Media Release 11 March 2020

Do the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern and the Minister of Justice approve of the infanticide of babies born alive in a late term abortion?

Parliament last night (10th March), voted 80 to 37 to defeat an amendment proposed by Simon O’Connor to the government Abortion Legislation Bill. The amendment proposed that a “qualified health practitioner who performed the abortion that results in the birth of a child, or any other health practitioner present at the time the child is born, has a duty to provide the child with appropriate medical care and treatment.”

The commendable object of this amendment was to ensure that the child would receive the same medical care and treatment as any other child who was born. This is the care that any decent society would provide its children. International experience reveals that babies are sometimes born alive after abortion and often cry for help.

It is appalling that 80 MPs were opposed to the amendment which made it clear that doctors had a serious obligation to provide this critical health care.

It is acknowledged that the objective of abortion is to deliver a dead baby (that has been violently killed), The last thing an abortionist wants is a live baby after completing an abortion.

The government Abortion Bill is at pains to ignore the truth that abortion concerns two patients, the mother and the child. The government is silent on the purpose of the Bill which is to facilitate the murder of an innocent and defenceless unborn child. It is therefore understandable that Parliament would collude to defeat this amendment which gives recognition to the truth that :-

The unborn child is a human being.

The child has right to life that needs to be respected and protected.

Medical practitioners have a duty to protect life and not to destroy it.

It is very disturbing that our Prime Minister, Minister of Justice and the majority of her government made the decision to vote against this important amendment. One would expect that any humane person would extend at least this minimum care to a child who had survived murderous intent. However it is clear that even this concession was a bridge to far for those who recognise that any moderation to the legal ‘right’ to kill carries the risk to the holy grail of “CHOICE”.

Right to Life asks our Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern as a woman and a loving mother of a child, why did you oppose this amendment to provide health care to a child that had survived the horror of a late term abortion?

Ken Orr,
Spokesperson,
Right to Life