Right to Life New Zealand

Upholding the sanctity of Human life and Standing Up for the Vulnerable

March for Life Christchurch is Still Happening!

by Leave a Comment

Click on this image to register for march

Hi Friends of Life,

The Christchurch March for Life  IS STILL ON. We are making changes to the march to fit in to the L2 requirements and Council has given us approval to go ahead under those rules.

So please don’t let the restrictions put you off attending. You will need however to register by clicking on the link  here or the one below if are coming to the march and you need to do this before 5pm Friday.

This will take you to a Google Form, which is very simple to fill out.

Please feel free to share this with as many people as you think may be keen to step up and support the unborn.  Let’s not let this put us off standing up for our unborn children and their mothers.

Please visit the March for Life Facebook page for updates ( < Click Here)

!! MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT !!

March for Life Christchurch can still go ahead under level-2 ?

But online registration before 5pm this Friday is essential, so that we can organise the logistics to comply with level-2 requirements ?

For more info, and to register today, click on the link below…

https://docs.google.com/…/1FAIpQLSd49tjSD-Y1FQQzFf…/viewform

Number are limited, so register quickly to secure your place ??

? SHARE ? INVITE ? PRAY ? ATTEND

 

Many Blessings and we hope to see you there

Chris

 

 

Chris O’Brien

President Right to Life New Zealand Inc

 

Why has the Prime Minister Redefined who is Human?

by 4 Comments

Media Release 9 August 2020

Why has the Prime Minister Redefined who is Human?

The Ministry of Health; “The term unborn child is not a scientific term and does not have a commonly accepted definition.”

The Prime Minister said in September 2018, “If you ask me why I’m in politics, my answer will be simple: children.”

Right to Life respectfully questions this assertion.

The Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, is the first Prime Minister in the history New Zealand who has sought to usurp the authority of the Creator to redefine who is human and the bearer of human rights. In doing so she has sought to usurp the authority of the Creator. Our humanity is a gift from God. Human life begins at conception at which moment we are endowed by our Creator with inalienable human rights, the foundation right being a right to life. Our rights being inalienable they cannot be taken from us, nor may we give them up.

Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, as the architect of the anti-life and anti-feminist Abortion Legislation Act 2020 which has redefined the unborn child as a non- human being. Right to Life has to ask why is the child now the property of the mother?  Why does It become a human being endowed with a right to life endowed with an inalienable right to life only when it is born? This is a legal fiction that is an affront to the Creator, an offence to women, a violation of the human rights of the child and a crime against humanity. It allows the government to sanction and fund the killing of nearly 13,000 defenceless unborn children each year.

Right to Life submitted to the Prime Minister an Official Information Act request on the 21 April 2020. The request was:

“What medical or biological evidence do you have to prove that the unborn child is not a human being with a right to life until it is born?”

The Prime Minister has refused to answer this important question. The Chief of Staff of the Prime Minister’s office replied on 22 May. “I believe that the information requested is more closely connected with the functions of the Ministry of Justice. Accordingly I have decided under section 14[b] [ii} of the Act transfer the request to the Ministry of Justice.” The Ombudsman has advised Right to Life that this is a legal ploy used by Ministers who wish to avoid being accountable.

The Ministry of Justice replied on 10 June. ” Information to which your request relates is not held by us but is more closely connected with the functions of the Ministry of Health,” your request has been referred to the Ministry of Health. The Acting Deputy Director General of Health, Clare Perry replied on 3rd July.

“The Royal Commission you refer to is now 50 years old.” The Law Commission’s report to the Minister of Justice on taking abortion out of the Crimes Act and making abortion a health issue,”only uses the term unborn child when referring to existing legislative provisions that include it, as it is not a scientific term and does not have a commonly accepted definition. The term unborn child is not used in recently amended Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion Act 1977 (CS & A Act). The information you are seeking is not held by the Ministry and would need to be created in order to respond to your request.”

