Do You Like This Story?
Bob Carr 380x213 News: Former NSW Premier to be Foreign Minister

Bob Carr

Prime Minister reveals former NSW premier will be Foreign Minister

In a shock announcement that ran contrary to the media narrative, Prime Minister Julia Gillard announced former New South Wales Premier Bob Carr would take over from Kevin Rudd and become Foreign Minister. He will fill the Senate spot left by the swift resignation of faction ‘heavy’ Mark Arbib who resigned after the leadership challenge earlier this week. Mr Carr said he was offered the opportunity for signing on for more public service “and I couldn’t say no”. He told reporters in Canberra that often you don’t choose the moment, it chooses you.

Ms Gillard said of the other moves:

“Craig Emerson will also take on an expanded role of Minister for Trade and Competitiveness, paying particular attention to increasing Australia’s international economic competitiveness, with a focus on the Australia in the Asian Century White Paper.

Brendan O’Connor moves into Cabinet to take the position of Minister for Small Business, as well as Minister for Housing and Homelessness. Small businesses are central to Australia’s economy and deserve Cabinet-level representation.

Attorney-General Nicola Roxon will take on the additional portfolio of Emergency Management, which as I have made clear I believe must be a Cabinet-level appointment.

Tony Burke will take on the additional role of Vice-President of the Executive Council.”

Kim Carr loses Manufacturing to Climate Change and Industry Minister Greg Combet but picks up Human Services.

For a full list, go here.
Hailey News: Former NSW Premier to be Foreign Minister

Sexy?

Model in ‘choke’ fashion spread

17-year-old model Hailey Clauson once sued a photographer for publishing images of her posed with her legs spread in a ‘blatantly salacious manner’. Mamamia covered that one at the time right here. She had asked for $28 million in damages. The case was later dropped. But Hailey is now featured in a new photo shoot by a different photographer Tyrone Lebon where she poses alongside a naked porn star and, in one shot, is being choked by a man’s hand. Jezebel writes: “It is strange, in light of that lawsuit and the barrage of publicity it received, that less than one year later Clauson, her agency Next, and her parents would permit her to participate in a shoot as sexualized as Pop‘s. To my eye, though, the most disturbing image from the story by far is the one which depicts Clauson being strangled by an unseen hand. For a magazine to sexualize violence against women in this way is frankly disgusting. This is not fashion, and this is not an appropriate way to depict any woman in a fashion spread — no matter her age. But to do this to a teenaged girl, when teenaged girls are among the groups most at risk of suffering violence at the hands of the men in their lives, is arguably even more offensive.”

Here are some of the other shots so you can judge for yourself. Warning: Some photos are Not Safe For Work [NSFW]:

17 year-old model Hailey Clauson poses in bizarre fashion spread for POP Magazine. (Photoshopped image).

Babies 380x253 News: Former NSW Premier to be Foreign Minister

.

Australian academics under fire for ‘after birth abortion’ article

Alberto Giubilini, from Monash University, and Francesca Minerva, from the University of Melbourne, say a foetus and a newborn are equivalent in their lack of a sense of their own life and aspiration and therefore killing them is the same as abortion. The pair were published in the Journal of Medical Ethics which has caused a storm of controversy in the United Kingdom. Fairfax reported:

About a third of infants with Down syndrome are not diagnosed prenatally, Drs Giubilini and Minerva say, and mothers of children with serious abnormalities should have the chance to end the child’s life after, as well as before, birth.

But this should also extend to healthy infants, the pair argue in the BMJ group’s Journal of Medical Ethics, because the interests of a mother who is unwilling to care for it outweigh a baby’s claims. They argued the baby was not harmed, providing death was pain free, by missing out on a life it could not conceptualise. The pair did not suggest when the babies became ‘full persons’ and should be protected.

Abbott’s paid parental leave policy will stay

Opposition leader Tony Abbott said his version of a paid parental leave would stay on as policy were he to win Government, despite the angst of many in the Coalition, largely because it would be paid for by a ‘modest’ tax on the 3200 richest companies. The scheme would cost $2.7 billion per year and provide 26 weeks’ paid leave on full pay capped at $76,000 (a person earning around $150,000 per annum, for instance, would get this full amount). Labor’s scheme offers 18 weeks’ on the minimum weekly wage of $570 and costs $260 million a year which would be paid for from general revenue and not a tax. Both schemes are available for either parent, depending on whoever is staying home with the baby.

“It’s fully funded by a modest levy on big business. This is a very good policy. It shows that we get it in a way the Government doesn’t,” Mr Abbott said of his scheme.

“I know there are some people in our party that have trouble with it. I had trouble with it 10 years ago too.”

Australian could face drugs death penalty in Bali

Edward Norman Myatt, 54, was arrested by Indonesian police on Monday afternoon following his detention at a Bali airport. Mr Myatt had flown in from Thailand and was taken aside for a drug testing. Authorities said the man was allegedly carrying a large quantity of drugs on his body, concealed inside tiny capsules. The man is alleged to have swallowed some of the capsules. He was held at police headquarters until he passed the suspected drugs. The Australian Consulate is attempting to gain access to the man to offer him assistance. Drug penalties in Indonesia range up to and include the death penalty for trafficking.

And the week in pics including a soldier homecoming kiss you can both ask and tell your friends about:

This Facebook photo of a marine returning home has gone viral. Marine Sgt. Brandon Morgan returned from Afghanistan to Hawaii last week and jumped into his partner Dalan Wells' arms.

And spare a thought for those affected by floods.

Flooding rains have hit two states and two territories causing evacuations, road closures and frayed nerves. Three quarters of New South Wales is affected by the deluge. Warragamba dam had around 130,000 megalitres along flow into it before 10pm yesterday and is expected to reach capacity for the first time in 14 years. Many are being evacuated, including in the township of Cooma where the rain is causing the most problems in the Cooma River. Floodwater has also cut roads and highways in the Northern Territory where the area has received more than one third its annual rainfall, in two days. Floods are also affecting properties near Shepparton in Victoria.

And how might the news media cover the Three Little Pigs?

This is a fun one for Friday. Britain’s Guardian newspaper has released a new and very clever advert imagining how a modern media organisation like itself might cover the story of the Three Little Pigs were it to happen today.

Comments

Comment Guidelines : Imagine you’re at a dinner party. Different opinions are welcome but keep it respectful or the host will show you the door. We have zero tolerance for any abuse of our writers, our editorial team or other commenters. So if you’re rude, mean-spirited, snarky, aggressive, defamatory or bitchy, your comment will be deleted (so will any replies to the original comment – so don’t bother arguing with rude people, instead just hit the ‘alert moderator’ button).
And if you’re offensive, you’ll be blacklisted and all your comments will go directly to spam. Remember what Fonzie was like? Cool. That’s how we’re going to be – cool. Have fun and thanks for adding to the conversation…

Use your profile to comment: Or, comment as a guest:
(Max file size is 150kb & jpeg's only - if you need help resizing go here »)

220 Comments so far

  1. Mel

    I’ve just read a comment that sums it up for me:

    Would you buy a used Carr from this woman?

    Warren Mundine put his hand up for the spot but was overlooked for a smooth talking spin doctor who has bad blood with NSW.

    Mundine would have given at least some credibility to this rabble but the mutual respect shared between him and Tony Abbott may have prohibited it.

    After all, Aboriginal rights is an industry that can’t be allowed to be made redundant by implementing policy that actually works. Solving the problem is not the goal, it’s giving the impression of caring, the billions to squander and keeping everyone on side except the poor little children who continue to be abused.

    Abbott and Mundine equals action. Labor equals theatrical apologies from a grandstanding egomaniac who used Aboriginals to showcase his ‘humanity’ to the UN.

    What ever happened to the ‘War Cabinet’ that he said would solve the problem? never heard of again – typical. Empty symbolism of moral supremacy.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  2. Sandi

    Can someone please explain to me HOW Bob Carr can be appointed to any portfolio? I thought that you had to have an electorate and be voted into a seat by the public before portfolios and ministerships were allocated by the ruling party? As far as I can tell, Bob Carr has neither an electorate nor is intending to contest a by-election for one before the next federal elections planned for 2013.
    If I am mistaken, can someone please clear this up for me?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • acanberramum

      When a sitting senator steps down (like Mark Arbib did last week), a ‘casual’ vacancy in the Senate arises. The party who held the senate seat (in this case, the ALP) gets to choose a replacement and have that person take over the role in the senate untilmthe end of the ex-senator’s term. Bob Carr has stepped into the vacancy left by Mark Arbib and will be a senator for NSW until Mark Arbib’s term would have expired (which I think will be at the next election). When that happens (presuming he wants to stay in parliament), Bob Carr will stand for re-election as a senator to NSW like any other representative.

      This is different to the situation which arises if a member of the House of Representatives steps down – in that situation, a by-election would be held in which the affected electorate has a chance to choose a new representative.

      So, Bob Carr can be given a portfolio because he is now a senator in the federal parliament representing the state of NSW.

      Hope that helps!

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Nulligravida

        acanberramum — thank you. ANd thank you Sandi for asking rather than getting all bend out of shape.

        In a number of fora, there were howls of misguided outrage over Carr’s appointment as though some kind of under-handed sleight of hand rather than a process that is Constitutionally codified (s15).

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  3. Not Again...

    I’m sorry… ‘contrary to the media narrative’…
    How about calling it like it is – the media reporting Julia Gillard’s latest round of lies!
    She denied flat out she was speaking to Bob Carr and then quickly backflipped.
    I find her relentless issues with the truth flabbergasting! She dodges, she sidesteps and when it serves her purpose, flat out lies.
    All the while blaming it on other people and hoping the electorate is to stupid to remember.
    Is she in control? If so, she should know what’s happening – particularly with the vital role of Foreign Minister. If she did know (well, of course she knew) that members of her party were sounding out Carr, why does she have to lie about it?
    It’s incredible and she is an embarrassment to the office of Prime Minister.
    As for Carr – well, some of us from NSW have long memories of his reign of disaster in here and then how he quickly jumped ship to live in NZ.
    He’s no Statesman and as with most of Gillard’s decisions – this is yet another major mistake.
    Oh please… bring on an election!!!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • CG

      HEAR HEAR! I’ve also had it up to here ^ with the lies and incompetency, the waste and Green overlords.

      Enough already!

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  4. essessesse

    The picture with the hand round the girl’s throat made me want to vomit.

    The Guardian advert is brilliant. I visit their website daily. Everyone should have a look.

    The ethics thing? Clearly the outraged posters are not familiar with the works of Peter Singer.

    More importantly, why the bloody hell is there nothing on TV tonight?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  5. Caro

    Why on earth would Julia Gillard appoint Bob Carr? He is the merchant of spin and the master of BS – maybe it’s a perfect fit!

    For ten years he hoodwinked NSW and was instrumental in seeing Labor kicked to the curb for the next decade or more.

    NSW won’t forget and it’s yet another sign that her judgment is seriously flawed.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  6. just post anything

    Good luck Bob Carr! Good move – but shame about the way it was orchestrated by Gillard.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  7. sweetsparrow

    A particularly interesting point in the paper “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?” is where it argues that a foetus and a newborn are “morally equivalent.”

    Quote: “The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus in the sense that both lack those properties that justify the attribution of a right to life to an individual.”

    Now I understand why people are claiming this is actually a Pro-Life argument in disguise.

    Are Drs Alberto Giubilini and Francesca MinervaIs right? Is a foetus morally equivalent to a newborn?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  8. Susan As Well

    There will come a time when societies can no longer avoid the task of deciding on the rightness or wrongness of abortion (and euthanasia, quality of life, disablement).

    Academic papers like this one are useful in opening up the discussion. At the moment, the pro-life and pro-choice views are too polarised to lead to any discussion whatsoever which can leave a void where we allow very good things to happen as well as very bad things to happen and all the degrees of human behaviour in the good/bad spectrum.

    I see how illogical the idea of pre-term life not having the same potential as post-term life is.

    Taking the defining comment from the paper that people in early life, either pre- or post-term, have no goals, aspirations or awareness of themselves therefore they are only potential people and can be (potentially?) killed leaves me feeling a tad uncomfortable.

    At 51 years of age, I still sometimes go through phases where I don’t know my goals and aspirations and am entirely unaware of myself and where my life is going until time, circumstances, life, etc lead me onto something else. But, life is still available to me so that my “potential” can become my reality.

    I have also witnessed the smiles, the tears, the confusion, the achievements, the daily functioning of severely disabled children and can only say that those expressions are the same as my own but a different way of experiencing life. But, it’s still life.

    I sometimes think that the best way to decide it for myself is to think that once a life is taken, can it be given back? Much the same reasoning that lies behind the arguing against the death penalty and the belief that life is a gift from … who knows? Not us, as we are unable to breathe life into a dead person. Nor do we have crystal balls to even anticipate what potential a person’s life may hold.

    Caitlin Moran’s latest novel (which I really loved) argues that women are the givers of life and therefore can determine whether a pregnancy continues sounds quite reasonable on the face of it. I disagree though because women do not “give” life, they find themselves with a life having already been granted to a potential person within which is not the same thing as giving life.

    It’s a challenge but I think, whether we want to or not, the social and legal ramifications which come out of abortion issues, are going to lead us to making clear distinctions about the rightness and wrongness of what we do. Discussion is good. I found the assertions of the authors of this paper chilled me to my bones but despite that, or even because of it, we need to keep the discussion going.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Anonymous

      What a slippery slope!! It’s all ( abortion ) bad! Shock horror.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Susan As Well

        Not exactly the type of comment to keep a discussion open …

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • CG

          Susan, I’m the same age and of the same mind. Well said.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
  9. Rick Morton

    Very chuffed with the choice of Bob Carr. Clever man.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • CG

      He certainly is, Rick. He stuffed NSW and now has the chance to aid in stuffing the rest of the country.

      Let’s all take a moment and look at Carr’s stellar ‘record’:

      He let thug unions run amok in NSW and ran services into the ground. He openly mocked the US.

      He turned a blind eye to massive ALP corruption in both State and Local government and then resigned before it all hit the fan.

      Too clever by half but those in NSW with memories longer than goldfish will remember.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  10. Bob Carr is a brilliant choice, but you gotta wonder at how Gillard has handled the media this week…again, what was she thinking?

    Not a Rudd fan, but thought he did OK as FM…but Bob Carr could be extraordinary!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • monique

      I think Bob Carr is a great choice but why did Gillard have to keep lying to the media? She kept saying she hadn’t spoken to him or offered him the position and I get that she didn’t want to say anything until it was confirmed but why couldn’t she have simply said “I won’t be commenting on that” and left it at that? She’s doing herself disservice by lying to the media.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • just jay

        Except that she only asked him yesterday morning.

        I think it’s a clear example of the media asserting THEIR narrative (and therefore their agenda) onto the political scene. The last few days have been a very sordid beat up of the PM because that is the EASY story to write and fits in with their narrative.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • D

          I think it is further proof of what Wayne Swan penned in his essay on the media being driven by the powerful. The media has lost my confidence because they believe they are more powerful than the politicians and that they should control the agenda I believe we should all be concerned by the current level of bias in Australia’s media.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
          • Meri

            Never has bias been more visible. This Government is just SO bad that anyone still attempting to prop them up can be seen for what they are – Labor stooges.

            And so says 70% of the electorate. Even the media army can’t protect them anymore.

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
            • D

              Meri, you obviously live in a delusional state if you believe the media bias in this country is in favour of the left of politics.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
    • An Idle Dad

      “Whatever else people might say about Bob Carr’s appointment, no-one can deny his depth of knowledge of the portfolio”

      That tweet is from Barry O’Farrell. A Liberal Politician saying something nice about a Feberal Labor pollie? BOF is all class.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  11. acanberramum

    Bob Carr is in!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  12. sweetsparrow

    Abortion (noun): the removal of an embryo or fetus from the uterus in order to end a pregnancy.

    Post Birth Abortion (?): non existent term used to replace “infanticide.”

    Infanticide (noun): 1.The crime of killing a child within a year of birth. 2.The practice in some societies of killing unwanted children soon after birth.

    Infanticide is what the paper is proposing. Infanticide of any unwanted baby, disabled or healthy, for any reason the parents see fit.

    Quote from: “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?”:

    “Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus’ health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.”

    The paper cannot merely be dismissed as “a hypothetical article written by a couple of students” as some have argued because :

    (a) It has been published in a well respected medical journal by ethicists
    working in Australian universities.

    (b) Legal precedent for infanticide exists in the Netherlands under The Groningen Protocol therefore it is no longer a hypothetical proposition.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • An Idle Dad

      Oh a dictionary! Claps!

      The Groningen Protocol has nothing to do with ending the lives of healthy babies. The idea is ludicrious.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • sweetsparrow

        The paper discusses the morality of killing both healthy and disabled infants therefore the Groningen precedent is relevant. The defintions highlight the ridiculous use of the invented term “post birth abortion”.

        PS Thank you for the respectful non-rude dinner party reply Fonzie. Very cool.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • An Idle Dad

          You suggest the article – which states healthy babies can be killed at their mother’s wishes – is not hypothetical and link it to the Netherland’s protocol.

          I was saying the protocol allows nothing of the sort.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
  13. alyssakt

    Why is everyone getting all excited by this baby story? It’s hard enough for a woman to get a legal abortion in Australia, let alone all of the laws against stem cell research, and the laws against euthanasia.

    Do you REALLY think there’s any chance whatsoever that live birth terminations would ever be allowed. EVER?

    Get real.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • hayleyjane90

      That’s a very valid point!

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • missamoo

      Perhaps not but you have to wonder when some one uses this as a way to try to make abortion illegal again. Not saying they will but it’s such an outrageous thought process that for those who wish to see it that way will argue and legislate in such a way that it may well scoop abortion back up into a net or infanticide. I hope you are right but i guess i have watched the law makers do some extraordinarily bad things in the name of fixing one problem. Well that was the first thing i thought when i saw it, totally hope i am wrong

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Anonymous

      Sorry. But they already do!! Late term abortion. Hospitals have “dying ” rooms for those aborted alive !!

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • alyssakt

        Thanks for your alarmist propaganda.

