Sex Selection Abortion Claims

[John ''True Grit'' Wayne]

Sex Selection Abortion Claims Investigated





Health Secretary Andrew Lansley is 'extremely concerned' about the claims

8:18am UK, Thursday February 23, 2012

An investigation into claims that some doctors are granting women illegal abortions based on the sex of their unborn baby has been launched by the Department of Health.

It has been sparked by an undercover newspaper study into sex-selection abortions, secretly filming doctors at British clinics agreeing to terminate foetuses because they were either male or female.
The doctors were also allegedly recorded admitting they were prepared to falsify paperwork to arrange the illegal abortions.
Health Secretary Andrew Lansley said he was "extremely concerned" about the allegations made by the Daily Telegraph, and has instructed officials to investigate.
"Sex selection is illegal and is morally wrong," he said.
The newspaper said undercover reporters accompanied pregnant women to nine clinics in different parts of the country.
In three cases doctors were recorded offering to arrange terminations after being told the women did not want to go ahead with the pregnancy because of their unborn child's sex.
In the UK, abortions are allowed on certain grounds, including that continuing with the pregnancy would be a greater risk to the woman's life, physical or mental health than ending the pregnancy, continuing would be more of a risk to the physical or mental health of any of the woman's existing children and there is a real risk the child would have a serious physical or mental disability.
In September, Tory backbencher Nadine Dorries and Labour's Frank Field lost a Commons vote on the issue of counselling.
They wanted to prevent non-statutory abortion providers such as Marie Stopes and the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) from offering counselling.
Ms Dorries said that, because they receive money for carrying out terminations, the organisations have a vested interest.





So now babys are being killed just so a family can have a boy.
I also read that in parts of Asia they will not tell the parent the sex of the baby as if its a girl it wont be wanted.And recently in the news a Afgan Granny killed her sons wife as she had burdened the family with a girl

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct...k8ExyYsnE_gEaA

.Do these people not realize if we all did this there would not be enough women to go around.Is this abortion thing getting out of hand.Surely if these babys can be seen to be male or female they are at a age they should not be killed.

[John ''True Grit'' Wayne]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17136213 Here is a link to the bbc the sky news link wont work for me

[Derbiean]

I disagree that a baby should be aborted due to its sex but on the flipside if this is a reason for someone to do an abortion then perhaps they are doing the unborn baby a favour by not bringing it into the world and taking out their resentment on said baby for being the 'wrong' sex. I would question if such people are fit to be parents at all.

[magpie]

Disgusting practice!
Societys that follow that road will end up in deep trouble with a very unbalanced population, 10 males to every Female I can see that causing future problems.

[Condottiere 40K]

Since India and China are experiencing that demographic bomb, we'll have an actual live demonstration.

[SLN445]

The difference is that places like the UK dont have as much of a "Boy is needed to take care of the family" thing like China and such have.

[John ''True Grit'' Wayne]

I think Britain is above all this boy girl thing and we expect better.I hope any doctor that is involved in these abortions based on gender are struck off the medical profession.
Lots of people cant have kids and i know 2 couples that got ivf and paid thousands for it.
Surely they should be allowed to take the unwanted babys.

[nein]

gee I wonder about the ethnicities of the people doing this... welcome to wonderful multicultural britain

[Svaline]

Not sure what's the big deal? Does it really matter so much why the woman chooses to have an abortion?

[Claudius Gothicus]

Not sure what's the big deal? Does it really matter so much why the woman chooses to have an abortion?

It does if there's a major demographic impact derived from said ''trends''...

[Primo]

Thats why the catholic church is against abortion.

[John ''True Grit'' Wayne]

Lets kill all the female babys and keep all the boys = near extinction.

[Heinz Guderian]

Was it just Indian doctors working in Britain or are white people involved here?