These disturbing responses are the fruits of a culture of death. A prime Minister who refuses to answer a fundamental question on the humanity of the unborn child. The Minister of Justice who has removed reference to the unborn child and its human rights from legislation specifically drafted for the killing of the child and lastly the Ministry of Health that declares that there is no commonly accepted definition of an unborn child. Only the triumph of a culture of life based on truth and justice that recognises the dignity of women, the humanity and right to life of our precious unborn can save our nation from this increasing and violent war on women.

Ken Orr,
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Authorised by Paul Ives, 22C McBrattneys Rd, Dallington, Christchurch 8061

Letter to Act Leader David Seymour on Euthanasia Referendum Information Omissions

by Leave a Comment

David Seymour MP

8th August 2020

Dear Mr Seymour,

While we fully support your desire for an informed debate on the referendum on euthanasia we believe that there is still considerable misunderstanding of the administration of the End of Life Choice Act (EOLCA).

We believe that it would be in the public interest if you were to make a public statement clarifying for the public that the EOLCA does not provide for turning off life support, does not include CPR requests and does not provide for stopping medical treatment which are already acceptable and legal. We also request that you ask the Minister of Justice to include this important information on the government referendum web site. I would be grateful if you would kindly advise me of your response to my request.

A poll conducted in New Zealand between 31 October and 6 November 2019 by Curia Marketing on behalf of Euthanasia Free New Zealand revealed the following disturbing findings on what the End of Life Choice Bill would provide.

  • 74% thought that it included turning off life support.
  • 70% thought it includes ‘do not resuscitate’ (no CPR) requests.

In a Curia poll conducted for Euthanasia Free in 2017 it found that;

67% thought “assisted dying” includes the stopping of medical tests, treatments and surgeries. 

 The End of Life Choice Act is NOT about, nor does it make legal the action of turning off life support, nor making a ‘do not resuscitate request (no CPR) nor to stop taking medical treatment. All of these end of life choice are already legal, are not euthanasia and this new law, if passed will not change these actions.

The End of Life Choice Act is NOT about pain relief. It’s already legal for a doctor to give a person enough medication to address their pain and make them comfortable, even if this may hasten their death as a side effect. In these situations the doctor seeks to neither hasten or cause the death of his patient.

The above polls clearly demonstrate that the public is not yet aware of the content meaning or implications of the End of Life Choice Act. We believe that in order to have a fully informed public referendum on this critical issue of allowing doctors to give patients a lethal injection or to assist in their suicide it is essential that the above information be included on the government Referendum website.

Yours sincerely,

Ken Orr

Secretary,

Right to Life

Authorised by Paul Ives, 22C McBrattneys Rd, Dallington, Christchurch 8061

Jacinda Ardern’s Hypocritical Stance on Child Mortality

by Leave a Comment

Right to Life believes that the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern and her government by redefining unborn children as property and not human beings, presents a serious threat to the lives of every New Zealander.

The Royal Commission on Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion in 1977, warned Parliament, that if Parliament did not recognise the status of the unborn child as a human being and effectively protect the right to life of the unborn a future Parliament would refuse to protect the right to life of those with Dementia and Alzheimer’s. Jacinda Ardern has chosen to defy this warning.

Right to Life applauds the Prime Minister for expressing concern for the 600 babies that die each year in stillbirth and miscarriage. Each one of these deaths is a tragedy. In Morning Report on 27 July, the  Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said New Zealand could be doing more on infant mortality. But she wanted to make it clear that she was only talking about deaths from miscarriage and stillbirth.

“Let’s actually make sure that when we have a conversation about what more we could be doing, we’re talking about miscarriage and stillbirth.” Prime Minister, why do you refuse to talk about the nearly 13,000 unborn children who are violently killed in abortions each year in New Zealand, funded by your government and performed in Public Hospitals.

Right to Life asks the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern if she is really concerned about child mortality why is she not also talking about the death of children from abortion.  Her statements expose appalling discrimination and indeed hypocrisy. Are they not ‘one of us’ and members of our human family? Every child is a unique and unrepeatable miracle of God’s loving creation that at conception, has been endowed with human rights, the foundation right being an inalienable right to life.

