Sunday, February 03, 2008

Surviving aborted babies left to die-- yes it does happen

Sometimes, I feel people get a little blasé about the fetal rights debate. The arguments, facts and talking points are repeated ad nauseum and get stale.

That's why it's important to report on the realities of abortion.

When proponents of legal abortion talk about the realities of abortion, they talk about the circumstances that lead women to choose abortion: the desire to complete one's education, poverty, bad relationship, etc.

But that's the reality of a woman's decision. That's not abortion itself.

Proponents of legalized abortion almost never confront the reality of the act of abortion, and especially not the reality of the unborn child.

In the minds of proponents of legalized abortion, when we debate abortion, we're debating about a right-- an abstract concept. We're debating over the women and their lives. That is what they are entirely focused on.

They almost never focus on the day-to-day medical realities of the procedure that is proposed as the source of women's advancement.

And it's good to be woken up by what actually goes on in hospitals and abortion clinics around the world.

The Daily Mail published an article relating how aborted fetuses do survive late-term abortions in the UK and are left to die.

Botched abortions mean that scores of babies are being born alive and left to die, an official report has revealed.

A total of 66 infants survived NHS termination attempts in one year alone, it emerged.

Rather than dying at birth as was intended, they were able to breathe unaided. About half were alive for an hour, while one survived ten hours.

The figures are the first to give a national picture of the number of babies who survive abortion but are left to die.

Experts previously believed the phenomenon was limited to a handful of cases a year.

The babies were aborted using a drug to soften the cervix and induce labour. Once born no medical help is offered.

This is old news to experienced pro-life advocates.

Just picture it: a baby goes through the violent delivery of a prostaglandin abortion (the contractions of which are stronger than normal labour). He's gasping for breath. He is dumped into a pan, and left in a corner.

Sometimes, the baby can be handed to the mother. But nothing is done to help the baby: no offers of resuscitation, no painkillers, etc. nothing.

He's just left to suffocate.

Do proponents of legalized abortion ever reveal that reality of abortion?


A few of these episodes have been documented. Take the case of Baby Rowan. In 2005, his mother, Angele, was convinced by a so-called Christian counsellor that the only way to deal with her pregnancy was to abort him at 23 weeks.

Rowan was born alive. His mom picked up him and tried to get a friend to call an ambulance. No ambulance showed up. Instead, police came. The staff at the clinic was trying to just let the baby die, against the wishes of the mother.

Some choice.

Baby Rowan

Another case of a late-term baby surviving abortion to be left for dead happened in 1999 at the Calgary Foothills hospital.

The baby in question was aborted at 35 weeks. Two nurses rocked the baby for 12 hours until he died. They were not permitted to feed the baby...

This is the "right" that proponents of legalized abortion are fighting for: the right to kill a baby in order to escape the responsibility of having to parent him.

That's supposed to be an advancement for women.

As a woman, I am deeply disturbed that a movement that alleges to speak in my name claims that this allowing this outrage is for my own good. As if I, a woman, were too feebled and victimized to allow any consideration for another party that my be harmed by my actions. I reject the notion that a woman has no responsibility towards her unborn child, or that the state cannot make a woman-- and indeed all of society-- live up to their responsibilities to the unborn.

Proponents of legalized abortion always bring back the discussion to the woman.

The discourse has been: if women do not have complete control over their bodies, they risk being enslaved by the patriarchy.

Paternalistically, the reality of the meaning of "control over one's own body" has been hidden-- for the women's own good-- so that women's feelings aren't hurt and they aren't traumatized by their past or future decisions. Women are supposed to be responsible and capable beings-- except in the face of gruesome realities. Then they're feeble wallflowers who must be protected from the big bad forces of patriarchy, because they can't cope with their feelings about their decisions.

They must never know.

But people are beginning to see through that reality. The discourse of "control over one's body" is pretty hollow when it's a euphemism to kill another human being. When the general public pictured the fetus as a blob, that slogan made sense. But as the public is becoming more and more aware of the true nature of the unborn, they are increasinly rejecting "control" as an excuse to kill a baby. When the unborn is a considered to be a blob, people don't mind championing women as the underdog in this debate. But the more they realize that the unborn really are human, and that it is they who pay for the price for this ideology, the more they want to see protection for the unborn.

If pro-lifers keep exposing the nature of abortion-- the procedure, not the woman's reasons for invoking it-- eventually there will be fetal rights legislation in this country. It's only a matter of time. The conscience of the elites may be dead to the fate of the unborn child, and they may peg us as fetus fetishists, but the average person on the street will want for this atrocity to stop. Canadians are all about fairness. There is something intrinsically unfair about being able to kill another higher being-- much less a human being-- for any reason whatsoever. And then not come to his rescue when he survives the attempt.

For more social conservative news check out