21 June 2004

TO:— New Zealand Minister of Health.

Your Ministry/Dept would be aware that 18 510 abortions were done in New Zealand in 2003.

Just about all abortions are excused under the words of Sec 187 of the Crimes Act

"serious danger to the mental health of the woman or girl”.

So I scrutinise the Report of the Royal Commission on Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion in New Zealand (dated March 1977).

It says (page 152) that for the year ended 30 Sept 76 total abortions for all hospitals were 4342.

Of that total 4166 were stated to be performed for psychiatric reasons (i.e. 96% on mental health grounds). So in just over 25 years (i.e. from 76 to 2003) total abortion numbers have more than quadrupled (from 4342 to 18 510).

The percentage of the 2003 figure (18 510) for mental health reasons has not yet been published but I assume it would be about the same as 2002 which was 98.6%.

That prompts me to ask myself:— why is there such a large number of “mental” abortions when one would have thought numbers would be reducing; because of our higher standard of living; maternity services; agencies; contraception freely available; etc.

Obviously those statistics should be of alarm to your Ministry. An individual such as I can speculate till the cows come home as to what has caused such a steep increase but the important point is unborn children are being killed under the existing system without any official (or unofficial) investigation into how and why this medical condition (of "serious danger to her mental health”) has mysteriously come into being and is being used as an excuse to kill the unborn.

Are NZ women healthy? i.e. mentally. And if they are before becoming pregnant then has their unborn child somehow, just by being in the womb, poisoned mum’s mind? If so, I wonder how they could have done that ?

I suppose Universities could put it under their wings to investigate (e.g. recently Auckland University researched pregnant women on the drug P).

The reality is those aborted babies, if born, would be citizens of this country, if allowed to keep growing in the womb, but, for reasons outside their control, they are killed, as if they are to blame for the serious deterioration their mums claim they suffer from ..... or will suffer from.

I pose the following questions:—

(1) Does your Ministry/Dept have any proof or direct evidence that a continued pregnancy has ever resulted in "serious danger to her mental health” ?

e.g. have women diagnosed as such been admitted to institutions for that reason ? (and gave birth).

If so, what proof or evidence do you have to offer me ?

 

( I ask that because I have heard judges (plural) in court cases say the abortion laws were enacted to protect the unborn. Therefore the admitting such a woman to nursing care of the state would protect both her and baby, which I would have thought is essentially a duty of your Ministry/Dept to administer ).

 

(2) If a woman had initially claimed the mental health prov­ision in the Crimes Act but then actually continued with her pregnancy what signs would art onlooker observe in ner pregnant state that she was indeed suffering ~serious danger to her mental health

For the year 2002 there were 17 380 abortions of which 98.6% were signed for under the serious danger to mental health escape clause.

That causes me to add the following questions:—

(3) Will your Ministry/Dept investigate why so many thousands of women can claim to be justified in using “serious danger to their mental health” such being said to be caused by their pregnancy? (that is, caused by the unborn) and so go ahead and use that “argument” as an excuse to abort.

(4) Will your Ministry/Dept set up (say) a Royal Commission or a Commission of Inquiry to find out why so many women are not set on the right path? i.e. somehow heal their minds so they go from being feeble minded (caused by that nuisance growig inside them) to having a healthy mind in a healthy body; and of course give birth.

(5) Could there be some sort of relationship BETWEEN your Ministry/Dept AND abortion providers so that women who claim to come into the category of the “mental health” provisions can be encouraged to go into hospital/institutional care i.e. to avoid having the abortion.

Lets reverse the reasoning. If every year it was found 17 000 to 18 000 women DIED because of their pregnancy there would be an outcry. And you would have to get your a into g. But here it's the women who sign the orders to kill.

Could I have your replies to my questions posed above ?

 

TABLE 13

NUMBER OF ABORTIONS IN 2002 ACCORDING TO THE GROUNDS ON WHICH AUTHORISATION WAS GIVEN

 

TABLE 14

NUMBER OF ABORTIONS IN 2002 ACCORDING TO PROCEDURE USED

Last Update: 4 December 2008

Top