in the panel discussions.”

Read the full text here.

40th Anniversary of the passing of the Abortion Act

London: Vigil 27 October 2 p.m. in Old Palace Yard, followed by March to Westminster Cathedral. Ecumenical service at 4 pm.

Manchester: 27 October 2007 at 10 am. Ecumenical service in Salford Cathedral.

Burnley: 28 October at 6 pm. Ecumenical service in St. Andrew’s Church (C of E)

Annual General Meeting: The AGM of the British Section of the World Federation of Doctors who Respect Human Life will be held at 12.30 pm on Saturday 27 October 2007, at No. 27 Walpole Street, London SW3 4QS.

LifeNews.com Editor

October 8, 2007

Milan, Italy (LifeNews.com) -- An Italian court has denied a request by a disabled woman's father to remove her feeding tube and authorize her death by starvation and dehydration. Eluana Englaro has been a coma for 15 years after an automobile accident seriously injured her and, this year, her father asked a Milan court for permission to remove her feeding tube.

This isn't the first time Englaro's case had been in court.

In April 2005, the Italian Supreme Court confirmed a lower court ruling to keep her feeding tube in place.

That case had also been brought by Englaro's father, who believes that she would have preferred to die. The court rejected the argument because there was no specific evidence on Englaro's views of life and death.

In addition, the court's opinion stated that to remove the tube required, "valuations of life and death that are rooted in concepts of an ethical or religious nature, which are extrajudicial."

The Italian case has drawn comparisons to that of Terri Schiavo, the disabled American woman whose ex-husband won permission from the court to take her life.

It also hearkens to Piergiorgio Welby, a euthanasia activist afflicted with muscular-dystrophy who had a doctor kill him in a euthanasia bid that is still under investigation.