        Early term abortion is still ILLEGAL in many states of Australia, but perhaps not enforced.

        Doctors do not perform late term abortions unless the mother’s life is at risk.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • TashD

          Sorry to contradict you, but there are some late terminations of pregnancy that are made for social reasons or due to possible congenital anomalies – these could be mid-trimester procedures (so 20-23 weeks) where doctors have potentially misled others about the gestation (or really not have known?) and while not at age of viability the baby nonetheless survives the delivery and then dies some hours later and is classified as a neonatal death. It does happen. I am very much pro-choice, so have not made this statement as a means of “alarmist propaganda” but just to let people know that it does happen.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
          • alyssakt

            Thank you Tash. I presume you weren’t behind the original comment, because yours was written without the alarmist tone :)

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
  14. Ella

    this is unbelievable.
    i personally am against all abortion but i do understand why people consider some short term abortions to be important and i know that is a part of our society that will not change. and then there was the huge battle to legalize late term abortion, and even then, whilst personalliy against it i accept and understand there are certain cases where a woman considers it important for her.
    but LIVING BREATHING BABIES!?? that is NOT abortion, that is MURDER!
    im sorry to sound so dramatic but honestly, abortion is always going to be one of those morally grey areas, when is it ok blah blah blah. but i REALLY didnt think there would ever be an argument as to whether we should be able to abort living babies.
    i literally feel sick in my stomach just thinking about it.
    and if not here where may i ask WILL we draw a line? what about a particularly difficult 1 year old that never stops crying? or a 5 year old that develops a disease? how is this different to animals being ‘put-down’ at the vet?! except this isnt the family dog, these are humans! living breathing babies with immeasurable potential and purpose. it is not our place to judge to what extent their purpose or potential is because of whatever disease or disorder. once a child is born it must have 100% the same living rights as every other human being on this planet.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Noelle

      There’s no suggestion that this become legal. And I’m 99% sure it never would be.

      It’s a journal article on medical ethics. They too, are asking, ‘where do we draw the line?’

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Guest21

        Here here, rational comment! I suggest to anyone that if you want to know what they are saying that you read the actual journal article. It is a very valid question, when is life, a life? It is a medical ethics journal, I would think exploring the ethics of when a life has human rights is an extremely important!

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
      • Ella

        Noelle, you are absolutely right. i have very little concern that this will ever become law, just outraged (and probably a little too worked up!) at the very notion and debating the arguments for such an idea

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  15. Bananna

    Anyone else think that the article stating that we should tolerate terminhating newborns is a rearguard action by the pro-life/anti-abortion rally?

    Basically its lending weight to the argument that there’s no difference between abortion and infanticide. And by extension if you’re against the latter you can’t maintain a pro-choice argument for the former?

    The editor claimed that if others made a similarly refined case for recriminalising abortion he would also publish that. What’s the point? Without going as far, this article is clearly directed at recriminalising abortion. The counter view would surely be a refined case distinguishing between abortion and infanticide?

    Or perhaps it’s just another case where science and politics make uncomfortable bedfellows.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • sweetsparrow

      The Journal of Medical Ethics is not a Pro-Life publication. Reading the abstract of the paper by Drs Giubilini and Minerva it is clear they do not hold a pro-life stance either.

      Abstract from “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?”: “Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus’ health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.”

      How could this then be a pro-life action?

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  16. JosieY

    I can’t go past the ideas of killing a baby. For any reason. I am as pro choice as they come but once that child is out of it’s mothers body it is a human being – THOU SHALT NOT KILL!

    Edit: Ok, I’m breathing again now. I’ve read a little more and it IS a discussion paper. No one is ACTUALLY suggesting killing babies.

    It’s interesting because I’ve worked with extremely premme children who have a terrible quality of life – sometimes the parents wish they they had used a DNR order. Is that any different? (Yes, I know it is, just discussing!)

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • LellaK

      I agree – without being jumped on please I find the reasoning that they put forward interesting (I’m not agreeing – I’m more intrigued though
      Scientifically It is an interesting argument – morally I could not fathom it.

      But then i have never had a child with severe deformities or disabilities. Not saying its a reason but along with Josie I wonder how many parents are torn with what way to go

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Guest21

      Read the actual article they discuss that very point. We abort babies because of diseases, what if it was missed? Why then can’t we terminated the life of a sick infant?

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  17. Anonymous

    I wanted a boy not another girl …

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  18. Eternal Caterpillar

    How about the law passed in the Senate yesterday permitting the contraceptive pill to be resupplied from the pharmacist without having to go to the GP first?

    http://www.news.com.au/national/law-allows-women-to-see-pharmacist-for-birth-control-pill-supplies/story-e6frfkw9-1226286363622

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Rick Morton

      I updated yesterday’s news with that one. Good news!

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Eternal Caterpillar

        You’re not bad, Rick. That was late afternoon. What are we going to do when you take holidays? Surely you’re due some soon?

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Rick Morton

          You’ll find out at the end of March! I’m going home tonight but only for the weekend :P

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
  19. Grace

    Nice move including the emotive picture of newborns in a nursery. Not trying to sway the opinion of the readership at all, are you?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Rick Morton

      Nope. Just choosing a picture that suits the bloomin’ article. I was hardly going to put a picture of hummingbird in there, was I?

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • MissT

        Well I think you should.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
      • Grace

        Newborn babies don’t actually come out looking that cute! That’s all I’m saying.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Anonymous

          Some come out super cute

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
        • JosieY

          Mine did!

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
        • e.t.

          Let’s just kill the ones who aren’t cute then. They don’t deserve to make it to their first birthday – the ugly brats.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
          • MJ

            e.t aaaall babies are cute! They make babies cute so you don’t totally lose your sanity in that first year – when the sleep deprivation and constant pooping and crying overwhelms you, you see their pudgy cute little faces and it’s all worth it.

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
          • Kathy

            Yes but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. So how are we going to decide on the cute ones?

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
      • Grace

        Silly me for trying to have a discussion about bias and the use of imagery in the media.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Anonymous

          I think this is a poor example of that.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
        • Jay

          I will discuss it with you. The pic seems reasonable enough to me. It’s a pic of ordinary newborns…it’s not Anne Geddes or anything. What image would you have chosen? What would be a ‘neutral’ image in your opinion?

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
    • MJ

      ummm that’s a new born baby.. they are suggesting the murder of new born babies.. that is literally what the article is about.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  20. Bookie

    The article on post-birth abortion makes some interesting arguments. It certainly made me think hard about my own pro-choice stance.

    In the end I’ve realised that I’m pro-choice because I firmly believe that women should have the right to make decisions that affect their own bodies. Pregnancy and labour are significant, physically stressing processes. No woman should be forced to go through that against her will. However, post-birth abortion is a decision that is not about the woman’s control over her own body as she has already gone through pregancy and labour. There are other options available at that stage i.e. adoption or state care. The woman would be making a decision that has no bearing on her control of her own body.

    That’s where I’ve drawn the line. I’m sure others will draw their own.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • MissT

      Yes, I think you’ve got it right.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • jackie

      Agree, I was under the impression that the paper was more of a discussion piece not suggestion for policy.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • LellaK

      I should have read this before I commented above – I like how you have put this

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Guest21

      If you read the actual article you will note they make the argument that a post birth abortion could be justified by exactly the justification you use to justify abortion. Why transfer the “burden” to someone else? They go through why adoption ect is not an option. Basically society seems to agree that the right of a woman to control her body is paramount and the rights of a child do not exist – when do HUMAN rights start? That is what they debate.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  21. Anonymous

    And in other news, I failed to get tickets to One Direction for the kids. Damn site kept timing out. By the time I finally got through they were all sold out.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Sarah

      Same here! My sister and her friends will be very disappointed indeed.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  22. Be Aware

    Firstly, let me say that I have faced the very real prospect of abortion head on as a teenager and again in my 40′s and I could write pages on the pros and cons but my comment here is simply to give those women who are interested a bit of background info on who is pushing the militant stand on abortion. In all honesty, it is a life altering thing for a woman to do and that message is being blocked from getting through to young women by organisations like Emily’s List who forbid any discussion on it.

    Militant feminists, Emily’s List and the power base they’ve established in the Labor Party are the keepers of the crypt and howl down anyone who is not ‘of the faith.’ As a woman and mother of daughters I want woman to be aware of where this pressure is coming from and to not treat abortions as flippantly as we are being told to. As I’ve said, I’ve been there and it’s not a great place. There are alternatives IF and only IF you choose them. No judging – just saying. Educate yourselves and don’t be herded.

    This is what Emily’s List say on their website:

    We believe women must have control over their own bodies and choices in their lives. Reproductive Freedom empowers women and men to choose if, when and how to begin the important journey into parenthood, without fear of discrimination, coercion or violence.

    This is from a quick google – Life Network Australia – Wednesday, August 17, 2011

    Emily’s List holds up abortion as a trophy of women’s reproductive rights, espouses the rhetoric of “choice” and poses as an organisation fighting for equality of women. At first glance, why wouldn’t any company jump at the opportunity to sponsor them?

    If, however, you look a little more closely, you may just see something more sinister.

    It was Emily List’s, Candy Broad, that initially tabled an abortion Bill that would legalise abortion up until birth – but it was put aside until after a federal election.

    Emily List’s Maxine Morand then retabled it. It was her Emily’s List colleagues, Joan Kirner, Jacinta Allan (Bendigo East) and others that argued passionately in support of the Bill.

    When challenged on her support of the legislation, during the last Victorian election, Ms Allan refused to comment. Her constituents flatly refused to believe that she would have supported abortion up until birth. With the protection of her local Bendigo newspaper, she remains unaccountable.
    During the abortion debate in Parliament, images of aborted babies were viewed. Abortion survivor, Gianna Jessen, gave her amazing story of surviving an abortion and asked “Where were my rights as a female?”
    But Emily’s List MPs remained determined.

    Peter Kavanagh, former Member of the Democratic Labour Party, described how he was told by some ALP MPs that although they did not want to support the Bill, they were told (by the ALP) that they would not be endorsed for reselection if they did not – so much for a conscience vote!
    Former ALP Member for Bendigo West, Bob Cameron, voted against the Bill. He has since been replaced by Emily List’s Maree Edwards.
    The legislation was passed and numerous amendments were put forward – some 60, in fact. It was the rejection of these amendments that gives us a look into what Emily’s List really stands for.

    Given they had succeeded in legalising abortion in Victoria, one would think that a political organisation that champions the rights of women would have supported the following amendments: Parental consent for girls under 18 years (parental consent is required for piercings); mandatory reporting of suspected sexual abuse; support/counselling for women considering abortion; a “cooling off period” for women considering late term abortion. But no – each Emily’s List Member of Parliament voted each of these amendments down.

    Emily Listers also opposed: The banning of partial birth abortions (banned in the U.S); provision of medical care for aborted babies born alive; anaesthetic for babies aborted late term; and limitting abortion availability to 20 or 24 weeks (babies can survive outside the womb at this stage).
    In espousing to be “pro choice”, there is no evidence of Emily’s List having any interest in any “choice” other than abortion. Where do they show such determination and passion for adoption? Are they fighting to have red tape surrounding adoption cut?

    Where are they lobbying for pregnancy support centres? Parenting classes?

    It is blaringly obvious that Emily’s List is “pro choice” alright…as long as that “choice” is abortion!

    The champagne flowed for those Emily Listers who had secured their ultimate “trophy”, but for the women, families and babies of Victoria and Australia, it was a very sad day. Legal protection for the unborn and also for women had been stripped.

    End of quote.

    THIS is where the Chinese whispers of hate against Tony Abbott come from. THIS is why he is described as DANGEROUS.

    They condemn anyone who has the unmitigated gall to think that abortion is not a badge of honour to be worn lightly and without consequence or who thinks that women are now being railroaded into abortions without being shown that there are alternatives IF they wish to choose them.

    This is another link that might interest some.
    http://www.endeavourforum.org.au/newsweekly_articles/emily.html

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Faybian

      While I agree that legislation should be altered with regards to adoption, I urge you to research more on the viability of a 20-24 week old foetus. It is almost unheard of for someone to survive if born at that age and even if they did, they would be very likely to have significant disabilities.
      Clearly you don’t like Emily’s list. What about the Federal women’s committee?

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Katherine

      For those interested here’s a link to Emily’s List outlining what they actually believe in: http://www.emilyslist.org.au/about-us/what-we-believe-in

      Candy Broad’s bill was to remove abortion from the Crimes Act and was supported by the Royal College of Australian and New Zealand Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. You can read about it here: http://www.abc.net.au/stateline/vic/content/2006/s1984246.htm

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Be Aware

        Good, lets get the information out there so that women are informed. I’m sick of the 10 second information grab with no behind the scenes info. As I’ve said, I’m both pro AND anti (for numerous reasons) and I’m not affiliated with either party or organisation. I’m just a mum who ‘felt’ that there was more to the vilification of TA and went looking for the answers.

        FACT is, to have the backing of Emily’s List you must be pro-abortion up till birth. If you don’t then you’re cut.

        There is no way anyone would allow the return of backyard abortions or the level of infanticide that existed and for Emily’s List and lazy journalists to continue to imply that that is Tony Abbott’s agenda is akin to brain washing women.

        http://www.endeavourforum.org.au/Newsletters/2010/federalelection.html

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Lulu

          “FACT is, to have the backing of Emily’s List you must be pro-abortion up till birth. If you don’t then you’re cut.”

          Proof?

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
      • rainbow

        thank-you!

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
    • B

      I have never had an abortion. I am not a member of Emily’s list. In fact, am not active at all in politics, except for having an opinion. I vehemently DO NOT see abortion as a badge of honour in ANY way.
      Please do not suggest that those of us who are pro-choice are influenced by this political stance. Of my friends who have had abortions and for the teenage girls I see at school who choose this option, they are counselled on this decision and NONE, not one, of them have taken it lightly and realise they have to live with their decision afterwards. Some of them (7 in the last 2 years) have decided to keep their children. It’s about choice.
      Tony Abbott is described as dangerous because he made health decisions based on his religious beliefs rather than medical advice. THAT is dangerous. We live in a country with a secular parliament and a leader who cannot make secular decisions is a problem.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Be Aware

        I didn’t suggest that women who are pro-choice see abortion as a badge of honour. I’m pro-choice. I said the level of militancy in Emily’s List and the militant feminists is attempting to portray it as so.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Mel

          I’m guessing you are a teacher, B? … am I reading this correctly …. 7 school girls in the last two years have kept their babies. How many have terminated? Is this all in one school? How many girls have fallen pregnant in the last two years?

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
          • Anonymous

            I really hope she counsels girls in many schools!

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
          • B

            To answer your question Mel, I have no idea how many have had abortions (and yes, I assume the numbers of abortions is higher than those who have kept them). I only know the number of girls who have had children because staff find these things out (and I’ve taught 3 of them myself). One of the girls is due 4 days after me (in a couple of weeks).
            These girls receive such a balanced presentation from our school nurse who is truly wonderful and doesn’t judge. I find it offensive to think that anyone can think our girls (who we try to look after as much as we can) are being ‘herded’ one way or the other. They are in no way misled, particularly regarding the mental health issues that can arise afterwards.
            To think that this is why Tony Abbott has the perception of being ‘dangerous’ is ridiculous. If Tony Abbott knew ANYTHING about losing a baby or ending it’s life he would know that a D&C is FAR, FAR, FAR easier and less traumatic than having a miscarriage or abortion complete itself at home.

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
    • trixie melodian

      This argument sounds very close to a conspiracy theory…

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Be Aware

        Then look into it for yourself. I don’t care what your end opinion is, as long as you have the info to start looking.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
    • Nulligravida

      Ah, Endeavour Forum! That far right lobby group led by Babbette Francis set up to counter feminism, to “defend the unborn” and the “traditional family”.

      In other words, a homophobic and slut-shaming organisation who want women back in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant. Or ELSE!

      Yeah, they will be unbiased. NOT.

      Ok, some people believe that an invisible sky fairy told them that their rude bits are not for fun but are for making babies only. Good for them. BUT when they start getting all angry and envious because they are dieting and everyone else is eating do-nuts is when the gloves come off.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  23. Jess88

    I think people are reading too much into the “healthy baby” side of the article. I don’t believe the academics would morally be ok with terminating a healthy baby. I think for the sake of the paper they’ve just included all aspects of newborns. I’m sure if something like this became legal it would only be in extreme circumstances like quality of life for the baby and I don’t think it’s a decision any parent would make lightly. Im pro choice and I can see where the academics are coming from in regards to disabled babies but not healthy ones.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Shannon

      Exactly. People who genuinely don’t want a baby, healthy or otherwise, would deal with it sooner I’d imagine.

      But, for the sake of argument, it is pretty valid to say that if the post-birth termination were to occur, it wouldn’t be substantively different to termination in utero when considering “personhood” etc. Theoretically and hypothetically that’s a pretty sound argument, to me. But once you add human emotion etc. to it it’s all thrown to hell, as is to be expected.

      Where it applies to unhealthy babies is (in my opinion) where it is truly up for debate and consideration of practical implications and I think that discussion is getting largely ignored. Instead of talking about the merits of *that* argument, people focus on being appalled that a couple of academics talk about hypothetically terminating healthy newborns. (And when I say ‘people’, I don’t mean just on MM)

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • sweetsparrow

      Quote from “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?”:

      “If criteria such as the costs (social, psychological, economic) for the potential parents are good enough reasons for having an abortion even when the fetus is healthy, if the moral status of the newborn is the same as that of the infant and if neither has any moral value by virtue of being a potential person, then the same reasons which justify abortion should also justify the killing of the potential person when it is at the stage of a newborn.”

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Jess88

        Yes, I read the whole thesis, thanks sweetsparrow and I stand by my original comment that people are focusing solely on that one aspect of the article and being outraged instead of seeing it for what it is: a thesis designed to put us out of our comfort zone and bring about discussion.

        The reality is that abortion isn’t an attempt to deny the humanity of a fetus – it’s just a way of dealing with a conflict of rights between the woman and the unborn baby. Should that woman’s rights and life be completely subject to the rights of the unborn baby? Some people say yes, some people say no. This article just takes it that one step further.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  24. jingwen

    Honestly? I think everyone has their knickers in a knot.

