New Zealand – Doctors sue to regain conscientious objection rights
Last year, New Zealand (NZ) passed abortion laws which decriminalized abortion up to 20 weeks and severely undermining conscientious objection for pro-life physicians. A physician refusing to do abortions should provide contact information of one nearby. The New Zealand Health Professionals Alliance went to NZ’s High Court arguing that the current abortion law makes pro-life physicians part of the “chain of causation that leads to taking a human life.” President of the NZ pro-abortion group equated conscientious objection to harassment which is gross mischaracterization. Physicians can decline to participate in abortion while maintaining respect for their patients. More
UK – Wales: 100% increase in ambulance calls since DIY abortion pills
A Freedom of Information request revealed a 100% increase in ambulance call-outs to women taking abortion pills at home. Originally sanctioned as a temporary measure to reduce transmission of Covid-19 during the pandemic in March 2020, the Welsh Government followed England in introducing DIY abortions. In December 2020 they began evaluating whether to end it. This information comes at the same time as evidence emerging of massive underreporting of complications arising from DIY abortions. In December 2020, Baroness Philippa Stroud, a prominent member of the House of Lords has called on the Government withdraw provision of ‘DIY’ home abortions given the potential for serious complications, coercion from abusive partners and inability to verify gestational age over the phone.
Wales: 100% increase in ambulance calls for women taking ‘DIY’ abortion pills at home | Lockdown regulation enabling at-home abortions putting women at risk, says MS | Prominent peer speaks out against ‘dangerous’ DIY home abortion scheme
USA – 20 State Attorneys General filed amicus briefs in support of journalist
Twenty state attorney’s general and several non-profit organizations have filed amicus briefs at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in support of Sandra Merritt and her colleague, David Daleiden. They argue that the lower court’s decision against Merritt and Daleiden will harm First Amendment journalism, which often uses undercover recordings to reveal crime and abuse. The lawsuit is with regards to their undercover investigation of Planned Parenthood’s trafficking of human baby body parts. The Attorneys General from 20 states argue in their brief that the trial court erred in excluding the public policy defense, because the videos were used by law enforcement authorities – including some of these amici themselves – to successfully investigate and prosecute wrongdoers. More
USA – Study shows legalized abortion does not improve maternal mortality
A new 10-year study highlighted by the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG) prove that Restrictions on abortion do not lead to an increase in women dying due to a lack of “safe” abortions. The study was published in the peer-reviewed British Medical Journal Open, which examined maternal mortality in 32 Mexican states over a 10-year period, between 2002 and 2011. The study acknowledging the pro-abortion argument that “the legal status of abortion … is a factor that influences maternal health.” They also acknowledged the common argument that restrictions on abortion are thought to lead to “clandestine, or illegal, or unsafe abortions” leading to an increase in maternal deaths.
But instead of discovering data in support of that argument, the study instead found that “states with less permissive abortion legislation exhibited lower MMR [maternal mortality rates]” (emphasis added) than those where abortion laws are more permissive. In other words, pro-life restrictions on abortion did not result in higher maternal mortality rates. To be clear, the Mexico study’s authors did not find evidence that abortion restrictions were the cause of better maternal outcomes. As AAPLOG’s tweet pointed out, “non-legislative factors (female literacy, birth weight, skilled attendance at birth, clean water, etc.) were leading causes” in the lower maternal mortality rates in the states with more abortion restrictions. The pro-abortion journal called Contraception attempted a rebuttal attacking the authors’ use of the underlying data while also engaging in ad hominem attacks by saying the Mexico study’s authors “have failed to respond to anti-abortion ‘junk science,’ which influences policy in the region,” Yet the critique did not hold up to scrutiny. After an examination of the data and counter-argument in the paper, major statistical error in key calculations of the rebuttal that undermined the published conclusions, were discovered. More