The Age, Thursday 18th August 1994
From Bruce Wearne,
anthropology and sociology,
school of arts and science
Monash University
Lynette Dumble's riposte against scientism and the Catholic bishops [The Age 16/8] deserves further comment. Whether or not there are physiological abnormalities as a result of RU486, there are certain to be other physiological and psychological and social consequences that must command greater attention if we are going to understand what is taking place here.
The social convention that abortion is a woman's right not only raises questions about the life of the aborted. Now, it also has direct implications for how we view the birth of any child.
Who wants to consider their new-born as a non-aborted? When abortion is considered lawful, the birth of a child is the birth of a non-aborted child.
When abortion pills, like RU486 come on to the market, despite the pious rhetoric about it being in the interests of women's health, then the seven out of 20 pregnancies that fail to abort will come to term and come into their mother's arms as babies who escaped this death sentence. Such terrible facts must shape the subsequent parenting.
Euphemistic rhetoric has tried for decades to put a humanist gloss on all this but we cannot avoid the real-life responsibilities we have for such mothers.
Contemporary ethics has not even begun to consider this side of the abortion equation.
What kind of maternal health is therefore being promoted by the advocates of such experimentation and chemical control? We are not just talking about aborting foetuses; the discussion is about aborting parenthood.
And with a drug like RU486, it seems that we have entered a phase in public life where a mother's tender care has finally succumbed to the scientistic aspiration for the vacuum.
Comment 09/10/2008
It now appears that at the time of this media debate, and the above letter, trials of RU486 (mifepristone) were being held in Victoria. So this not only raises questions about the way RU486 was being promoted. At that time those advocating the drug had appealed to the alleged 65% "success rate" as justification for saying it should be available. Later on the claimed success rate from trials was something near to 90%. So what can we now say about the 1994 advocacy? Does it not seem to have been part of a "marketing" campaign so that there would be greater interest in, and hence agitation for, the drug? Would that not help secure further research funding that was needed to improve the drug's reliability? Clearly we confront what appears to be the arranging of pregnancies in order to have them terminated by the drug! And such experiments were necessary to improve the drug and hence make it fail safe for the termination of pregnancies.
Pregnancies were being brought about in order to be terminated in order to increase the likelihood of the drug's success in terminating pregnancies.
You may want to explore this further by reading the October 8, 2005 article from The Age here.
Nurturing
Justice seeks
to encourage a sustained Christian political contribution by affirming our
God-given calling to build sustainable human communities which will promote life
and strengthen our interdependence - the way of public justice will help us
avoid the myths and contradictions of human autonomy. But a Christian
understanding of the myths and contradictions of human autonomy, as they are
accepted and enshrined in changes to the law, requires a comprehensive
political philosophy, one that finds its point departure for seeking justice in
the gentle and merciful rule of Jesus Christ, the ruler over all of the earth's
political regimes.
Nurturing Justice
October 2008
© The contents of this email are copyright. Documents may be photocopied or
retransmitted in their entirety but not otherwise reprinted or transmitted
without permission. "Nurturing Justice" is a project to encourage
Christian political reflection based upon wise and loving civic participation.
Comments are welcome and should be sent to bcwearne@ozemail.com.au