Abortion is bad for society because it is bad for people! Abortion is bad for the child. The child is already in the world. She should not be excluded from membership in our society merely because she is still in a secluded place, necessary for her so that she is nourished and protected during those first formative weeks of her life. Abortion is bad because it represents frightening hazards for women, physically and psychologically.
It is bad because of its effects on other children. It is bad because of its effects on the family structure. It is bad because of its effects on men. Abortion is bad because of its effects on human relations.
Many other dimensions could be added: its effect on the medical profession when doctors, committed to healing and saving, become hired killers; its effect on nurses having to reassemble the broken pieces of a baby torn apart by the abortion knife; and its effect on the society that lives in the midst of a holocaust. Abortion is a deadly plague with many victims.
Often it is the pregnancy that is unwanted. The child once born, and perhaps even before birth, is very much wanted. A child unwanted now may be very much wanted later. And if a child is at first wanted, then later unwanted, does the objection imply that she should later be killed, when she is born? Adoption, not abortion. While millions of babies are killed, so many couples who want to adopt cannot.
In the UK and other countries where abortion has become 'normal', abortions of babies with Down's syndrome, deformed feet, cleft lips and palates, as well as other medical abnormalities, have become more and more commonplace. According to statistics released by the Office For National Statistics in England and Wales over the last 8 years more and more women are choosing to abort their babies who may have some form of handicap. These kinds of abortions spiked by 8 percent in 2004 and have increases ever since.
Of Down's syndrome babies, 690 were aborted in 2002, an increase of 17 percent over the 2001 total of 591. More babies were aborted in 2002 who had Down's syndrome (372) than those that were born with the disease (329).
Several chilling studies and examples show how babies with disabilities are targetted by abortion:
A study from Wayne State University found that 87% of unborn children diagnosed with Down Syndrome were aborted.(1) An review of studies in several countries showed 92% of unborn children who were diagnosed with Down Syndrome were aborted. (2)
Children diagnosed prenatally with spina bifida were aborted 64% of the time. (2)
Twenty-six children diagnosed with cleft lips or palates, conditions that are correctable by surgery, were aborted in the United Kingdom from 2002 to 2009. (3)
Infanticide of disabled newborn babies is also an issue of concern. Groningen University in the Netherlands, where euthanasia is legal, advocated a policy under which disabled infants who are deemed to be suffering unbearably can be killed, and even went as far as killing a few infants. (4) Medical professionals (5) and bioethicists (6) in other countries have supported this view as well.
(1) Kramer, R.L., Jarve, R.K., Yaron, Y., et al (1998). Determinants of parental decisions after the prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 79(3), 172-174.
(2) Mansfield, C., Hopfer, S., Marteau, T.M. (1999). Termination rates after prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome, spina bifida, anencephaly, and Turner and Klinefelter syndromes. Prenatal Diagnosis, 9, 808-812.
(3) Twenty-six babies aborted for cleft lips or palates. July 4, 2011 - www.telegraph.co.uk
(4) Netherlands grapples with euthanasia of babies. Nov. 30, 2004 - www.msnbc.msn.com
(5) Doctors: let us kill disabled babies. Nov. 5, 2006 - www.timesonline.co.uk
(6) Opposition Is Mounting Against Infanticide Ethicist. Mar. 21, 1999 www.ncregister.com
Thanks to Right to Life of Michigan for the info above
In the same year, five babies were aborted for deformed feet and another was killed because of a cleft lip and palate. Also, in 2000 and 2001 combined, nine babies were the victims of abortion because of a cleft lip and palate while two more babies were also aborted for having a cleft lip.
Rev. Joanna Jepson, a curate with the Church of England who fought on behalf of an aborted baby in a 2001 High Court case, said she is outraged at these statistics because they are an insult to surviving humans with these conditions.
Rev. Joanna Jepson
Portrait of Rev. Joanna Jepson at her home in Chester. The 27-year-old Church of England curate, won the right in the High Court to challenge the decision by a police force not to prosecute the doctors who aborted a 24-week-old baby with a cleft palate. Jepson, who herself was born with a facial disfigurement, challenged the decision saying the abortion was illegal because a cleft palate does not constitute a "serious handicap."
Because of the technological advances in the detection of birth defects prior to birth, more and more women are choosing to end the life of their baby despite the fact that most of these conditions can be corrected once the baby is born. Abortions for babies who may be at risk of having a physical or mental condition or are deemed life-threatening are considered legal for any reason throughout the entire pregnancy according to Ground E of the Abortion Act in England.
According to the latest data published in the Health Statistics Quarterly from the Office for National Statistics for the National Congenital Anomaly System (NCAS) from 2002, 1,863 babies were aborted under this law compared with the 1,722 in 2001. This system virtually guarantees that women who want to have an abortion for any reason can do it.
London Metropolitan University ethics professor Jacqueline Laing said aborting babies because they have deformities is making the world a savage place. "We are obliterating the willingness of people to accept disability," Laing noted in the Drudge story. "Babies are required to fit a description of normality before they are allowed to be born."
It was reported by the BBC on 6 March 2008 that the Joint Committee on Human Rights in the UK said that vulnerable adults are particularly likely to be abused and neglected. Andrew Dismore, chairman of the committee, said: "It is extremely depressing to see, 10 years after the introduction of the Human Rights Act, the way people with learning disabilities are treated when using our services.
"The evidence has shown us that the consequences of a lack of awareness of people's rights can be devastating."
The MPs and peers highlight cases where people in care homes or hospitals have been neglected and abused, as well as other breaches of human rights. The committee also heard of patients being inappropriately restrained with straps, or subject to a "chemical cosh". The committee was shocked that even in cases of horrific abuse, staff did not know they were doing wrong.
Unfortunately, talk about rights for the disabled mean nothing if society advocates that the disabled should have been aborted in the first place. It puts disabled people on the defensive from the word go and forces them to establish their right to exist. The more disabled that are aborted, the more society accepts that they should not be there. This will amount to more abuse of the disabled an vulnerable as has been demonstrated above in the recent UK report.