Why is she pretending to believe that children killed in an abortion are not human beings? As the architect of the Abortion Legislation Act that allows for the killing of innocent and defenceless unborn children effectively on request up to birth she is aware that her legislation, contrary to the facts of medical science, unjustly denies the humanity of the unborn and its right to life until it is born.

Jacinda Ardern may believe that the abortion issue in NZ is now settled law but she is completely wrong. We will not rest until we see the repeal of the appalling and inhuman piece of legislation that is the Abortion Legislation Act.

Right to Life appeals to every New Zealander NOT to vote for any politician who voted for this law.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Authorised by Paul Ives, 22C McBrattneys Rd, Dallington, Christchurch 8061

Government Supports Yes Vote for Euthanasia Referendum with Campaign of Misinformation

by 9 Comments

Media Release 12 July 2020

Right to Life believes that the government is withholding important information from the community concerning the End of Life Choice Act. The Minister of Justice, the Hon Andrew Little has set up a government website allegedly to provide information on the Act to assist the electorate to make an informed choice, in voting at the referendum. Right to Life believes that the real objective is to encourage a misinformed electorate to support the government’s agenda of social engineering by voting yes at the referendum.

Right to Life believes that it is inappropriate for the government to be involved in providing information on the referendum. The government is not neutral as 72% of its Labour members pressured by the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern  voted in support of the Act to empower doctors to kill their patients with a lethal injection or to assist in their suicide.

Right to Life asks the government to explain why it is withholding important information from the community?

It is important that those voting understand that under the Crimes Act 1961 that homicide and assisted suicide are serious crimes. There is a total prohibition of the taking of the life of another innocent human being. The End of Life Choice Act will establish two radical principles that will change not only the law but also medicine.

  • The first, that Parliament has the right to legislate for who may be killed.
  • The second that doctors and nurse practitioners are empowered to kill  patients or assist in their suicide as health care.

Right to Life believes that there is still a great deal of misunderstanding in the community about what the End of Life Choice Act provides.

A poll conducted in New Zealand in 2019 by Curia Marketing on behalf of Euthanasia Free New Zealand revealed the following disturbing findings on what the End of Life Choice Bill would provide.

  • 85% thought that it included turning off life support.
  • 79% thought it includes ‘do not resuscitate’ (no CPR) requests.
  • 67% thought it includes the stopping of medical tests, treatments and surgeries.

The End of Life Choice Act is NOT about, nor does it make legal the action of turning off life support, to make a ‘do not resuscitate request (no CPR) or to stop medical treatment. All of these end of life choice are already legal, are not euthanasia and this new law, if passed will not change these actions.

The End of Life Choice Act is NOT about pain relief. It’s already legal for a doctor to give a person enough medication to address their pain and make them comfortable, even if this may hasten their death as a side effect as the doctor seeks to neither  hasten or cause the death of his patient.

“This poll demonstrates that the public is not yet aware of the content and meaning of the End of Life Choice Act. We believe that in order to have a fully informed public referendum on this critical issue of allowing doctors to give patients a lethal injection or to assist in their suicide it is essential that the above information be included on the government Referendum website.

The opposition of the world Medical Association which represents the medical association in 122 member nations with a membership of 10 million doctors, the NZMA, the NZ College of General Practitioners, the Australian and New Zealand Society of Palliative Medicine and the Palliative Care Nurses of NZ ARE ALL OPPOSED TO THE LEGALISING OF EUTHANASIA. This important information should also be shown on the government website. Why is it not there?

Ken Orr,
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Authorised by Paul Ives, 22C McBrattneys Rd, Dallington, Christchurch 8061

Euthanasia Referendum Threat to Hospice Movement

by 1 Comment

Media Release Monday 29th June 2020

Right to Life believes that if the euthanasia referendum results in the ‘End of Life Choice’ Act coming into force, which would happen if more than 50% of people vote for it, there is a danger that the  the government could withholding funding for palliative care for hospices in New Zealand. The objective would be to compel hospices against their conscience to allow doctors to kill their patients or assist in their suicide within their hospices.

The 16th June 2020 High Court judgement of Justice J, Mallon in the case of Hospice NZ V the Attorney General highlights the threat to world class palliative care provided by Hospice NZ.

Hospice NZ had sought an urgent hearing in May in the High Court in Wellington to ask three questions. One was on whether New Zealand’s proposed euthanasia law, the subject of a referendum would have the effect of defeating the conscience right of hospices to protect their patients by prohibiting the killing of patients under the End of Life Choice Bill.

Justice Mallon in his judgement supported the right of hospices to prohibit euthanasia, but stated in his decision that there was however nothing to prevent the government authority from withholding health care funding if a hospice refused to allow euthanasia.

The Attorney General submitted to the court, [131] Further, if a DHB determined the most efficient way to fund assisted dying services in its area was to fund a provider who is willing to provide both palliative care and assisted dying services, it must be entitled to do so. Such a decision would not be to discriminate against those holding a conscientious objection. Rather, it would be one of effective allocation of funding to service providers in accordance with the statutory requirement on a DHB that it “seek the optimum arrangement for the most effective and efficient delivery of health services in order to meet local, regional and national needs”.  

So if we consider the judgement we would have to conclude that under it, if a DHB seeking the most optimum arrangement or determined the most efficient way to fund assisted dying services… it must be entitled to do so. The words most efficient way are chilling and do nothing to negate our concerns expressed in the first paragraph of our post.

As it reads there is nothing in the above judgement that would cause any alleviation of our fears.

Let’s be clear, Euthanasia is about doctors killing patients or assisting in their suicide and it is diametrically opposed to the objective of palliative care, to neither hasten nor postpone death.

Euthanasia represents a culture of death. It is incompatible with palliative care which is compatible with a culture of life.  Right to Life believes that the culture of death will not compromise, and will  demand complete subservience. The End of Life Choice would grease the slippery slope and a right to die would ultimately become a duty to die.

There are 33 hospices in New Zealand providing palliative care for those seriously ill, or in a terminal condition. Government funding accounts for 60 per cent of the funding required to maintain hospices.

Right to Life believes that it is the intention of the government to compel Hospices to accept that doctors could kill patients with a lethal dose or assist them to commit suicide. This was clearly indicated in the defeat of the Supplementary Order Paper 295 to the End of Life Choice Bill, moved by the Hon Michael Woodhouse. This SOP sought to amend the End of Life Choice Bill by upholding the right of hospices to “conscientiously object to including euthanasia”, It was shamefully defeated by 68 to 52. (See Sections 58-62 of Hospice-New-Zealand-v-Attorney-General)

This important amendment was opposed by the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern and 33 Labour MPs, supported by nine NZ First MPs, eight Green MPs  and 15 National MPs.

Right to Life is firmly of the conviction that if they succeed with the referendum, that it is the government’s intention to incorporate euthanasia as a ‘health service’ in our hospices.

We call on all those who value the lives of our unwell and elderly to vote NO at the coming referendum. The lives of the vulnerable have never been at greater risk.

Ken Orr,
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Authorised by Paul Ives, 22C McBrattneys Rd, Dallington, Christchurch 8061

Fifteen MPs of Maori Descent Vote to Deny Humanity of Maori Unborn Children

by 2 Comments

Media Release 24 June 2020

Right to Life believes that the 15 MPs who claim Maori descent who mistakenly believed that they were supporting women, voted to support the passing of the anti-life and anti-feminist Abortion Legislation Act 2020, unwittingly breached the Treaty of Waitangi. Article three of the Treaty provides protection for the lives of Maori by the Crown. We believe that this protection extends to Maori unborn children.

 Right to Life commends the 12 MPs of Maori descent who courageously voted against the Abortion Bill, thus retaining for the unborn child the protection of the Crimes Act and the Treaty of Waitangi.

 This was a sad day for Maoridom, for Maori women and for their precious unborn. New Zealand must not rest until we elect a pro-life Parliament that will repeal  this appalling legislation. 