    Two STUDENTS wrote a paper. They study ethics and philosophy – e.g. pretty much the two most “talk a lot and never do anything” subjects you can have (no offence to ethics or philosophy students!). They’re not government representatives. They’re not drafting any bills, or making their THEORIES into law.

    We need to be more worried about the fact that 41% of people during an election in the US voted for “personhood” for fetuses in an effort to make abortion and other things completely illegal. Or that Virginia passed that law where women are essentially having foreign objects placed in their vagina before they can get an abortion in an attempt to emotionally guilt them out of their choice.

    THAT’S what we need to worry about – actual politicians and actual actions that take away a woman’s right to choose. Not two postgraduate students theorising about a controversial topic to get their papers recognised in the wider non-academic community.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Katherine

      Yes, this. Total agreement.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Bananna

      I take your point and agree those issues are the serious concern and where our attention should be focussed.

      But … just incidentally, I got the giggles when you told ethics and philsophy students not to be offended that you think they “talk a lot and never do anything”. If I were an ethics or philosophy student I think I’d be offenced despite your disclaimer!

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • jingwen

        Point taken as well. :P

        I should add a disclaimer – I think ethics and philosophy studies/topics/discussions are VERY important for helping the community at large discuss morally-ambiguous topics. But we also need to recognise that on the whole, it’s just discussion that’s personally enriching but doesn’t get actioned.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
    • sweetsparrow

      The killing of infants is no longer a hypothetical discussion among students. It is legal in the Netherlands under The Groningen Protocol.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • jingwen

        And it happens only after widespread medical and personal consultation to end hopeless suffering that could not be alleviated. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15702738

        I’m okay with that. Keeping someone alive through endless suffering isn’t valuing life. It’s selfishness that doesn’t consider what’s best for the individual.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
      • trixie melodian

        @sweetsparrow, the euthanasia of babies under the Groningen Protocol can only occur when there are four criteria met:

        The presence of hopeless and unbearable suffering
        The consent of the parents to termination of life
        Medical consultation having taken place
        Careful execution of the termination

        Would you really condemn a baby to “hopeless and unbearable suffering”? The idea of extending the option of euthanasia to babies who face a life of nothing but uncomprehending pain simply because they are unable to provide consent as an adult can (their parents provide the consent in this situation) is probably the most humane thing I can think of.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  25. Z

    what the fuck is wrong with these people?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Kris2040

      Nothing. They wrote a discussion paper about a topic and looked at it from different angles. What’s wrong with that?

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  26. KAteateight

    My thoughts aren’t completely formed on abortion, but I am beginning to think that life should begin when the baby is no longer dependent on the mother’s body for survival (i.e. another person could easily take over the care). When something is dependent on another living being, then the being providing that living, should be able to decide whether or not to stop. In my opinion, a woman is NOT simply a vessel for another life – she is more than that.

    Using this ‘independence’ criteria, then I would disagree with post-birth abortion (or euthanasia). Even though I agree with euthanasia in general, that involves deciding for yourself.

    Regarding this story – it is an academic thesis – I don’t know if those scientists would actually do it themselves – it is a philosophical and medical debate they are talking about.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  27. Lulu

    For all the anti-abortion people who are horrified by the idea of terminating newborns – that is *how it was done* before medically safe abortion. And sometimes happens. Just saying.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Anonymous

      Infantcide has always been around. There was an article recently about women in other countries killing their newborn girls in hopes of a boy next time.
      But does the fact that it’s always been around doesn’t chance the morality of it does it?

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Lulu

        I made that comment because from the way some anti-choice people speak, it’s as if making abortion illegal would solve everything – as if the time before abortion was all rainbows & fluffy bunnies. And it wasn’t. Removing abortion = more newborns killed.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  28. Margs

    I love the egg shortage story out of France. Think Lana would like it.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  29. acanberramum

    So, I went looking for typos this morning, but couldn’t find any, so I guess I’ll have to comment on an article instead. And what a doozy it is.

    I think the ethics article highlights an obvious point that we (maybe just I, but I suspect not) often forget – that, in any moral debate, whatever side you are on, there is always a line. Sometimes that line feels clear cut to you, sometimes it looks fuzzy to everyone else. But it is important to remember that everybody has a line (and hope that your line is on the right side of the law).

    For the record, I am pro-choice and I am entirely comfortable with that being on the ‘right’ (I’m sure there is a better word) side of my line. The possibilities raised in the ethics article, sit on the ‘wrong’ (again, sure there is a better word) side of my line. If I accept that the only criterion for determining what is right and wrong on this issue was whether a newborn is a ‘potential person’, and if they are correct in their characterisation of a newborn as a ‘potential person’, then I am sure that my reasons for being OK with abortion, but not OK with this would sound inconsistent, and probably contradictory. I am comfortable with that.

    If the reporting of the article is correct, it also seems that the researchers gloss over some important issues including the health of the newborn, consent (whose and how much is enough) and intent (can you murder a ‘potential person?). Plus, they seem to have completely evaded the issue of when a ‘potential person’ becomes an actual person.

    I am off to track down the article and hope it’s not too scientific for me to understand. I think this will be bouncing around my head for a while.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  30. Jenna

    Whilst I can see where the scientists are coming from ie. a newborn can’t decide it wants to be a fireman when it grows up, all it makes me think is they need to stop looking through microscopes and visit the labour ward to witness the miracle of life.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • shanny

      i so agree. women should have a right to choose re abortion, but post birth abortion is horrifying.
      last night i bawled looking at footage of the babies in pompeii. stupid? perhaps. i thought of their beautiful innocence and their lives ended in a flash.
      newborns are a precious gift, and i don’t think any mum in a healthy frame of mind could consider killing a healthy baby. it doesn’t matter if they’re ‘not aware’; the person doing the killing IS.
      i know they’re ethicists and they’re just shooting the shit, so to speak, but babies aren’t animals. there is no ‘putting them down humanely’. it’s just killing a human.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  31. Kate C

    I’m a bit disappointed Mama mia has baited with this headline. I am pro-choice and will admit this openly but I have been painted with the brush of thinking that all abortion, any abortion, lots of abortion is a-okay! It’s like when people bring attention of cases of extremists to represent all people from a particular religion.

    I am pro-choice because women will get abortions if they are legal or not, so it’s in the best interest for them to be legal, because I don’t believe that if I was against abortion I should stop some person from getting abortion, because you should not be forced to have a baby against your will.

    So no, you shouldn’t be able to kill your alive child but put it up for adoption and watch all those people who are anti-abortion fight to adopt your child.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Margs

      Totally agree Kate C. If you read the article on the Age website it is reported much much better than on here where it has been quite selective in reporting. Not great journalism Mamamia.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Rick Morton

      All headlines are bait. They summarise an article. The authors made the point, so not sure how you think it’s a poor representation of the piece.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Kate C

        It’s simply that I read the headline, knew it was ridiculous then did some more research than your summary and realised it was an article in regards to ethics. Then I thought “great, here come the army of commenters that lump pro choice with this frame of mind”.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Rick Morton

          It was published in an ethics journal. I thought that much was obvious. Nevertheless, they intended for a discussion of the subject matter and that is what is happening.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
  32. Definitely anon

    I suspect the post birth abortion article may be a hoax designed to create discussion, But if so, it’s a valid point. Some (but not all) pro choicers advocate abortion up to birth in a variety of circumstances – ‘as early as possible, as late as necessary’. If it’s OK to abort 1 minute before birth why not 1 minute after? There is essentially no difference between the two cases in terms of the baby/fetus’s ability to survive and see both cases as infanticide. Personally I think post viability abortion (huge question about when that is) should be either banned entirely or restricted to when there is an overwhelming risk to physical health for the mother. Should also add though that as far as I am aware hardly any late term abortions pass this test but they are a very small minority of terminations.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  33. MaryV

    Love the kissing photo.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • PixiMum

      Me too! It’s just joyous! :) Makes me break out in big smiles :)

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  34. No e in Tracy

    To me the academics seem to be saying that there is little difference between terminating a foetus before birth and a baby after birth. I think they are making an important point – if as a society we find it acceptable to terminate a foetus, why not a newborn? This is really a euthanasia discussion, complicated by a parent making the choice, rather than the individual, so this paper also speaks to the issue of parental rights vs the rights of the child. Regardless of what side of the debate you are on, having the debate is important and I don’t think these academics should be vilified for raising the issue. I don’t know what my opinion is – and i don’t think I could know unless i was actually put in the position to have to make a decision, however I’m not afraid to think about the issue or to have it debated.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Kate

      Euthanasia discussion?? Euthanasia can be defined as ‘the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit’ (http://www.euthanasia.com/definitions.html). Non-voluntary euthanasia is ‘when the person who is killed made no request and gave no consent’. This would be true of babies killed, however the key factor in euthanasia is that is is for the alleged benefit of THE PERSON BEING KILLED, but in this case, the killing is for the alleged benefit of the parent.
      I find the concept of killing a newborn abhorrent, but no more terrible than late term abortion. If a baby is able to survive outside his/her mother’s body, I don’t see that there can be any justification for killing the child because the parents don’t want to care for him/her. There are many people who are waiting to adopt and would like nothing better than to provide a loving home for a child. These children should be able to live their lives, regardless of whether or not their birth parents wish to raise them.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  35. happyface

    I’m not overly keen on the photo. I all all for gay marriage, love, equality etc, I just don’t really enjoy looking at same sex couples kissing.
    Each to their own and this own does not find it appealing.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • twomummies

      I don’t mind straight people as long as they act gay in public.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Jess88

        I laughed out loud at that comment twomummies! Touché!
        You make a great point.
        I personally love a pic of any returning soldier, gay or straight embracing their partner & this particular photo gives me goosebumps and a little smile every time :-)

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Ali

          Totally agree Jess88. That photo put a huge smile on my face simply because of the intense love and emotion it portrayed. The fact that it is a same sex couple is totally irrelevant. Pretty much sums up my attitude to same sex couples in general. The value of their love is no different to that of heterosexual couples so why should they ever be treated any different.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
    • Noelle

      You’re not for ‘equality’ if you have a particular problem with gay couples kissing. Because I assume (due to the admission of ‘same sex’ in your sentence) you do not find heterosexual couples kissing wrong.

