Are We Really Saying that Babies with Down Syndrome Can Be Killed, But Not Baby Girls?

Right and wrong are not things determined at a UN assembly or in the Houses of Parliament, they are God given and all we have to do is instantiate human law which upholds Divine law

I found myself talking about local hospitals with a group of homeschooling mums this morning. Yes, we’ve hit that age. One of my friends defended a particular hospital by reference to how they responded when she gave birth (6 years ago) to her daughter with Down Syndrome. “They were so lovely” she said “Welcoming and congratulating us, which was very different from the experiences a number of my friends had at [insert any of the woefully inadequate local hospitals] when they gave birth to a child with Down syndrome; they reported that the staff were saying how awful it was, how sad they must be, and even how sorry they were”.

It came as no surprise to learn this week that Sex-selective abortion could be legalised in Scotland under recommendations from a review of the abortion law in Scotland, commissioned by the Scottish government, and undertaken by a group chaired by a former trustee of the UK’s largest abortion provider.

The report was commissioned by Humza Yousaf when he was Scotland’s First Minister and blocks provisions from being added to legislation to prevent sex-selective abortion. Some MP’s are outraged.

Kemi Badenoch, leader of the conservative party said “This is a totally disgusting idea” while the party’s equalities spokeswoman Claire Coutinho said, “Killing babies because they are the wrong sex is a dystopian nightmare”. Former Chairman of the Conservative Party, Richard Holden, said, “We all know what sex-selective abortion means. It should have no place in any society and should never be allowed in Britain”.

This is all good stuff, but Kemi Badenoch describes herself as pro-choice, Claire Coutinho voted in favour of an amendment to make ‘DIY’ home abortions permanently available in England and in favour of a motion to approve regulations to give the Northern Ireland secretary further powers to impose the commissioning of abortion services on Northern Ireland.

Richard Holden voted against an amendment to ensure that silent prayer and consensual communication are not made illegal outside abortion clinics, whilst voting for an amendment to introduce censorship zones around abortion clinics that make it a criminal offence to offer support or pray. He also voted in support of an amendment to make ‘DIY’ home abortions permanently available in England, and (like Coutinho above) in support of the motion to approve regulations to give the Northern Ireland secretary powers to impose the commissioning of abortion services on Northern Ireland.

Where was the outrage then?

It is not just killing babies because they are the wrong sex that is the stuff of a dystopian nightmare, but killing babies full stop. Are we really prepared to say that killing babies with Down syndrome, or life limiting illnesses or perfectly healthy babies conceived through rape, or because the mother is worried the baby will impact her chance of promotion, are ok, but draw the line at sex selection? Why stop there? With the ‘Right to Life’ already only afforded to certain people, at certain points, decided by certain other people, is it any wonder that we are entertaining assisted suicide, and how long before it moves from voluntary to mandatory? Try as these politicians might, these things cannot be uncoupled. How many politicians are prepared to say “Well, I personally wouldn’t keep slaves, but I respect other people’s right to do so” - can you even imagine it? Yet we are talking about the choice to end the life of the most vulnerable in society.

If it’s already acceptable for me to kill a baby because I’ve decided that their disability will be a drain on me, then why can’t I choose to have a baby whose gender I believe will benefit me later in life? We have lost all moral authority if we give an inch on this. There are no grey areas when it comes to abortion.

China’s (now abandoned) ‘one-child’ policy ran for 35 years and led to devastating consequences. These are often reported as ‘unintended consequences’ but this is to let the policymakers off lightly.