When the Treaty was signed in 1840, the Crown gave an assurance that Maori would have the Queen’s protection. It was believed that this was to include protection for the right to life of Maori from conception to natural death, which was provided by the common law of England and carried on in the New Zealand Crimes Act since 1856.

It was the intention of the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern who was the architect of this legislation and who believed that it was not a crime to kill an unborn child, to remove abortion from the Crimes Act. Unwanted children including Maori, could then be removed from the protection of the Crimes Act and killed, in the deceptive words of the Prime Minister, “as a reproductive choice for women”. It was the Minister of Justice who was responsible for drafting this legislation who declared in Parliament in presenting the legislation, that the unborn child had no human rights and was not, contrary to medical science, a human being until it was born.

The Abortion Legislation Act provides for an abortion and the killing of the child at the request of the woman up to twenty weeks’ gestation. The Crown withdraws its protection for the child and rejects its responsibility, effectively up to birth, to protect the life of this the weakest and most defenceless member of the human family.

The Act also :-

  • Denies the humanity of the unborn child.
  • Denies the child’s inalienable God given right to life.
  • Grants property rights to the mother over the child.
  • Declares that it is no longer a crime to kill an unborn child.
  • Grants the “right” of the mother to terminate the life of her child.

Statistics NZ advise that 2,991 unborn Maori children were violently killed before birth in 2019. This was 12 more than the 2,979 Maori babies killed in 2018.

Right to Life believes that the following MPs claiming Maori descent should explain to the electorate and the nation why they supported the Abortion Legislation Act that violated the human rights of the unborn and allowed for the Crown in violation of Article three to withdraw its protection for Maori mothers and the lives of their unborn. Hon. Paula Bennett, Hon. Kelvin Davis, Hon. Willie Jackson, Willow-Jean Prime, Kiritapu Allan, Louisa Wall, Paul Eagle, Jo Luxton, Hon. Tracey Martin, Jenny Marcroft, Marama Davidson, David Seymour and Jami-Lee Ross. Peeni Henare and Tamati Coffey represent Maori electorates and have the increased responsibility of upholding protection for the unborn in accordance with Article three of the Treaty in the interests of Maori.

Ken Orr,

Spokesperson,

Right to Life

Abortion Statistics 2019 – 36 Unborn Children are Killed Every Day in New Zealand.

by Leave a Comment

Media Release 17th June 2020

Many women in 2019 chose life for their baby in preference to the violence of abortion. Right to Life congratulates these heroic women who deserve the love and support of our community.

Every day it is estimated that thirty-six unborn children are taken to Hospitals and clinics to be violently killed. If this number of children were taken out of our kindergartens each day to be murdered there would be riots in our cities and towns. Statistics NZ report that In 2019 there were 12,857 abortions reported in New Zealand. This is a decrease of 425 abortions on the 13,282 abortions reported in 2018. We should mourn with these women who are grieving the loss of their precious child. There were only 35 abortions authorised on the grounds of “danger to life and/or Physical Health.

Right to Life also grieves with the women who were so often abandoned by the father of the child in the time of the woman’s greatest need and coerced into an abortion that was chosen for her. It is a cruel mockery and charade for society to pretend that it is “a woman’s right to choose.” “Choosing” an abortion is a decision of despair and a cry for help.

The abortion statistics are an indictment on our Parliament which sanctions and funds the killing of the innocent as in the words of our Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, “a reproductive choice for women.” Abortion is a core health service with unlimited funding and no waiting list, our women deserve better. The statistics disguise the reality that every child  violently dismembered in the  womb of the child’s mother is an unrepeatable miracle of God’s loving creation.

The statistics are also an indictment on the media which have generally ignored the media release on abortion statistics made by Statistics NZ It was Joseph Stalin who said the killing of one human being is a tragedy and the killing of tens of thousands just a statistic. Since 1977 more than 500,000 children have been violently killed in their mother’s womb, a massive violation of human rights. Why is the media so coldly indifferent to the killing of New Zealand children in their first nine months of life?

