{"id":323307,"date":"2024-12-22T11:35:14","date_gmt":"2024-12-22T17:35:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=323307"},"modified":"2024-12-20T20:03:25","modified_gmt":"2024-12-21T02:03:25","slug":"guardian-promote-free-expanded-abortion-nsw","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/guardian-promote-free-expanded-abortion-nsw\/","title":{"rendered":"Authors at The Guardian promote ‘free’ and expanded abortion access in New South Wales"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

The University of Sydney has published a map of “abortion deserts” in the Australian state of New South Wales (NSW), and three writers\/editors at The Guardian are complaining that abortion is not as easy to access<\/a> as it thinks it should be. To fix this alleged problem, it is calling on the government to force all public hospitals in the state to commit abortions \u2014 for free<\/em>.<\/p>\n

According to the research, there are only three public hospitals out of 220 in NSW that routinely commit abortions, either through the abortion pill or surgical abortion. If a woman lives more than 160km (100 miles) from an abortion-committing hospital, researchers consider her to live in an “abortion desert.” Yet, it also notes that there are 13 private abortionists in the state.<\/p>\n

That’s apparently not easy enough access to abortion for these writers at The Guardian, who present induced abortion \u2014 the direct and intentional killing of a preborn human being \u2014 as “basic healthcare that is legal in NSW.” The article notes that the World Health Organization recommends all public hospitals willingly kill babies in the womb, and calls on all<\/em> public hospitals and their doctors to commit abortions.<\/p>\n

In an effort to see if other public hospitals in NSW do actually commit abortions quietly, The Guardian reached out to all local health districts, but none responded.<\/p>\n

In NSW, induced abortion is legal<\/a> through 22 weeks gestation, and after 22 weeks as long as two doctors approve it and it is carried out in an approved hospital setting.<\/p>\n

Guardian Complaint #1: Abortion is too expensive<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Guardian offers a list of concerns it has surrounding abortion in NSW; first, that it is too expensive.<\/p>\n

With a Medicare card (which Australian citizens have under the nation’s universal health care), it says, an abortion will cost $775 ($500 US). But, if a woman lives in a so-called “abortion desert,” that cost will rise because she will need to pay for transportation to the abortion facility which is a “minimum round trip of four hours by car.” She would likely also need to pay for an overnight stay.<\/p>\n

“This assumes a person is able to travel, take time off from work or carer responsibilities, and in some cases, have someone come with them to support them through the process (including driving back if it is a surgical abortion),” said The Guardian.<\/p>\n

“Abortion deserts” would all but disappear, according to The Guardian, “if all public hospitals provided free and public abortion services.”<\/p>\n

It seems to forget that induced abortion \u2014 actively killing living human beings in the womb \u2014 is not a medically necessary procedure. If it is a “woman’s choice” as abortion proponents claim, then it is a “choice,” not a medical necessity that the government must pay for.<\/p>\n

What The Guardian failed to mention is that in its 2023-2024 budget, the NSW government allocated $3.5 million<\/a> over four years to expand access to abortion, and in 2023, $34.3 million<\/a> was given to 20 Women’s Health Centers \u2014 including MSI Australia, which commits abortions in NSW. (MSI was formerly known as Marie Stopes International, a well-known global abortion profiteer.)<\/p>\n

Guardian Complaint #2: Abortion is not treated as health care<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Guardian calls abortion “basic healthcare,” and the outlet, along with other abortion proponents, wants the world to believe that abortion is health care. What they don’t<\/em> want is for abortion to actually be treated like health care<\/em>.<\/p>\n

WARNING<\/span>: Image of abortion victim below.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Anytime a person has a procedure or surgery, it is expected that they will take time off from work and perhaps travel a short distance, bringing someone with them to assist them in driving. These are not big asks. They are expected and understood parts of receiving medical care<\/em>.<\/p>\n

The Guardian writes about a woman named Anne (name changed) and her partner, who had brought children from other relationships into their relationship and did not want to have a child together. Then, Anne learned her birth control had failed and that she was pregnant \u2014 and in the second trimester. More than half<\/a> (51%) of the women who seek abortion reported using birth control during the same month they got pregnant \u2014 like Anne \u2014 according to a\u00a0study<\/a>\u00a0published by the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, along with a\u00a0study<\/a> by the British Pregnancy Advisory Service.<\/p>\n

Anne was so far along in the pregnancy that no doctor in her area would approve or commit an abortion. So she and her partner, of their own free will, traveled “hundreds of kilometers to Sydney, each taking three days of leave from work.” It cost them several thousand dollars for a surgical abortion plus accommodation costs \u2014 with no medical reason to do so.<\/p>\n

In the second trimester, the most common abortion procedure used is the D&E dismemberment abortion procedure. If this was the “surgical termination” that Anne indeed had, her baby was killed and dismembered simply because he or she was seen as inconvenient. This is the aftermath of a D&E abortion; this is not health care:<\/p>\n

\"\"

Baby Angel was found in a medical waste bin. Experts believe he was possibly exsanguinated and dismembered alive.<\/p><\/div>\n

The Guardian complains that not enough doctors are willing to do that<\/em> to preborn human beings.<\/p>\n