      It’s like when people start a sentence with, ‘I’m not racist/homophobic/sexist, BUT…’

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Renae

        And in this person’s defense, they didn’t say they find gay couples kissing wrong.
        They just did not finding LOOKING AT IMAGES appealing.
        There is a difference.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Anonymous

          Only if they find hetrosexual couples kissing equally as unappealing..

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
          • LellaK

            Why? She doesnt find it visually appealing, it doesnt mean she doesnt accept it.
            I dont find people having massive PDA’s in the street visually appealing but I accept it.

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
            • Anonymous

              Their sexes are irrelevant to to story behind the picture. In my opinion you can’t be all for equality and then go on to feel the need to comment that you don’t want to see it in your community or in the media.
              It’s not about find it appealing. It’s about the fact that you are so uncomfortable with seeing it that you feel the need to comment. That’s not acceptance!

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
          • fifif

            i hate all pdas – but for some reason this photo is just beautiful to me

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
    • Ursula

      As a wise man once said (RIck): “I don’t dislike birds, I just hate that they fly”.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Renae

      Give Happyface a little bit of a break…
      A lot of us are trying to break free of prejudice that has been deeply ingrained from birth. A lot of people may not have had much exposure to gay people at all, even though they agree in theory with gay rights.
      It’s not an easy thing to break free of deep prejudice. You think you have conquered it, but then you see something (like this picture) and the old reactions leap to mind. You then have to consciously tell yourself “No, that’s not wrong. That’s not bad.”
      Happyface may be at an earlier stage of acceptance. I admit my first reaction was a little bit shocked, but then I reminded myself that these are two people in love, and that is okay.
      I think Happyface is brave for admitting the truth.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • acanberramum

      I think there should be more kissing like that in everyone’s relationships. I can’t remember the last time my husband and I had a ‘leap-into-your-arms because-I-missed-you-and-love-you-more-than-I-can-say’ kiss. My husband has been away, so he might just get one of those tonight ;)

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  36. Donna S

    http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/02/22/medethics-2011-100411.full is the link to the ethics article. Thanks for making me aware of it. Something to ponder. There are a lot of assumptions in the article that bug me but I haven’t been able to work out my thoughts on this. Yet.
    I keep thinking that you could argue that since formation of new neurons occurs right up to 18 months, that someone could argue full person status at that point.
    And the implications of a definition of self for those with autism type disorders.
    But I do like having the concept of the mother-baby dyad being put out there because it is very hard to split the two. If the dyadic link is so damaged that it would be unreasonable for Mum to mother the child, what about adoption?
    Lots of random thoughts in my head about this one…

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  37. DL

    The guardian ad is brilliant. Just saying.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Rick Morton

      I love it. Such a strong reflection of modern media, the good and the bad!

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  38. Shannon

    Why would you terminate a healthy newborn? Wouldn’t that be an ideal case for adoption? I can understand women wanting to terminate an unplanned pregnancy where they have no intention of keeping the baby and fear potential health consequences of carrying a baby to full term but after a successful birth…I just can’t fathom anyone wanting to do that.

    Other than that aspect, though, I think the article is definitely food for thought. I can see why it has generated a lot of controversy but I think it raises some valid points for consideration and debate.

    [Edit: I would just like to add to my first paragraph that if someone wanted to adopt a disabled, unwanted newborn that should also be okay. That's just a slightly heavier issue for discussion, in terms of "is it kinder to the child to let it go" which isn't what this discussion is about]

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • An Idle Dad

      No one is saying a woman would want to. It’s an academic paper dicussing ethical possibilities, not motivations.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Shannon

        Just to qualify my statement (and this is my reply to Cait, too): I wasn’t saying that I thought the academics were suggesting that.

        The way the news piece was written was to suggest that this was part of the controversy, i.e. people were worried that they were trying to say it was OK (or preferable) to just terminate healthy newborns, and I was seeking to simply point out how ridiculous and unrealistic a take on the research that was. Sometimes I forget that people can’t hear the tone of my voice when reading what I write. You sort of need to imagine me sighing and rolling my eyes while saying, “Why would anyone terminate a healthy newborn?”

        By the time I rewrote my whole comment a few minutes ago to make it one coherent piece of thought, I was no longer authorised to edit it!

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
    • Cait

      From what I have read in the paper, the comments were in the context of their research. Their research claims that up to 2/3 of cases of Downs Syndrome are not able to be detected in the womb, and are only evident at birth. Im not sure how true that is though.

      I think thats why they are advocating it to be an option if the mother chooses. Im sure there are plenty of DS families and parents who would be (rightfully) horrified at the suggestion though.

      In theory they might be right about the baby’s sense of ‘self’, but i think society has to draw a line somewhere, and I think that line is just fine where it is.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  39. auscrawl

    On a minor note, am I the only one who thinks Katy Perry is in poor taste, the stylist as well for the copycat shot so soon?

    Talk about a wannabe, too busy being a media sellout.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  40. An Idle Dad

    So… a fourteen year drought – 1996-2010 followed by the two wettest years on record.

    Yup, everything’s fine.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Rick Morton

      LOL.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • The wounded bull

      Oh dear. There have been a number of similar drought events in australia in the last 200 years, I fact, this last drought is not the worst on record. And how do you think drought events end…yup, floods generally. It is a cycle played out time and time again in this country.

      Where was the term ‘australia, a land of droughts and flooding rains’ first penned, I dont think it was first said by Tim Flannery in Coppenhagen.

      The skys falling, the skys falling.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • An Idle Dad

        Gosh. I wasn’t aware floods and drought have always occured.

        Thanks WB.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • The wounded bull

          Its quite clear what your implication was, dont patronise me when backed into a corner with facts.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
          • An Idle Dad

            I wasn’t backing away from my implication.

            After your “it’s just weather” catch phrase gets old, what is the next argument you’ll jump to?

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
            • The wounded bull

              From a man that didnt even know there was a climate commission until a few days ago, I think I will take anything you say on the issue with several grains of salt

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
            • An Idle Dad

              Ha! And I admitted it, didn’t I? I thought lefty urbanites never did that?

              I’m also not a scientist – we should ask them, right? Wait… I forgot. They’re all lying.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
            • The wounded bull

              You are so cock sure ID, and so naive. Even the CSIRO believes the recent drought was due to climate variability and not climate change (jan 2011, google it), but still the ID disiciples give the big thumbs up. Good for you.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
            • An Idle Dad

              Googled! And found it!

              http://www.csiro.au/Outcomes/Environment/Australian-Landscapes/Understanding-Floods.aspx

              It says it is difficult to assess the EXACT contribution, but that climate change will continue to increase intense extreme weather events.

              Here’s the exact wording:

              “It is expected that long-term climate change will result in greater climate variability with more intense extreme events than in the past.

              CSIRO research shows that Australia is likely to become warmer over the coming decades, with a reduction in average annual rainfall in the south and east, and uncertain changes in average annual rainfall in the north.

              Climate variability from year to year and within years will be superimposed on these trends in average conditions. For example, a warming trend will include some cool years and many hot years, and a drying trend will include some very wet years and many dry years. In this highly variable climate, future extreme rainfall events are likely to be more intense resulting in more severe flooding”

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
            • An Idle Dad

              Doesn’t really read as “There have been a number of similar drought events in australia in the last 200 years” to me.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
            • The wounded bull

              Read this

              Home.iprmius.com.au/foo7/droughthistory.html

              Read Matthew Flinders accounts of drought then flood in the late 1700s. Sound familiar.

              The skys falling.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
            • An Idle Dad

              Seriously, did you just use a CSIRO report to try to ‘get me’ and then when I point out you incorrectly paraphrase ‘difficult to access the exact contribution’ to ‘No contribution’ and then ignored the follow paragraphs all discussing climate change, ignore my response and bring up something else?

              Who did you accuse of never being able to admit they were wrong? Go on, for once, say “The CSIRO report did not say what I said it said”.

              For me?

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
            • The wounded bull

              Nice selective googling and cut pasting, but wrong study sunshine. Refer Cai Wenju, cowan, 2010 (sorry, I said 2011.

              And how does a ‘long term expectation’ equate to the recent drought, that was similar to those we have been recording for 200 years. Believe what you want, but science does not support the view that the recent drought was either abnormal, or caused by man made global warming, period.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
            • An Idle Dad

              LOL. Only you could tell me to search 2011 CSIRO Queensland Flooding then suggest I’ve selectively googled when I produce an article on it, by telling me you’ve giving me the wrong search criteria! Kudos! Well played!

              Thanks for providing me the right details, I’ll check it out. In the meantime, I’ve got to feed and bath the kids…. I mean sacrifice a goat to gaia.

              A quick look of the article states that climate change IS impacting Southern Western Australia – glad to see you accept at least that though. Or do you dispute that bit? I can never tell which parts of a report you read.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
            • The wounded bull

              I tell you what mr big fan of science, you are the one making the claim that our recent drought was evidence of man made global warming, please site even one credible scientific paper that proves it. Over to you mr scientific fact.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
            • the wounded bull

              Where did I tell you to google anything about flooding? I am waiting.

              And the study clearly shows that the major drivers of the recent Australian droughts are not climate change related. And once again, you pull out the snippet that supports your alarmist view. No wonder you and tim Flannery get on so well.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
      • Eternal Caterpillar

        Dorothea Mackellar, ca 1904 (which would have been soon after the awful droughts of the 1890s that led to shearers’ uprising, birth of unions etc etc). Beautiful poem, “My Country”, which ironically most Aussies know predominantly from the TV commercial rather than studying literature….

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Rick Morton

          I performed that poem in year 5! I memorised the whole thing so well my teacher gave me the job of directing the rest of the class in our end of year performance.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
          • Eternal Caterpillar

            I’ve always been a Banjo Patterson girl myself ;-) I can still recite several of his poems, and sometimes when my two boys won’t sleep (they share a room), I sit down and bore them with it. They drift off soon enough….

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
        • archie

          I am clinically unable to recite that poem without crying. It’s a curse.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
      • MJ

        There is clear evidence that the weather IS changing! Are you suggesting it’s not?

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • The wounded bull

          I am simply trying to point out the BS of alarmists pointing to events that have nothing to do with climate change as somehow proving their point. Thete were worse droughts and floods a century ago. Even the CSIRO acknowelged that climate change could not be blamed for our recent drought as such droughts have always happened. Yet, whenever an event like this happens, the alarmists get all excited, like it proves something and makes them look good.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
          • Anonymous

            People don’t need to get excited about it like it proves something.. there is literally proof that climate change is a real thing. The evidence is on their side.

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
            • The wounded bull

              I was purely poiting out that a long drought is not uncommon in australia and therefore the recent one cant be initself sited as any sort of proof of anything. Simple really

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
  41. I'm going to be Anonymous for this one...

    While I feel uncomfortable with what the academics are saying, I would be lying if I said I hadnt thought about it. There is a family I know with a eleven year old daughter who was born premature (26 weeks). All her life she has encountered difficulties and spend long periods on hospital – she has cerebral palsy, muscle stiffness that prevents her from sitting up properly, poor hearing etc. she has already begun to question her existence and say she wishes it was all over. She’s eleven. When she was born she was kept alive at her parents insistence while her Drs suggested that it may not be the kindest plan…I look at her now and see her pain, isolation and dependence and wonder if they did the right thing by her. I still don’t feel that I would like late term abortion made legal…but I don’t know if i can ever discount it entirely.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • An Idle Dad

      While I am a nonimally in support of legal child euthanasia in very specific scenarios – along the lines of late term abortion in cases of negative genetic diagnosis or the child is in constant pain along the conditions of the Groningen Protocol – this article is arguing that the permissiable scenarios should include healthy newborns.

      I missed it on first reading, until another commentator pointed it out.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • I'm going to be Anonymous for this one...

        I’ll have to read the article again more carefully, I was speaking more in terms of newborns with serious health problems and not healthy newborns…that I definitely do not agree with at all. Thanks for bringing that to my attention Idle Dad! :)

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
      • acanberramum

        I assume that they are raising the issue of healthy newborns simply to point out an ethical conundrum, given that (with the option of abortion available) it would be highly unlikely that the possibility of ‘termination’ of a newborn for reasons of the mother’s well being or ability to raise the child would ever arise. It is a highly hypothetical scenario that I think highlights the point that their definition of a ‘potential person’ is not the only criterion by which this question should be considered.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
    • Renae

      I wanted my life to be over when I was 11. (my first suicide note was written at 9)… And many times, even up to about 4 or 5 years ago. I was almost successful in ending it a few times.

      And before someone jumps up with “how can you compare that with a REAL disability like cerebral palsy…” – if you think that, you’ve never experienced true and debilitating clinical depression.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • LellaK

        I have had and am still battling the depression you are talking about – and i hope you are winning your battle. With all due respect this is a little different – You cant detect depression at birth.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Renae

          What if you could detect depression at birth?
          The paper was all about ifs and what ifs…

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
  42. Eternal Caterpillar

    Peter Singer made that point about babies/foetuses twenty years ago. I gave it more merit then, when I wasn’t a parent, which probably just goes to show how hard it is to be objective.

    [For those who don't know Singer, he is a champion of animal liberation (an Australian to be very proud of) and argues extensively for increased aid by individuals and government for underdeveloped nations.
    Certainly I take issue with how much the pro-lifers fight for the "rights of the foetus" over the needs of the MILLIONS of people sick and/or starving in the world.]

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  43. Anonymous

    I feel sick about the baby article. To all the beautiful couples that just long for a child and cant have one I feel for u so much.
    These writing the article, They are condoning ‘murder’… Feeling so bloody sick.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  44. melanie

    I think its obvious said academics have never had children. What a stupid thing to suggest. Time to get out of the classroom & get a bit of life experience. It’s not okay to murder living babies. Ever.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Noelle

      It’s funny how vehemently pro-choicers (myself included) will reject this article. At which point do we decide aborting a living foetus is fine, but aborting a breathing baby isn’t? And that’s a serious question. I mean, I don’t have a problem with late-term abortion if the baby is seriously sick, but then i have an issue with birthed babies being euthanised.

      Why is that? Is it the breathing? Or is it the fact that it’s seen daylight? Or do we decide that since it is viable it should be left to live? And in that case, why is abortion at all okay? And to that end, can you reject such an idea, and still be pro-euthanasia (as I am)?

      Just to reiterate, I’m pro-choice. But I’m just wondering how people distinguish between what’s okay and what’s not. It’s an interesting this to ask yourself.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Kris2040

        I guess it happens in nature a lot where poorly babies are left to starve to death, so it’s not a massive stretch, really. Don’t babies get left in this manner in traditional societies?
        I guess it’s really the intent of the pregnancy? Like if you’ve found yourself pregnant, and decided to continue with the pregnancy to term, you’re making a contract of sorts to care for that baby once it’s born?

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Noelle

          I would agree. Like once you get past 20 weeks, this child is yours. However, I don’t like saying things like that since I don’t understand what it feels like to have a child born with a severe disability. I imagine it would be a terrible choice to have to make.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
        • Faybian

          I agree, there are societies where sick/prem babies are “left to die”, as in no heroics applied to save their lives. I think in the west, the pendulum has swung too far. We save more than probably should be saved.
          I read a heartbreaking book “the long dying of baby Andrew” that was a about a 25 weeker born in the 1970s in the early days of NICUs, who was kept alive against the parents wishes. I know 25 weekers can survive now, but the risk of disability is still huge.. Sometimes parents just can’t let go. Very sad.
          Killing healthy newborns though is appalling. If you don’t want the baby, adopt it out. As a general rule I don’t agree with late term abortions either.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
          • Kris2040

            The same has been said about prolonging life in the terminally ill/elderly, too. Just because it CAN be done doesn’t mean it SHOULD be done.

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
            • Faybian

              Exactly, seen that more times than I care to remember.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
            • Shannon

              I honestly think that sometimes (often) it’s about being selfish.

              Families don’t keep prem/unhealthy newborns or the terminally ill/elderly alive necessarily because it’s better for the person being kept alive…they do it because they can’t bear to let them go. Which is still heartbreaking, but I don’t think it’s fair to prolong one person’s suffering in order to postpone someone else’s, if that makes sense.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
            • MJ

              Shannon – With the elderly I think it’s a lot to do with the guilt and focus on their own needs as opposed to the elderly person who has had enough.
              But premmie babies are different. It’s not selfishness, it’s more than that. Asking a parent to willingly let their child go (even when they know it’s the right thing to do) is unimaginably hard.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
          • eternally

            I agree with your points.
            Interesting that in that case it was the doctors wanting to push on and the family wanting to let go. I imagine that these days it’s more often the other way around.

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
            • Faybian

              I think it is. I can only imagine that neonatal life support was in it’s infancy (pardon the pun) then and they wanted to push the boundaries a bit. I don’t think staff could understand how the parents were able to let go either. It was written in diarised form and the parents had obtained medical records as well.
              Also, the baby was born in the US and I may be generalising, but I think they’ve always been more “agressive” medically.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
    • Anonymous

      I have 2 children and I agree with the academics.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Bec

      I love how people point the finger straight at academics. Most academics have earned that position through years of experience! I aspire to be an academic in education, and my current job is..yep, childcare. If that’s not getting experience, I am not sure what is.