Right to Life requests that the government introduce abstinence sexuality programmes to replace Family Planning school sex education programs which encourage promiscuity with abortions arranged without the knowledge or consent of parents as a backup for failed contraceptives.

Repeat abortions totalled 4,645, 3,008 were having their second, 1,081 were having their third, 326 were having their fourth, 132 their fifth, 62 their sixth, 26 their seventh and 10 their eighth or more. Right to Life believes that these statistics are under reported. Studies conducted in the United States, reveal that repeat abortions are actually 50 per cent of the total abortions reported.

Key Facts Abortion Statistics 2019

  • The general abortion rate was 13.1 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years, down slightly from 13.7 per 1,000 in 2018
  • Women aged 20–24 years had the highest abortion rate (19.5 abortions per 1,000 women aged 20–24 years), down from 20.5 in 2018.
  • 51 percent of all abortions were for women aged in their 20s
  • Most abortions (64 percent) were a woman’s first abortion, unchanged from 2018.
  • 64 percent of abortions were performed before the 10th week of the pregnancy, up from 50 percent in 2018.
  • 18 percent of known pregnancies (live births, stillbirths, and abortions) ended in an abortion, unchanged from 2018.
  • 78 young women under the age of 16 years had an abortion in 2019. Statistics have been discontinued on the number of young women who alleged that they had notified their parents or guardian of their abortion.
  • 12,498 abortions were authorised on the grounds of mental health, the grounds used by certifying consultants to provide abortion on demand. This is 98 percent of the total. There were 35 abortions authorised on the grounds of danger to life/ and or Physical Health.

 

Ken Orr

Spokesperson,

Right to Life

Which Leader will Protect Life and Promote Human Dignity?

by Leave a Comment

In September our nation will make a decision that will determine the future of our country. This election is a watershed moment in our history and one in which we all have a part to play. We face the real possibility, of the return to power of a government that is both hostile not only to the sanctity of human life, but in fact also many of the foundational Judeo-Christian principles upon which our nation has been founded. The deconstruction of those values has been underway for decades but this government seems determined to complete that process. Ahead lies the very real threat of the legally sanctioned killing of our elderly and unwell. We also face increasing threat to freedom of speech and our religious freedoms.

Both Jacinda Ardern and Todd Muller wish to lead our nation as Prime Minister. It is a very great honour and privilege to be elected as the leader of our country. A Prime Minister needs to be a person of integrity and we believe one whose ethos includes a conviction that the lives of the weakest and most vulnerable persons in our community need to be protected in law. Unfortunately we do not see those qualities in Jacinda Ardern. Todd Muller commendably voted consistently against the Abortion legislation Bill, yet has publicly stated that he believes abortion is now with the enacting of that Bill, ‘settled law’. We cannot agree. It is not settled law, neither as slavery.

Who is best qualified to reaffirm the value of every human life from conception to natural death? We need a government that is committed to seeking the repeal of the infamous Abortion Legislation Act 2020 and opposing the killing of the vulnerable through implementing the End of Life Choice bill, should it be approved in the referendum.  Society through its laws and social institutions has a duty to protect and nurture all human life.

The Prime Minister who presents as charming, attractive and likeable was the architect of the Abortion Legislation Act 2020 that declares that it is no longer a crime to kill a child before birth and permits women to kill their children effectively for any reason, up to birth. She also opposed eight pro-life amendments that would have given increased legal protection for women and their unborn. These included protection for children with disabilities including Down syndrome, who may now be violently murdered up to birth. She also supported and voted in favour of the End of Life Choice Act and the the referendum which if passed, will permit doctors killing their patients or assisting in their suicide. Jacinda Ardern also supported the first reading of this legislation, that would have enabled the killing of the disabled.

We believe that these actions alone disqualify her on moral grounds from being New Zealand’s leader.

Todd Muller is committed to protecting the lives of every member of the human family from conception to natural death. He has a commendable 100% voting record in defending life. He opposed the anti-life Abortion Legislation Bill and the End of Life Choice Bill. It is however disappointing that he never took a call to speak up in defence of the right to life of the unborn in the abortion debate. Neither did he speak up in defence of the vulnerable in the euthanasia debate. It is hoped that should he become Prime Minister that he will accept the responsibility of providing leadership in defending the lives of the vulnerable in our community. He who remains silent in the face of attacks on the right to life of the voiceless shares the guilt of the oppressor.

Right to Life believes that there is no place in our Parliament for those who are not committed to protecting the lives of every member in our community from conception to natural death. We believe that the Jacinda Ardern Labour led government is a continuing threat to the vulnerable in our community. This is not the great Labour Party of Michael Joseph Savage that was founded on a commitment to social justice and a profound respect for the right to life of every individual from conception.

Right to Life encourages the electorate to elect at the next election a Prime Minister and Parliament who are committed to protect the right to life of every member of our human family and to vote No at the referendum on euthanasia.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Authorised by Paul Ives, 22C McBrattneys Rd, Dallington, Christchurch 8061

Pharmac Joins Death Peddlers

by Leave a Comment

Media Release 5th June 2020

Right to Life encourages health practitioners to defend their ethics and patients by refusing to participate in the killing of the unborn and by opposing Pharmac’s anti-life proposals. They are extending access to the lethal murder drug Mifepristone and the prostaglandin, Misoprostol. These drugs are used to kill unborn children up to ten weeks gestation. The proposal which further victimises women, means that these drugs would be available and on hand for health practitioners authorised to provide abortion services. The ability to kill now extends to doctors, midwives and nurse practitioners. Women would not be required to go to a pharmacist to obtain the drugs.

It is important that the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, the architect of the anti-life Abortion Legislation Act accepts full responsibility for the plight of women victimised by her appalling Abortion Legislation Act. Right to Life stands with women and their precious unborn and pledges to the women of New Zealand that we will not rest until it is repealed.

This proposal has been made legal by the new Abortion law, which intensifies the war on women and their precious unborn children. It trivialises the killing of the unborn which is promoted as a “health service”. Under the previous abortion legislation the lethal drugs were authorised only by a registered medical practitioner and were required to be administered and supervised by a doctor in a hospital or clinic licensed by the Abortion Supervisory Committee. Under the new Abortion law the drugs can be given to the woman in a clinic, hospital, doctor’s surgery or the women’s own home. In the home option there is a complete lack of medical supervision.

Despite claims that medication abortion is safe and easy, research proves that as many as five to seven percent of women who take abortion drugs will require follow-up surgery and three percent could end up in the emergency room. Self-managed abortions from home are especially dangerous; in fact, half of the abortion providers do not consider them safe, according to a 2019 survey published in the journal ‘Contraception’. Medical  abortion becomes even more dangerous in situations where women cannot access emergency medical care.

Pharmac’s proposal will increase the pressure of the culture of death by encouraging doctors, nurse practitioners and midwives to accept the killing of the unborn as just a normal health service.  This pressure will result in the following negative impacts;

  • It will put pressure on health practitioners who are committed and trained to respect and care for both the mother and her child as patients, to be become killers of our unborn.
  • It will place pressure on health practitioners to accept a responsibility to have these lethal drugs available to give to women seeking a medical abortion.

The proposal is just the first step in the agenda to make it compulsory for all health practitioners to provide drugs to kill the unborn. The ultimate objective will be to make it mandatory to have these drugs on hand to kill the unborn. Those practitioners who are not prepared to co-operate could  be required to leave the profession.

The proposal of Pharmac will place increased pressure on a woman facing a crisis pregnancy to accept the killing of her child as the logical solution by:

  • Deceiving her into believing the destructive and wrong information in the Interim Guidelines of the Ministry of Health for the performance of abortions, “that abortion is safer for women than birth.”
  • Discouraging her from seeking pre-decision counselling and taking time to consider all the options of parenting and adoption that will protect her life and that of her baby.
  • Forcing on her the sole responsibility for the killing of her child by taking the Mifepristone.

 

Ken Orr,
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

This is the website of Right to Life NZ Inc.
%d bloggers like this: