Are Sex-Selection Abortions A Reality in the US?

 AfterAbortion.org  recently posts that although China and India are already known offenders of sex-selection motivated abortions, it seems that other European countries and even the US are beginning to show data that indicates that the practice is beginning to take hold here as well.

It seems that some immigrant women, once they find that they are carrying female infants, may be forced by "old-school" husbands to abort infants of the "weaker" sex.

Read on....

Not Just China and India: Sex Selection Abortions Spreading Around the World

Experts Say Selection Abortions Are Increasing
in the U.S. and Europe

Efforts to expose and combat gendercide and sex-selection abortion have mostly focused on countries such as India and China. But now experts are reporting that this problem is spreading in Europe and the U.S., too.

According to a recent article by Elena Ralli at New Europe Online:

According to a recent study by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), in Albania, 112 boys are born for every 100 girls, while in Kosovo and Montenegro the figures stand at 110 and 109 boys per 100 girls respectively. …
In countries like Albania and Macedonia these EU laws [against sex selection abortion] are being ignored since female births keep on decreasing[;] however, women’s rights activists also see a trend towards gender selection in EU member states as well.As a result, Danish media have indicated the existence of “abortion tourism” to Sweden, where terminating a pregnancy is legal until the 18th week. Moreover, studies from Norway and Britain suggest a gender imbalance among immigrants from Asian cultures, especially among second and third children.
In a November 2011 resolution, the Council of Europe voiced its concern over the rising trend of prenatal gender selection. But the EU has no legal say on the matter since abortion law is decided and adopted by individual states alone. As a result, EU cannot press for improvements in candidate nations either.

And in an article at National Review, population control expert Steve Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute, offers some shocking information on sex selection abortions in the United States:

[Dr. Sunita Puri],  who practices in the Bay Area, wanted to find out why so many immigrant Indian women in the United States were so eager to find out the sex of their unborn children, and why so many of them choose abortion when they found out they were carrying a girl.
What she discovered over the course of 65 interviews conducted over several years profoundly shocked her. Fully 89 percent of the women carrying girls opted for an abortion, and nearly half had previously aborted girls.
Puri’s report, published in Social Science and Medicine this last April, makes for grim reading. Women told Puri of their guilt over their sex-selection abortions, how they felt that they were unable to “save” their daughters. Even the women who turned out to be carrying boys this time around could not shake their remorse over having earlier aborted daughters in this deadly game of reproductive roulette.
They also made clear that they were not free actors when it came to reproductive “choice.” Many, when it was learned that they were carrying girls, became the victims of family violence. Some — in an effort to make them miscarry — had been slapped and shoved around by angry husbands and in-laws, or even kicked in the stomach. Others were denied food, water, and rest in order to coerce them into aborting their unwanted girl babies.

Mosher also sited research showing that sex-selection abortion “is widely practiced among certain Asian-American communities:”
Jason Abrevaya of the University of Texas analyzed U.S. birth data and found unusually high boy-birth percentages after 1980 among later children (most notably third and fourth children) born to Chinese and Asian-Indian mothers. Moreover, using maternally linked data from California, he found that Asian-Indian mothers are significantly more likely both to have a terminated pregnancy and to give birth to a son when they have previously only given birth to girls.
Columbia University economists Douglas Almond and Lena Edlund also found clear evidence of sex-selective abortions in what they called “son-biased sex ratios,” that is, a higher ratio of boys to girls than would occur in nature. Looking at the sex ratio at birth among U.S.-born children of Chinese, Korean, and Asian-Indian parents, they found that first-borns showed normal sex ratios at birth. But if the first child was a girl, the sex ratio jumped to 117, and if the first two children were girls, then the sex ratio jumped to 151. That is to say, for every 151 boys, there were only 100 hundred surviving girls. The rest had been eliminated.

Read more at :  http://afterabortion.org/2013/not-just-china-and-india-sex-selection-abortions-spreading-around-the-world/

Ireland Abortion Laws: What do you think of the case of Savita Halappanavar

The recent case of Savita Halappanavar, a dentist who apparently died from blood poisoning due, in part from, some say, because she was unable to get an abortion in Ireland has blown up the Pro Life/Pro Choice debate.

According to some reports, Halappanavar was already carrying a 17 week old baby who had died in her womb, and hospitals were still unable to perform the process to remove the fetus. Other reports say the baby still had a heartbeat at the time of the termination request.

In any case, it calls attention to the Pro Life/Pro Choice debate and the situation in Ireland where some pro choice groups complain that women must go to the UK to get abortions in the cases of rape, incest or other tragic circumstances. 

Whatever your stance, read on about this interesting and controversial case.. tell us what you think.

 (From the BC Catholic Paper)

Pro-lifers warn against snap judgments regarding Ireland abortion case

Thursday, 22 November 2012 08:06

Following the death of a pregnant women in Ireland who was denied an abortion, pro-life voices are advising careful examination of the circumstances rather than abortion advocacy.

Debate over Irish abortion law has been heated since news broke of Savita Halappanavar, a 17-week pregnant woman who died in a Galway hospital on Oct. 28.

Halappanavar's autopsy has revealed that she died of blood poisoning and E. coli ESBL, an antibiotic-resistant strain of the bacterium.



“Instead of jumping to the conclusions that Halappanavar needed an abortion and that Ireland needs to legalize the killing of the youngest of its kind, the reasonable approach would be to get to the bottom of what Halappanavar’s condition was and examine how it was, or was not, responded to,” wrote Stephanie Gray, executive director of the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform Nov. 20.



E. coli ESBL has recently spread throughout the U.K., causing urinary tract infections which can develop into blood poisoning.



“The presence of E. coli ESBL is particularly problematic if Halappanavar was given antibiotics to fight an infection that was resistant to those very antibiotics,” Gray said.

Both the Irish health department and University Hospital Galway are making independent inquiries into the circumstances of Halappanavar's death.

On Oct. 20, she went to the hospital suffering severe back pain and there found she was miscarrying. She then requested an abortion, but was told medical staff would not make such a move as long as her daughter had a heartbeat.



Prasa, the child, died four days later, and after another three days Savita succumbed to blood poisoning and E. coli ESBL.



“We have yet to hear from the hospital and the medical professionals involved as to what precisely happened, but with this report of her dying from E. coli ESBL one wonders how killing Halappanavar’s baby Prasa would have killed the E. coli,” Gray noted.


read more: http://bcc.rcav.org/canadian/2172-pro-lifers-warn-against-snap-judgments-regarding-ireland-abortion-case-


Note: The above article is from a Catholic newspaper. Other new sources may report the story differently.

China's One Child Policy: How Can This Be True?

China is well-known for its offensive One-child policy and here is just another testimony of that fact from a speaker at the Victims of Communism Memorial event held in Washington DC earlier this June. Continue reading below to hear more about the forced abortions and other disgraceful policies in China.

The Most Violent Policy Against Women and Girls in the World

Posted on June 25, 2012 by EI

“The coercive enforcement of China’s one-child policy causes more violence against women and girls than any other official policy on earth and any other official policy in the history of the world, ” according to an expert speaking at a memorial for victims of communism.
Reggie Littlejohn, president of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, spoke at the Victims of Communism Memorial in Washington, D.C. on June 12. She described a recent case — one of many reported cases — of forced abortion in China:

Feng Jianmei was beaten and dragged into a vehicle by a group of Family Planning Officials while her husband, Deng Jiyuan, was out working.  The officials asked for RMB 40,000 in fines from Feng Jianmei’s family.  When they did not receive the money, they forcibly aborted Feng at seven months, laying the body of her aborted baby next to her in the bed.
Feng Jianmei is not alone.  The Chinese Communist Party estimates that it has “prevented” 400 million lives through its brutal One Child Policy.  Every one of these 400 million snuffed out lives is a victim of communism.

Read more by clicking here...

South Dakota Screens Women for Coercion Prior to Abortions

South Dakota is taking an important step in preventing abortions beginning July 1st. Although abortions are still legal, they are holding abortion clinics responsible to screen women for psychological factors that may indicate that they are being coerced to have the abortion by someone else.
Please check out this link from After Abortion.org:

Pre-Abortion Screening Law to Take Effect in South Dakota

Posted on June 29, 2012 by EI

A federal court has dissolved an injunction against enforcement of a new law in South Dakota that requires abortion doctors to screen women for coercion and other factors that increase the risk of psychological complications after abortion.
Beginning July 1, physicians must screen women for coercion and other risk factors for psychological complications before scheduling an abortion.
The law contains elements of the Elliot Institute’s model legislation, which was the first in the nation to create civil liability for abortionists who fail to screen women for coercion and other risk factors.
“This is an important step forward in protecting the rights of women who are facing unwanted, unsafe, and unnecessary abortions,” said Dr. David Reardon, a leading researcher in the field of abortion complications and director of the Elliot Institute.

Read more...

The Right to Choose? An Argument about Rights

Whatever you think about the pro-choice camp, they don't want for cleverness. The idea that abortion is a woman's right is very powerful. We are a nation of rights.  They are prominent in our founding documents.  Our hearts beat a little more quickly when we think about liberty.  The mere suggestion of abortion as a right conjures an image of battle-weary women marching behind a flag, fife, and drum. 

Embrace the fiction for a moment and suppose abortion is a woman’s right. Instead of mere cleverness and an appalling Supreme Court decision, suppose it was actually listed in the Bill of Rights along with the other freedoms that we hold dear: speech, religion, assembly, press, etc. We would be basically where we are, except we would be spared the “safe, legal and rare” mantra spewed by pro-choice politicians when giving full-throated support to abortion and a deceptive nod to life.

Of course, a corollary to this right would have to be the right to actually have the baby.  They are two sides of the same coin.  Intrinsic in these rights is the notion that the unborn baby has no rights whatsoever.  It can’t, or they might interfere with the mother’s right to abort.  Also, the unborn babies must have no inherent value.  They can’t, or the father might have grounds for an objection which might interfere with the mother’s right to abort.

Not all countries are as free as us, though.  So, maybe some of the more outspoken abortion activists should visit a clinic in China.  There they can comfort one of the mothers undergoing a forced abortion.  As she wails hysterically for the child she’ll never know, they can pat her hand and explain that it’s no big deal.  It’s not infanticide or an atrocity of some kind.  The baby had no value.  Her government is just a little more restrictive, and this is simply one of the rights she doesn’t enjoy.

~ Rob

Abortion Laws Around the Globe...

Have you ever wondered what abortion laws look like around the world?  You can do a quick Google search or you can go to this site http://www.pregnantpause.org/lex/world02.jsp.  There’s a wealth of information, but it’s presented as a color-coded table which makes it very easy to read.

Brace yourself.  We are the most permissive, along with human rights abusers like China, Cuba, and North Korea.

Mark Steyn wrote an interesting but terrifying book a few years back called America Alone which discussed how many countries were in decline because they weren’t maintaining their populations.  From the chart, many of those countries also have some of the more permissive abortion laws.

Do you know what’s even more interesting, though?  Our recent enemies, Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya have some of the most restrictive abortion laws.  I don’t pretend to understand what’s driving these laws, certainly a combination of tradition, religion, and culture.  But how is it possible that countries that sponsor suicide bombers and terrorist acts against women and children can hold unborn babies in higher regard than we do?

 
~ Rob


image:License

Some rights reserved by Ben Ramsey