Monthly Archives: May 2008

Pro-lifers must protest at Mail and Dorries’ insult to women’s intelligence

This week, in the run up to the second reading of the human fertilisation and embroyolgy bill, anti-abortionist campaigners have used the Daily Mail as a soap-box for their liturgy of guilt and condemnation on women who have foetuses aborted between 20 and 24 weeks.

Fortunately commonsense has prevailed through comment pieces in the Guardian and news of a report published today by the British Medical Journal. Both have sought to assuage the speculative and highly subjective use of facts, figures and general hearsay used by the pro-lifers with more substantive and objective research.

The BMJ study of all premature births in one region, Trent, shows that life expectancy for babies born before 24 weeks are poor and have not improved since the last review of this bill took place in 1990.

In the face of clear cut objective medical research Nadine Dorries MP, who is leading the cross party group launching the “20 Reasons for 20 weeks campaign”, has shown her true colours with her ludicrously subjective statement in today’s Guardian:

“I think this report insults the intelligence of the public and MPs alike. No improvement in neonatal care in 12 years? Really? So where has all the money that has been pumped into neonatal services gone then?” She called the study “the most desperate piece of tosh produced by the pro-choice lobby”.

Comment pieces by Zoe Williams and Polly Toynbee have cast also cast aspersions on Dorries and the Mail’s sensationalist use of facts and figures this week. Some of the most powerful myths they have dispelled I think are:

Myth:
Two-thirds of GPs support a reduction in the time limit.

Fact:
At the last British Medical Association vote on the matter, 77% voted to keep the time limit as it is.

Myth:
Foetuses can feel pain at 18 weeks.

Fact:
This myth is based on just one study from the University of Arkansas. But the consensus in the mainstream medical community is that the neurological development necessary for pain is more like 26 weeks plus.

Myth:
The abortion of foetuses between 20 and 24 weeks is commonplace in the UK.

Fact:
Only 1.45% of abortions happen after 20 weeks. Of this small per cent one woman was just 14-years-old and arrived at a clinic when she was 23 weeks and five days pregnant: her periods had become irregular but she had not realised she was pregnant until a school nurse referred her just in time. (Some women are caught out by having periods all through pregnancy, a trick nature plays.) Another was a 27-year-old who arrived at just over 22 weeks’ gestation. She already had a 10-month-old, a five-year-old and a six-year-old, all of them in foster care. She said the next baby would go straight into care, because she was a drug user. In a chaotic daze, she had left the abortion to the last minute. Then there was the woman who arrived at 22 weeks and four days, who had been drinking heavily and taking large doses of cocaine, unaware she was pregnant. The one rational choice these addicted women were fit to make was to know they were not fit to be mothers.

Myth:
Foetuses are being aborted late in the pregnancy because women are being too lazy to sort it out before this time.

Truth:
If campaigners really wanted more abortions to take place earlier in the pregnancy, then they would work towards improving access to terminations on the NHS. Conversely, this campaign is all designed to stigmatise abortion, castigate women, lionise the foetus, and make the whole debate so emotionally charged that it no longer matters whether the argument has any factual basis at all. Never mind the insult to women.

Sad truth:
This week some Labour MPs may be taking fright. They have been sent lurid DVDs of abortions: last time they were sent plastic foetuses. Bombarded with letters from their local churches, some may reckon that voting to cut a few weeks off the time-limit won’t matter much. But it does. And unfortunately the pro-choice lobby has no pulpits to marshal its troops.

New research on baby survival rates stokes abortion limit row
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/may/09/health.medicalresearch

Fact, fiction and foetuses (Zoe Williams comment)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/may/07/gender.health

Resist the medievalists. Women’s right to abortion is a private matter (Polly Toynbee comment)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/may/09/health.health

Leave a Comment

Filed under 24 week time limit, Fact, Guardian, Myth, Nadine Dorries, Polly Toynbee, Zoe Williams

REQUEST FOR ACTION

The question – ‘What is your religion?’ – in the 2001 Census led to deeply flawed results. The British Humanist Association (BHA) is now working to make sure that the question or questions about religion in the 2011 Census give an accurate picture of religious affiliation in the UK.
At least 15.5% of the population is non-religious according to the 2001 Census, making this the second largest ‘belief’ group in the UK, being two-and-a-half times as numerous as all the non-Christian religions put together. By any sensible reckoning this figure is far too low. The Office of National Statistics admits that the leading nature of the ‘religion’ question meant that many people, especially those with a loose (for example, merely cultural) affiliation to a religion, would have identified themselves as religious when they are not. This is particularly true of those who identified themselves as ‘Christian’. A large proportion of those people who identified themselves as affiliated in some sense to a religion in fact have no active involvement.
Apart from the inaccuracy of the data collected on religious affiliation, there are real, practical problems with the use of this data. The Census data on religion says nothing about the actual religious practice and involvement of the population. However, both central and local government use this data in resource allocation and for targeting equality initiatives.
The figure stating that 72% of the population are ‘Christian’ has been used in a variety of ways, such as to justify the continuing presence of Bishops in the House of Lords, to justify the state-funding of faith schools (and their expansion), to justify and increase religious broadcasting and to exclude the voices of humanists in Parliament and elsewhere.
The Office of National Statistics has written to the BHA claiming they have done some testing of the question and that their results show that the 2001 Census question on religion should be used again. In light of how the data has been misused, this is a highly irresponsible decision. In order to strengthen their case, the BHA needs evidence that demonstrates the difficulties created by the 2001 Census question.
Please would you look out for information in your locality, which justifies ‘faith-based’ practices by public bodies based on Census results. Examples of this may include making funding decisions using this data or changes in service delivery or justifying the allocation of resources on the basis of Census data on religion.
If you have any pertinent examples, please let the BHA know so that they can build up evidence showing the misuse of the questionable 2001 data. All information should be sent to Naomi Phillips, BHA Public Affairs Officer,
[email protected]. Contact Naomi for more information, by email or on 020 7079 3585.
I very much support the BHA on the matter. They need evidence, so please contact them if you have anything they may find useful.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Bishops, Census, Christianity, House of Lords, Statistics

KEEP THE 24 WEEK ABORTION TIME LIMIT

Zoe Williams makes some very telling points about abortion time limits in Guardian Comment in Free today.
This is the link

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/may/07/gender.health

Leave a Comment

Filed under 24 week time limit, Guardian, Zoe Williams

IS THIS "NORMAL"?

Late yesterday evening I watched “Am I Normal”, introduced by psychologist Dr Tanya Byron, on BBC2. (I get BBC2 in Brussels on cable).

The programme looked a sexual behaviour and attempted to define normality. Much of it was disturbing, not least the sequences dealing with paedophilia and the sexualisation of children, usually girls.

Dr Byron spent some time examining lad mags such as “Loaded”, interviewing the editor of one such publication and the female models who posed for the photographs. I was struck by the way both the young women and the equally young male editor thought the subject matter – a certain portrayal of women and a certain view of male sexuality – was quite OK, nothing out of the ordinary, just what we all do, and why not make some money out of it.

The “Loaded” approach dehumanises both men and women. It views sex as a commodity to be bought and sold via its soft porn pages. I recently read that, according to one survey, something like forty percent of teenage young women aspire to be glamour models. In my time it was air hostesses. At least there was, and still is, dignity in being an airline steward.

Leave a Comment

Filed under glamour models, soft porn

BAD DAY FOR LONDON

There is no getting away from it – Thursday 1 May was a bad day for the capital. Ken Livingstone has done an extraordinarily good job on our behalf. His most striking achievement, the congestion charge, was one of the boldest moves I have seen in my thirty odd years in politics. It took a very special politician to embark on a course of action which, while beneficial for the city as a whole, upset many vested interests and invited the wrath of the capital’s only newspaper, the appalling Evening Standard. Many would say “it was the Standard wot won it” thanks to the paper’s relentless and uncritical campaign for Boris Johnson.

As a London representative resident in the capital’s centre, I was very aware of the real improvements made by Ken. Since there are many more buses I now use them in a way I did not eight years ago, and I have found my Oyster card immensely helpful. Ken is a true Londoner and worked tirelessly on behalf of the people of London.

My congratulations to the Labour members of the Greater London Assembly who were returned: Nicky Gavron, Murad Qureshi, Val Shawcross, John Biggs, Jennette Arnold, Joanne McCartney, Len Duvall and Navin Shah. I know they will keep up Labour’s good work.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Conservative, Evening Standard, GLA, Jennette Arnold, Joanne McCartney, John Biggs, Ken Livingston, Len Duvall, Mayor, Murad Qureshi, Navin Shah, Nicky Gavron, Val Shawcross

VOTE FOR KEN

Londoners go to the polls today in one of the most important elections we will ever have.

Ken Livingstone has turned London into a world class city. During the past eight years Ken has reduced pollution by introducing the congestion charge and improved public transport by investing the proceeds in buses. He also gave us the very successful Oyster card.As a central London resident I have really noticed the difference. There is less traffic and the air is better. Gratifyingly, I no longer have to wait half an hour for a bus then have three come at once.Ken has fought tirelessly for Londoners. We must not let his efforts go to waste in the dubious hands of bonkers Boris Johnson. Johnson has never run anything. He is MP for Henley, not a real Londoner like Ken.

Vote Livingstone today.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized