Wednesday, October 28, 2015

Late-term abortion is legal in Victoria, Australia, but doctors refuse

An Australian woman who is 26 weeks pregnant and believes that an abortion will ease her suicidal feelings will not receive an abortion from Royal Women's Hospital. Doctors there are unwilling to kill a viable, healthy baby.

The Age reports:
In 2008, the procedure was decriminalised, so that women could have one up to 24 weeks for any reason. After 24 weeks, two doctors need to agree based on the woman's medical circumstances and her current and future physical, psychological and social circumstances. But in reality, doctors say there are no services that will do it after 24 weeks, unless there is a major abnormality in the foetus. A doctor from the Royal Women's Hospital, who did not want to be named, said the hospital never performed abortions for "psycho social" reasons after about 16 weeks and that this was allegedly because of a lack of staff willing to do it and fear of negative publicity. 
Ultrasound at 26 weeks
In the United States, there are only a handful of abortionists who will commit the deed in the third trimester. (Gosnell was one of just five; the remaining four were the subject of a glowing pro-abortion documentary a few years ago.) And no wonder, when a third-trimester fetus is no different, developmentally, than a premature newborn.

Australia has approximately 24 million inhabitants, compared to 325 million in the United States. Not to put too fine a point on it, but there are only so many sociopaths per capita. Australia just doesn't have enough to make abortion-on-demand activists' dreams a reality there.

Royal Women's Hospital properly offered mental health care to the woman, and several individuals have come forward to adopt the child. But she remains fixated on abortion, and her case has become a rallying point for Australian abortion extremists. A local health minister "said she was concerned about limited access to abortion, particularly in regional areas of Victoria and was working on a new strategy for sexual and reproductive healthcare."

What, short of conscripting doctors, would lead to a different result in this case?

No comments: