Outrageous: Ethicists Argue For Acceptance of “After-Birth Abortions”

According to two Australian ethicists, the baby in that photo should be killed if the parents so wish it, in what they call “after-birth abortion”. It’s not infanticide or murder to them. No, it’s just another form of abortion, because newborns aren’t really people yet. And while it sounds crazy and horrific, this unfortunately isn’t something I’m making up.

Alberto Giubilini with Monash University in Melbourne and Francesca Minerva at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne write that in “circumstances occur[ing] after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible.”

The two are quick to note that they prefer the term “after-birth abortion“ as opposed to ”infanticide.” Why? Because it “[emphasizes] that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus (on which ‘abortions’ in the traditional sense are performed) rather than to that of a child.” The authors also do not agree with the term euthanasia for this practice as the best interest of the person who would be killed is not necessarily the primary reason his or her life is being terminated. In other words, it may be in the parents’ best interest to terminate the life, not the newborns.

The circumstances, the authors state, where after-birth abortion should be considered acceptable include instances where the newborn would be putting the well-being of the family at risk, even if it had the potential for an “acceptable” life. The authors cite Downs Syndrome as an example, stating that while the quality of life of individuals with Downs is often reported as happy, “such children might be an unbearable burden on the family and on society as a whole, when the state economically provides for their care.”

This means a newborn whose family (or society) that could be socially, economically or psychologically burdened or damaged by the newborn should have the ability to seek out an after-birth abortion. They state that after-birth abortions are not preferable over early-term abortions of fetuses but should circumstances change with the family or the fetus in the womb, then they advocate that this option should be made available.

As if that wasn’t sickening enough, there’s also this little gem:

Merely being human is not in itself a reason for ascribing someone a right to life.

Let that sink in for a few minutes.

So if a baby is born with Down Syndrome, or another disability, then according to these two, a parent should be able to just kill it. Or let’s say that the mother decides that being a parent is just too stressful for her. She should be able to kill her baby then, too. Baby costs too much money? Yep, just kill it. All of these things are perfectly acceptable, because newborns aren’t real people yet. And as for adoption in any of these circumstances? Well, that could cause the mother emotional distress, so the answer would be… kill the baby! The fact that they see adoption as something that would cause a mother emotional distress but not the murder of their own child just shows how sick these two people are.

The sad thing is, that this point of view is inevitable once you start allowing people to define just what a human being actually is. If we don’t value all life, then does it really make a difference when we kill a baby? At this point, what difference does it make if the baby is inside the mother’s womb or outside of it?

And while it sounds incredible that anything like this would ever be allowed outside of speculation in a bioethics journal, keep in mind the horrors of partial birth abortion. Keep in mind that our own president voted in favor of infanticide. And the arguments that these ethicists are making are the exact same arguments that pro-abortion advocates make for abortion every day.

Pro-aborts would surely scoff at this as fear-mongering, but I’d be curious to know what their answer is to why it is acceptable to kill a baby one day before they are born, and unacceptable to kill them the next day after they’ve been born. When we fail to stand for life, this is the inevitable conclusion. First it’s just the unborn babies that it’s OK to kill. Then it’s the newborns, and then the “undesirables”. If pro-choice is all about the choice of the mother, with no protection given to the child whatsoever, then why should it really make a difference when she kills her child?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=669540127 Stefan Hansen

    After reading this blog post, as well as the actual paper, I have but one question: did Fiano read the paper? Did any of my fellow 300+ “commenteers” read the paper by Giubilini and Minerva? If you haven’t read the actual paper, then I strongly suggest you do, before making any comments.

  • Joan

    Abortion is an issue that few are acknowledging that Tax payers are paying the abortion doctors for these procedures. Are these women so stupid, lazy, or undisciplined that they can’t take the pill, or use condoms or foam??? Are these women so mean to kill this unborn or now the born child that they can’t set this baby up for adoption??? How can it be the responsibility of the tax payers to foot the bill for the irresponsibility of these women? How can this even be in the political realm when it is so personal and within the value system and morals of individual women? I just don’t understand how this got into the realm of the government. There are so many women who can’t have children that would love to have one that is being aborted/killed that it is a disgrace. What happened to adoption??? What happened to abstinence or at least important instead of casual sex?

    • http://www.facebook.com/nathan.t.merrill Nathan Merrill

      Joan, a child has a cost to society of over $100,000. An abortion costs $500. A woman cannot possibly have 2000 abortions in their lifetime. Ergo, abortion is cheaper than having them have babies.

      Of course, free contraception is cheaper still.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=669540127 Stefan Hansen

    This issue has been greatly distorted in the media. I strongly suggest you read the actual paper before commenting.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=669540127 Stefan Hansen

    Why does my comment constantly disappear?

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=669540127 Stefan Hansen

      Good question!

  • Olwynandian

    I don’t know where these people come from but growing up as a christian you don’t kill babies that is a worse sin than adultry, rape and all the things that people  take as sin. A baby is a person as soon as it is conceived. I have no idea where it says any where  that a baby born is not human in the bible or any where else that says a baby is not a human being as soon as a sperm and an egg combine. Get a life people  you need to rethink  because if your mother or father killed you when you were born you and your stupid remarks would not be of any significance !  I think that the people that have that way of thinking should just not reproduce than no one would have to listen to their stupid   logic. I have 7 children and 9 grandchildren and would not give up  or kill any of them 

  • MAD

    This is horrible Anyone who would ever consider killing a innocent life should be killed my goodness whats this world coming to just like all you people sitting here comparing killing a baby to killing a animal my lord people what is this world turning into!! Animals are here for eating!! Do you this a Tiger is going to sit here and hesitate on eating you?? Do you think a grizzly bear is going to sit there and take up for you!! Its called life if you eat nothing but Veggies did you not know there a living thing also!! Get over it!! A babys precious life should never be compared to a animal and its sad if you think of it that way how about instead of killing babys they start Spaying woman like they do dogs and cats if we wanna compare to animals!! Babys are only made one way!! I think any woman who can choose to terminate a baby after she thought she was responsible enough to lay down and make that baby should have every right of ever having another baby taken away!! When people start losing common sense is exactly when this world is going to end!! And That end is very NEAR!!!

  • http://www.facebook.com/nathan.t.merrill Nathan Merrill

    Infanticide is a perfectly acceptable practice when carried out on newborn babies, because they are not, in fact, people yet.
    A person is defined by intelligence. That is the ONLY thing that separates us from the so-called lesser animals, and likewise, we define as people in fiction things with human-like intelligence. If an animal we have no special moral compunction killing (and eating!) is more intelligent than a newborn baby, then the newborn baby quite clearly is not, in fact, a person.

    Being human does not make a person. My hair and toenails are human, but they are not people. Sperm and eggs are not people. Fetuses are not people. Tumors are not people.

    I eat pigs. As I am not reprehensible, I do not eat people. Ergo, it would be hypocritical of me to define something less intelligent than a pig as a person, because, as intelligence is what defines someone as a person, it would make a pig a person.

    Drawing an arbitrary line south of the “people line” is acceptable to avoid mistakes (we wouldn’t want to accidentally kill any people) but I don’t see anything particularly morally reprehensible about what they’re advocating. Indeed, in many cases it could save everyone a lot of trouble, resources, and heartache. There are plenty of humans on the planet already, no need to add unnecessarily to them. If a baby is unwanted, it should not exist, simple as that. Unwanted children grow up to become criminals at a far higher rate than desired children, and in any event the world is overpopulated and something that responsibly reduces that burden is not bad.