[Svaline]

Any significant gender imbalance will naturally rectify itself within a lifetime as long as the gender specific abortions eventually stop. If they never do in a hypothetical situation, sure the population will keep on dropping, but so what? It has the same effect women choosing lifelong abstinence has.
Surely that is not grounds for any government action, how can a democratic state legitimately try to adress, by force no less, a deliberate decision by some to not reproduce according to some demographic "imperative"?

[Claudius Gothicus]

Any significant gender imbalance will naturally rectify itself within a lifetime as long as the gender specific abortions eventually stop.

Which takes cultural change, better enforced through law and legislation.

If they never do in a hypothetical situation, sure the population will keep on dropping, but so what? It has the same effect women choosing lifelong abstinence has.

I like populations to have at least replacement rates, it makes me feel confortable about the fact that when I grow old there's going to be a sizable portion of young men and women who will be able to support my retirement through their labour... just like i'm doing with today's old people.

Surely that is not grounds for any government action, how can a democratic state legitimately try to adress, by force no less, a deliberate decision by some to not reproduce according to some demographic "imperative"?

Societies who want to survive usually address their individuals with functional imperatives, demographic balance being one of them. There's quite a difference between legalizing abortion and actually letting people destroy masculinity indexes through aesthetic choice of babies... that and allowing for eugenic choice are pretty much the same.

[Svaline]

Which takes cultural change, better enforced through law and legislation.


Of course it takes a cultural change, but it's doesn't "need" to happen either, and so should not be forced upon society by it's government. The culture of a people is what it is, the government it elects trying to constrain and modify it by laws is hardly justifiable and somewhat deranged if you think about it (except the aspects of it that directly infringe on other individual's freedoms and go agaisnt basic human rights).

I like populations to have at least replacement rates, it makes me feel confortable about the fact that when I grow old there's going to be a sizable portion of young men and women who will be able to support my retirement through their labour... just like i'm doing with today's old people.

A fair point, any major demographic change will have an impact on a country's social system. But in the same way that it would not be an argument for any kind of forced procreation/immigration to maintain a replacement rate, it is not an argument for limiting individual's freedoms, which come before any social program, not after. The solution in such a scenario would clearly have to be to move toward a more liberal system.



Societies who want to survive usually address their individuals with functional imperatives, demographic balance being one of them. There's quite a difference between legalizing abortion and actually letting people destroy masculinity indexes through aesthetic choice of babies... that and allowing for eugenic choice are pretty much the same.

If a government's role was to make sure a certain society survived (and by society i am assuming you mean the culture,lifestyle, history ect.. of a people, and not the people themselves) then yes, such a trend would clearly go agaisnt it's goal. But a government's role is to ensure the wellbeing of the people who are currently living, and their eventual descendants, which i hardly see as being put in peril by any abortion trend.
As to the last point, i see no reason to keep people from choosing how their offspring will look, as long as no future pain/misery is caused to the child by such a choice.

[King Gambrinus]

Should be the woman's choice. If the man is pressuring her to have an abortion because it's not the right sex, then that's a different issue altogether...

[Claudius Gothicus]

Should be the woman's choice. If the man is pressuring her to have an abortion because it's not the right sex, then that's a different issue altogether...

It basically shouldn't be anyone's choice. If there's significant evidence pointing out at ''selective abortions'' being preformed on the basis of sex preference there should be a punishment... quite a strong one.

[King Gambrinus]

It basically shouldn't be anyone's choice. If there's significant evidence pointing out at ''selective abortions'' being preformed on the basis of sex preference there should be a punishment... quite a strong one.

Well, no. How the hell are the clinics supposed to know if they're having an abortion because of the sex of the baby or not and who are they to judge that? Yes, it can seem obvious, but if you want to be fair to the human life inside the womb, you let the mother choose what to do with it. Whether she regards the abortion as murder or not is not the doctors problem, since they're not allowed to discriminate based on religion.


I find the whole idea of picking and choosing sickening though...but this is more of a problem with societies and communities that discriminate against women...

[John ''True Grit'' Wayne]

Soon we will be in a society that now discriminates against your genes, instead of your gender, race or religion.