      On the contrary, I suggest that anyone who can’t see where this article is coming from have probably never witnessed the suffering that severely disabled kids go through, or children who are neglected. Some would be better off dead than having the parents they do. There is one child I work with who is ten years of age, has an inability to love, is not toilet trained, and loaths himself. He’s also I intellectually impaired, violent, etc. His foster mother treats him like a piece of trash. He has no future, except maybe full time care and working a very menial job. It’s easy for you to judge, but the reality is YOU need perspective.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  45. Noelle

    Also, I have two points to make about the newborn abortion story.

    1 – it’s extremely radical. I think it would be close to impossible to find people who would support it, but;

    2. I hate that such articles get attention because it just encourages people to say, ‘Feminism has gone too far!’ Just wait for it.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Faybian

      Yes, it just begs for the ‘feminazis’ phrase to be wheeled out.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  46. Anonymous

    I agree with the academics. I’ve thought this before. Although stillbirths, deaths soon after birth etc. are completely heartbreaking, they are heartbreaking because someone wanted that life in this world. From the perspective of the baby, there is little to no evidence to suggest that they possess conscious thought to comprehend what is happening to them. I accept that they can register pain but this is a purely physiological reaction that just about every living thing on the earth is capable of, regardless of intelligence/cognitive thought.
    I don’t believe that all physically/mentally disabled babies should be terminated as I know that with the right care and love, they can grow to be amazing people. However, if a person feels that they cannot provide the huge amounts of love and care that is necessary to raise someone with special needs, which is a lifelong commitment, then I don’t think the baby is going to have any concept of its own death, if done painlessly as was suggested.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Jay

      What’s your view if someone else is prepared to provide the infant love and care?

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • An Idle Dad

      The article is going beyond the idea that it might be premissiable to euthanise babies with servere disabilities – along the lines of late term abortions – to say that women should be able to terminate healthy newborns for any reason.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Faybian

      Even newborn babies are capable of subtle interaction with their carers when calm and alert. I’ve seen enough to see how they stare at their parents after they’re born, particularly when the parents talk to them.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Rick Morton

      That is exceedingly interesting. It’s on the list!

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Noelle

        *tents fingers* …Excellent.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
    • Simone

      Good idea Noelle. I am married but always use Ms because firstly I think my marital status nobody’s business, and secondly because it shits me that men don’t have to be so revealing in their titles. They just tick the ‘I’m a bloke’ box, not the ‘I’m a married bloke’. Good call France. Can’t wait to discuss it here.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Nelly

        Me too! I recently got married, changed my name too – but can’t bear being called “Mrs”.

        Well, apart from anything else, I feel it makes me sound old, and I’m in denial of all ageing.

        But I also have no intention of sharing it if it’s not necessary, because I like the same rights of not being instantly judged by my marital status, like my husband.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
      • WillaWay

        Have you noticed, though, that there is a huge swing against Ms? Many young women use Miss again, and many younger women getting married just automatically change their names and use Mrs. Some forms I have had to fill out lately didn’t have a Ms option (I made my own). I get called Mrs all the time, being in my 40s now. When I say, actually, I’ve never been married, people get all confused and don’t know what to do ;) I actually find it really disappointing that so many people still embrace the older stereotypes of marital roles. So limiting, for no reason, and women seem to accept a lot of the more tedious aspects of it as part of the deal of having a marriage.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Kris2040

          I think it’s swung back – I really noticed it in the navy, working and living with teens and young 20s kids. Most of my friends my age have either got married much older, or not bothered at all. And not many have changed their names either. But the young ones seemed really keen to get hitched and start families young, and change their names straight away. Weird.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
    • katherine anne

      Great link! I’m just checking out the “conversation” website and it’s brilliant.
      This is why I love Mamamia forums. I learn so much from everyone. :)

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • ParisChic

      I don’t think it will change anything in reality – it’s just government forms. I am usually referred to as “mademoiselle” when out and about and will be until I appear to be visibly older or visibly married. Madame doesn’t have to mean married – it can be used for older women as a sign of respect, and is actually supposed to be used if you don’t know the woman isn’t married.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Acanberramum

        A young French guy asked me for directions in downtown Canberra yesterday. He was very polite – “excuse me, Madame” – but, boy, did it make me feel old!!

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  47. archie

    While I don’t agree with the concept of late term abortion (especially one so late that the baby is breathing) I think it is important to have the discussion. Hopefully it will remind policy makers of the comfort levels of the society they serve, and where our moral boundaries lie.

    I would feel incredibly confronted if late term abortions were made legal. However, we as a society put down unwanted puppies, and we euthanize disabled animals at birth, so I can understand the basis for the argument. Still, I saw my daughter suck her thumb in utero. She could hear my heartbeat and would sleep when I sang. She was still a fetus, but she had a level of awareness. I could no more comprehend terminating a child of that age than I could a three year old or a thirty year old.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Jess

      Archie, late term abortion is legal in Victoria. Up to 23 weeks with one doctors consent and up to 40 weeks (birth) with two doctors consent. The royal hospital for women in Melbourne performs 2-3 late terms a week, up from one every fortnight or so before the law was changed. And not all of these were to save the life of the mother or end the life of a severely disabled child – one woman at 36 weeks requested and abortion due to a cleft palate diagnosis (something that can be fixed with plastic surgery)

      On another topic, I note how silent many pro choice ethicists are on this article. To oppose this would highlight their inconsistency. How is it ok to end life in the womb 5 minutes before birth, but not once born?

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Kate C

        Kate, where are you getting your statistics from? And please link the the cleft-palate case? Yes late-term abortions are legal in Victoria but they are not without restrictions and are supposedly rare. I say supposedly because it is VERY hard to get accurate stats on how many are performed.

        What women are running around aborting their babies 5 minutes before birth? Might want to do some research to argue this.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Kate C

          I like that I just spoke to myself in the comment, good work. Tired much?!

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
        • Catherine

          The only restriction is that 2 drs agree to the abortion. rcently we had the case where a woman aborted twin boys who were perfectly healthy becuse she only wanted a girl. it had a lot of media coverage and was discussed at length on mama mia. The stats on late term abortions were published in Melbourne newspapers at least

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
          • An Idle Dad

            The case of the aborted boys was not late term.

            The idea that a Mum would abort because of a cleft palate is plainly ludicrious and the source is ‘a doctor said’.

            And even if someone did, in a moment of insanity, request it, two Doctors would have to agree. I doubt they would.

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
            • Catherine

              Details on late-term abortions in Victoria 2008 Annual Report of The Consultative Council on Obstetrics and Paediatric Mortality and Morbidity (CCPOMM).

              . It says that of Victoria’s 328 late-term abortion in 2008:

              • 178 were for psycho-social reasons; the balance;

              • 150 were for abnormalities;

              • 118 still births were related to termination of pregnancy;

              • 32 neonatal deaths where parents decided “to have their labour induced early resulting in the early birth of their infant.” (CCOPMM 2008, p.26);

              Ok, so it seems that report is stating that there didn’t have to be ANYTHING wrong with the baby in order for a late term abortion to be performed.

              We know there was a case years ago where a Victorian woman had a n abortion because she feared the baby would be a dwarf ( ok the kid was going to be short, but as far as we know nothing else was wrong with it).

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
        • Jess

          Here is the 7 news report on Victorias law.
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AeFdCG4gEg

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
      • Faybian

        I’m not silent. I’m ok with earlier abortions. I’ve seen them and why they’re done and particularly mid term abortions are not lightly done, or done without a thought on the part of the parents. I’m not particularly ok with late term abortions though..

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
      • Kris2040

        The story’s been up for about an hour and a half, it’s confronting. I haven’t been silent about it. I find it really interesting. I haven’t had a read of the original article from the doctors, but it strikes me as a euthanasia type argument.

        Oh, and 40 weeks isn’t “birth”. It’s 40 weeks gestation.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  48. Trixie Melodian

    This MUST be a pro-life hoax… Like that woman a couple of years ago who claimed she would decide whether to abort her pregnancy based on Facebook likes.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Em

      It’s not a pro-life hoax. Singer has been advocating it for years.
      I think it is probably a bit harsh to say ‘ah! Pro-life hoax!’ as soon as something makes someone uncomfortable.
      I am pro life, but I like to think that belief doesn’t stop me from making valid arguments as to support my view.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • sweetsparrow

      What leads you to conclude it is a pro-life hoax?

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  49. Rachel from Redcliffe Style

    I actually feel physically ill reading the first article. I can not believe people would to this. Rachel

    http://www.redcliffestyle.com

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • KateO

      So do I. I actually have tears in my eyes. I have my newborn resting on my chest right now, that made me feel sad and sick.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...

So, we have $1000 to give away... oh, would you be interested? Well step right this way.

To go in the draw to win, just LIKE us on Facebook, enter your email address and tell us in 25 words or less why you love reading Mamamia.

Close this popup



Full Terms & Conditions