    There is no clear line between when something becomes a person and when something is not a person. The idea that there is, is simply wrong, and black and white thinking is a bad thing. But there has to be some sort of law defining when something is indeed a person, simply to rule out ambiguity, and that line should be drawn where no people are harmed. I’d say killing a newborn is okay, morally speaking.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1033329012 Elisabeth Skoro

      Nathan, even if I throw out my many levels of objections to what you’re saying and argue on your terms, I need to ask: How do you define “intelligence?”  Is it an IQ score? Please let me know. Because I think potential needs to be considered here, too.

      So, what if we go with my definition of “intelligence” and I think you’re south of the human line? Does that give me the right to kill you? What does that mean for those who are born with disabilities? Become disabled?

      I think you’re dealing with a very slippery slope. I object to it on several levels; This is the least of them.

  • Willchansr

    murder is murder, no matter what color you paint it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001405116247 Jere N Angie Gaffney

    I am SO sick. The love and desire to protect my child that I felt from the moment I knew of his existence leaves me unable to fathom HOW a mother could extinguish the life of their own child. The argument of these evil fools is appalling to me as are all arguments on the topic of abortion in terms of PRO-Abortion….so sickening. I need to go snuggle with my little PERSON. Now and remember that there still is good in this world amongst all the evilness….

  • Amanda_kirby2005

    Thats why theres a thing called Adoption

  • greg

    if we were to allow this treatment to domesticated pets their would be such moral outrage you wouldnt believe so how perverse is this dangerous development  and such a callous and gutlless attack on newborn babies is vile to nature to man and God and anyone who lets this happens deserves desexing like a dog or a cat since they operate at that level

  • Danyelblanchette

    Reading some of the post made me laugh. Y’all start with being normal then had to throw religion into the mix. Give me a damn break. We r honestly talking about morals as human beings. There was an episode of 20/20 about how in some country it was the norm for little girls to be killed. There are more men in the country then women cause they are costly. Here in the usa its murder if u kill a newborn. I’m sorry unless u where raped,or the baby would kill u put it up for adoption. Don’t kill it. As soon as its concieved its a human being it has a heart beat. Stop trying to do population control.

  • Lisa Moore

    All I have to say is, “Vengeance is Mine, sayest the Lord” and after what I just read I can’t help but wish He would do something very,very soon!  That’s the christian principled me but the human side of me wishes God would get those satanic sadists and ….   If I was in the hospital room I would do whatever it took to stop those murderers and it would be done with a clear conscience.  Too many people have opinions, especially the politically correct let’s pray and turn away.  If I was the one going to my death I would wish to have a saviour to help me in my hour of need not a bunch of’ cross over to the other side of the street levites’, (as in the parable of The Good Samaritan).  God’s people have warm blood.

  • http://www.facebook.com/ERICLARSHANSON Eric L Hanson

    Frankly, nothing these reptiles come up with can surprise me anymore… It clearly has nothing to do with “in the womb”… just a complete and cold disregard for sanctity of human life (with the exception of a nice death-row inmate for whom the leftist loons will all stand out holding candles).

  • Aundie fields

    Completely sickening and sad :( A baby is a person. If you do not want a baby do not have sex! Plain and simple. And for those who where raped and you do not want the baby give it up for adoption don’ t kill it! And if you are worried about pain during labor get over it they have drugs that kill the worst part of the pain. Women have been giving birth for as long as we have been here. I didn’t want kids at first but when i got pregnant it wasn’t the end of the world i just told myself it’ll be ok, i can do this and let’s see where it takes me. I did not beleive in abortion and i was not killing a baby. I was scared too but i did it. And i am not rich by any means but i work and i make it through with two beautiful children now. There is no excuse for killing a baby. I would not trade my kids for anything in the world. I am thankful for them.

  • Jenn

    I wonder…if the pro choicers are so adamant about their “choice” then why are they still here???….

  • Brandi

    This world makes me sick. I cant believe ppl think this is acceptable.

  • Ana Vizcaino

    I am completely against! It is sad to know that people would actually think this is OK??!! It is sickening. I wonder what kind of moral and values where taught to them while growing up or just how could they get to such conclusions!! Again, just sickening…

  • Mysterious

    I think abortion is good