Opinion

Abortion chain CEO says late-term abortion has no “detrimental effect on society”

Ann Furedi, chief executive of the abortion chain British Pregnancy Advisory Service recently engaged with Will Saletan in a debate over the issue of late-term abortion. During her opening statements, Ann made some comments that caught my attention. She admitted that a late-term fetus connects with people because “it looks like a baby.” Of course though to Ann, it isn’t a baby nor worth of legal protection.

Ann Furedi

She further states that “there is no evidence to suggest that we need to restrict later abortions in any way.” What sort of evidence is she looking for? Does the fact that a late-term abortions painfully and violently ends the life of a human being count as evidence?

Surely Ms. Furedi knows what a late-term abortion looks like being the CEO of the largest independent British abortion chain. For those that want a real and frankly brutal education about what a later-term abortion looks like, you can see abortions on video at about the 20th weeks at http://abortioninstruments.com. (WARNING, content is very graphic.)

Furedi rightly points out that “there isn’t any profound point at which you can say there is a difference between one kind of fetus and another.” She uses this lack of difference to argue that since terminating early-term humans is fine in her view then how can later-term abortions not be an acceptable decision.

She goes on to state:

“I accept that abortion stops a beating heart and I accept that abortion ends a potential human life, even in the very earliest weeks of pregnancy.”

20 Week Human Fetus

20 Week Human Fetus

I am grateful that Furedi is honest about the medical science that the human heart begins to beat about three weeks after the joining of sperm and egg. Being honest about what abortion does doesn’t make it any more acceptable though. In the same way, honestly acknowledging that killing a three-year-old child stops their heartbeat doesn’t make it right.

I also wonder how exactly Furedi defines human life since clearly she thinks that abortion only ends a “potential” instead of actual human life. At what point does she recognize human life begin? Dose it magically start when a baby bursts forth from his or her mother’s womb? Were newborn children just “potential” human lives moments earlier?

Finally, near the end of Furedi’s opening comments is where she makes the statement that stuck me most. She questions herself saying, “Does late abortion have a detrimental effect on society? No, I really don’t think it does.” To that I wonder, what sort of detrimental effect is Furedi looking for? Are mangled human bodies not enough?

You can read the entire comments by Ann Furedi here.

Live Action on Facebook
  • Mike Monohon

    No rest for the wicked…evil begets more evil…violence against the innocent has everlasting consequences and without repentance of this severest of negative behaviors most likely will greatly increase the chances for eternal damnation of those who consent to it directly or indirectly. Being that insensitive seems to be way past the point to return to the Lord. Every abortion is detrimental to society. This is definitely a call for the faithful to pray with great fervor to love our neighbor in the womb by witnessing our faith in God’s Church, the public square, and within our families. Let’s not destroy our society any further. There are a lot better ways to make money than stealing someone’s life on the basis of bad laws and think it doesn’t have any effect on other people who at least try to live righteously.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Marcy-Wollard/100002973111950 Marcy Wollard

    This woman is just the face of the abortion industry and it is horror.  I was recently reading EWTN Host Teresa Tomeo’s book Extreme Makeover http://teresatomeo.com/books-and-media.html and it details the lies that Planned Parenthood and others in the “pro-choice” camp spout.  I can’t believe that we as a society not only swallow these lies but promote them.  Our whole culture, bolstered by the media and those that are the leaders of our society encourage the murder of our youth, but also the murder of essentially the something precious inside the heart of women.  Women are also the victims here – even women who have not had abortions.  Womanhood and its kindness, love, & nurturing have been damaged when we allow society to tell us killing our young is ok; that only our appearance matters; that sex is not beautiful, it is just a commodity or for entertainment.  Women deserve better all the way around. 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FLLSUFX3JOAT2JNJL54FILX6HU Kimberly

    I believe the negative impact on “society” that she & others are looking for, are negative impacts on THEM individually.  If it doesn’t affect them then why should they care?  As far as that goes, a serial killer on the loose doesn’t negatively affect “society” as long as it doesn’t negatively affect them in any way, shape or form. 

  • Sparky

    I really don’t think that was the main point of her argument.  She did, as you point out, suggest that in her opinion late abortions did not have a detrimental effect on society, but you left out her reason for making the statement – “There is no evidence that the number of women requesting late abortions is increasing.”   You may not agree with her conclusion, but you do a disservice by ignoring her reasoning.  I also don’t think it’s fair to suggest that she thinks abortion is a legitimate option right up to the time just prior to delivery.  While she leaves the question open in regard to herself she does acknowledge that for the purposes of public policy 24 weeks (the age of viability in both the UK and this country) is an acceptable limit.  Remember, she is in part arguing against the reduction of the current limit.
    A closer reading of her comments I think reveals two main themes.  First, that no matter how you feel about this issue, up to a certain point, there is nothing about the fetus that should affect whether you think later abortion is appropriate.  If you think abortion is wrong then it is wrong at any time.  But if, for you, abortion is an acceptable alternative then only you can decide what qualifies as “late”.  And that brings us to her second theme which supports the first – what is considered late is arbitrary and subjective and therefore should be defined by those who are closest to the decision i.e. the woman in consultation with her health-care provider.
    What she’s really getting at and what lies at the heart of this issue is that what happens between the time of fertilization and birth happens on a continuum.  As much as we would like it otherwise, science cannot now, and in all likelihood will not in the future, tell us the exact point at which independent human life begins.  At best, it can only tell us the point at which life is definitely absent and the point at which independent life is definitely present – and that leaves a lot of room in between.  So, in the absence of evidence, we’re left to make that determination in an act of faith.  As such, if you truly believe in free will or just believe in the right of self-determination, it is best made individually, free from the interference of others.

    • http://catholicview.wordpress.com Lee

      Following that line of reasoning, especially in your last sentence, shouldn’t we give the fetus the benefit of the doubt and allow him/her to continue to grow and develop, free from the interference of others? Especially those who want to do much more than interfere with that growth and development, as in, actively deliberately seeking to stop and kill that growth and development? If, in your opinion, we are lacking in clear evidence that life is actually there, or a human life, then should we not err on the side of caution, in case there is human life there? Wouldn’t that be the intelligent, wise and humane thing to do? 

      And just for the record, if someone tries to kill me, you have my permission to interfere all you want to and I’d be eternally grateful to you. And if I couldn’t speak up for myself or protect myself at all and you interfered, I’d be even more grateful to you.

      • Sparky

        Don’t worry, I’ve got you covered. :-) 
        But to your point – that’s exactly what’s in question.  Is there something there that warrants the benefit of doubt and does it exist independently as an entity with its own set of rights separate from the body that sustains it?  That’s a question that each of us has to answer for ourselves.

        • Esmeralda Quintero

          Ya, it’s common sense. Don’t need to try the philosophical route, it’s life. It’s a waste of brain use to doubt if it is a person who exists in life form. And for the people who don’t have common sense, then that’s why sonograms exist. 

  • Barb

    It certainly does make abortion advocates seem inhumane when they assert a right to kill because the woman, “in consultation with her health care provider” chooses to kill.  Don’t cry about the puppies in the mills or the turkeys/chickens in the poultry factories – hypocrites.  Don’t whine about the wars or the atrocities in Darfur – hypocrites.

    • 12angrymen

      I think it is wonderful that people, including those who are pro choice, are aware of situations of genocide around the world (including that in Darfur) and realize that it is horrible. 

      • Esmeralda Quintero

        Ya definitely I’m sure they are aware, and Barb points that out, but they are hypocrites to support baby killing. You watched the video right? At abortioninstruments.com right? Babies are human just like the people in Darfur are also. 

  • Miharu_ichikawa

    To each their own, and I think everyone ought to agree to disagree. Let those who so choose to make a ‘wrong’ choice by anyone but themselves do so, and move on to other issues that need attention. Like the many children born into families who raise them into abuse, poverty, and eventually give them up to fall through the legal system as unwanted foster kids that then continue to fuel more crime and failed adoption. This isn’t rocket science. There are obviously pros and cons to both sides. Choose to argue either moral or factual, and you have both sides with their wins. Again…you live your life, let me live mine, and let anyone else make the choice to abort or not on their own!!! So how’s the government? Anyone keeping up with the stock market or our interference in other countries? Give it a try.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000111525197 Lee Lancaster

      Oh, good point. Why should we bother with things like the right to life when there are so many other more important things to think about? 

      Live and let live, huh? That’s exactly the point, isn’t it? That’s exactly what we’re saying. Let everyone have the chance to live. We do have laws against murder, we don’t just turn a blind eye toward that. We have laws about all sorts of thing, prohibiting or punishing acts of various kinds. Why should we turn a blind eye to abortion, which stops a life? Why does “live and let live” not include all the parties concerned, not just the mother and the father but also the one in danger of being killed?

      Amazing. An absolutely stellar example of twisted thinking thinly disguised as compassion. Wouldn’t want the kid to experience any problems in life, so just kill it now. The way some people treat animals. Don’t wanna have to worry about feedin’ ‘em. They’ll just end up as strays so just toss ‘em in a bag and throw ‘em in the river.

      So much for the corporal acts of mercy in the modern world. Murder is the new mercy.

  • Pingback: No Limits: Obama’s Record On Abortion