Criminal complaints filed in France in respect of HPV Vaccines

We have reported on numerous occasions on HPV vaccines such as Gardasil and along with many others have highlighted the ongoing problems associated with them but health boards in general seem unwilling to listen to reason and continue to roll out new vaccination programmes.

Sanevax report that criminal complaints have been filed in France against yet to be named defendants regarding severe injuries after Gardasil vaccinations. The complaints were filed by Camille Krouchner on behalf of ten young women, ages 18 to 24, suffering from a variety of autoimmune disorders including lupus, Guillain-Barré, ADEM, idiopathic hypersomnia and multiple sclerosis after being injected with the HPV vaccine, Gardasil.

According to lead Counsel, Camille Kouchner, the reason Sanofli Pasteur MSD is not directly named as the only defendant is because:

    “The one thing these young women have in common is they have all contracted severely debilitating diseases in the weeks and months following vaccination when they had no medical history. There are many stakeholders and (we) must seek everyone’s responsibility.”

Gardasil was launched in France in 2006 as a preventive measure against cervical cancer. Almost immediately, safety concerns began showing up in medical journals and news reports from the United States, Spain, Germany and Austria. These concerns are being echoed in countries around the world including India, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Japan, Israel, Mexico, Columbia, Peru, New Zealand, Sweden, and The Netherlands, just to name a few.

According to French philosopher and social scientist, Elena Pasca:

    “You cannot kill the Gardasil based on singular stories, scientific demonstration is required; but there is circumstantial evidence against the vaccine.”

Ms. Pasca is absolutely correct. Scientific validation should be required – if safety of the vaccine for some individuals was the only issue at hand. Unfortunately, that is not the case.

According to Dr. Spinosa, gynecologist from Switzerland, analysis of peer-reviewed studies of Gardasil’s efficacy indicates:

 “Even if we vaccinated 85% of girls aged 12 until 2060, assuming it (Gardasil) is 100% effective and immune for life – after 52 years, cervical cancer would decrease 10%; cervical cancer mortality by 13%…”

The SaneVax Team believes it is high time government health authorities take the concerns of medical/scientific experts seriously. The issue of side-effects and HPV vaccines should have never arisen.

When injecting a healthy population against one risk factor for cervical cancer – NO RISK TO CURRENT HEALTH IS ACCEPTABLE – particularly when said vaccine has not been proven to eliminate even one case of cervical cancer.

Pope Francis' first message for 'World Day for Peace'.

--> In his first message for January 1^st 2014, World Day for Peace, Pope Francis stresses the importance of fraternity and that fraternity begins in the Family.

Fraternity is an essential human quality, for we are relational beings. A lively awareness of our relatedness helps us to look upon and to treat each person as a true sister or brother; without fraternity it is impossible to build a just society and a solid and lasting peace. We should remember that fraternity is generally first learned in the family, thanks above all to the responsible and complementary roles of each of its members, particularly the father and the mother. The family is the wellspring of all fraternity, and as such it is the foundation and the first pathway to peace, since, by its vocation, it is meant to spread its love to the world around it. 

Pope Francis continues by highlighting the never ending grave offences against the right to life and also to religious freedom

In many parts of the world, there seems to be no end to grave offences against fundamental human rights, especially the right to life and the right to religious freedom. The tragic phenomenon of human trafficking, in which the unscrupulous prey on the lives and the desperation of others, is but one unsettling example of this. Alongside overt armed conflicts are the less visible but no less cruel wars fought in the economic and financial sectors with means which are equally destructive of lives, families and businesses. 

The full text of the message can be found on this link

RTE (Ireland’s Radio and TV station) lacked balance at a critical juncture in public debate on the Irish Government abortion legislation

-->

The Journal reports that the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland (BAI) has judged that a segment on RTÉ’s Morning Edition about the Protection of Life during Pregnancy Bill lacked the required fairness.

The decision relates to a complaint made about the 12 June edition of the show which discussed an Irish Times poll on the bill.

The complainant, Anne Marie Stack, made a number of submissions about the show, including that criticisms of both the poll and the bill were not represented in studio.

The complainant alleged that, in their absence, the presenter of the show had a duty to “represent their arguments and to challenge the prevailing and uniform view that was emerging from the three contributors”.

The BAI upheld this portion of the complaint saying that:

    While all current affairs programming must meet the statutory requirement for fairness, objectivity and impartiality, additional care is required on the part of broadcasters where the topic of discussion is a matter of current public debate and public controversy, including an issue such as abortion.

The discussion of the poll included an interview with Michael O’Regan from the Irish Times. During the course of this discussion, the presenter put to O’Regan that a representative of the pro-life campaign had suggested that the questions in the poll were “leading”.

This viewpoint was then dismissed by O’Regan as ‘nonsense’, ‘absurd’ and ‘regrettable’. The BAI felt that not enough was done thereafter by the presenter to ensure that there was an adequate alternate viewpoint to the one being put forward.

Other complaints

A number of other complaints were made by Stack which were rejected. These complaints related to a subsequent discussion on the content of the day’s newspapers when it was alleged that the tone, language and demeanour of the presenter had given the impression that she supported the legislation being debated.

Reilly signs order to commence legalized killing of the unborn from January 1st

-->

According to the Irish Independent health Minister Dr James Reilly has signed the order to bring the controversial abortion law into operation from January 1 2014 a day that go down in infamy.

The Protection of Life During Pregnancy act was passed by the Oireachtas consisting of both houses of the Irish Parliament last July and signed into law by President Michael D Higgins. But it required a commencement order from Dr Reilly to take effect.

It is understood that the commencement of the law was due to the need to publish regulations. The independent however reports that the delay occurred in order to establish a review panel to deal with applications for termination of pregnancy.

This could be more accurately described as termination of unborn babies lives

In what is clearly an assault on their right to conscientious objection 25 hospitals in the State have been listed to carry out abortions irrespective of whether medical personnel are willing to do so or not.

The Onward March of the Culture of Death: Euthanasia

The Telegraph reported Dec 16^th that a public panel set up at the request of French President François Hollande has urged him to legalise assisted suicide in specific cases. According to a member of the panel the possibility of committing medically assisted suicide is a legitimate right of a patient close to death or suffering from a terminal pathology. 

Other Countries

Euthanasia has been legal in Belgium since 2002 but has been since its enactment prohibited for patients below 18 years of age.  This age limit is now under threat as the Belgian Senate recently voted by 50 votes to 17 to extend euthanasia to children with disabilities. The vote in the Senate followed from a Senate committee vote to allow minors to seek euthanasia under certain conditions

and to extend the right to request euthanasia to adults with dementia. No age limit would be set, but the children who are euthanized would have “to possess the capacity of discernment.”

There is still a possibility of halting the process in the House of Representatives, though pro-life campaigners fear it will become law.

There is also concern that the number of euthanasia deaths in Belgium is increasing rapidly, with an increase of 25% in 2012. Recent studies indicate that up to 47% of all assisted deaths are not being reported, 32% of all assisted deaths are being done without request and nurses are killing their patients, even though the law restricts euthanasia to doctors

Research conducted by the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) in 2010 found that 32% of euthanasia deaths in the Flanders region of Belgium occurred without an explicit request.

The Netherlands also legislated for euthanasia in 2002. The legislation there allows patients experiencing unbearable suffering to request euthanasia, and doctors who carry it out to be free from the threat of prosecution, provided they have followed strict procedures.

According to this law patients must face a future of unbearable, interminable suffering and the request to die must be voluntary and well considered.

Doctor and patient must be convinced there is no other solution

A second medical opinion must be obtained and life must be ended in a medically appropriate way. The patient facing incapacitation may leave a written agreement to their death.

Switzerland has an unusual position on assisted suicide: it is legally condoned and can be performed by non-physicians. Euthanasia however is illegal, but there is an ongoing debate about decriminalization.

Nelson Mandela

Much has been written in recent weeks on the passing of Nelson Mandela. There is no doubt that his achievements in negotiating a peaceful transition of power in South Africa was truly remarkable. May he rest in peace.

It is a therefore a great pity that Mandela’s pro-abortion record as South Africa’s President is such a major stain on his record as a human rights champion.

During his term as President of the Republic of South Africa (RSA) Mr. Mandela signed the ‘Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act of 1996’ bringing about what the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute has called “one of the most liberal abortion laws in the world.”

The law allows abortion on demand up to the 20th week and up to birth for ‘serious medical reasons. The law, which was amended in 2004 also allows registered nurses and midwives to perform abortions before the 12th week.

Mr Mandela's African National Congress (ANC) has a strong ideological committment to abortion, with the ANC Women's League strongly behind the legalisation of abortion on demand. The ANC has for decades been in a close political and electoral alliance with the South African Communist Party

Since the legalization of abortion in the RSA, there have been at least 1 million legal abortions reported to the government.

The 1996 Constitution signed by Mr Mandela made South Africa the first country to forbid so-called discrimination on the grounds of "sexual orientation”. Homosexualist activists have honoured Mr Mandela for this provision.

Mr Mandela was one of "The Elders", a group of retired international public figures dominated by leading international advocates of abortion, homosexuality and population control.

Another Controversial report to be considered early next year in the European Parliament

Just one week after the EU rejected the controversial Estrela report another equally controversial draft report, the ‘Roadmap against homophobia and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity’ otherwise known as the Lunacek report, was adopted today by the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, by 40 votes to 2 with 6 abstentions.

 

It is understood that today’s report follows a number of previous demands made to the European Parliament over a three year period, to roll out a so called ‘equality strategy’ for LGBT people similar to the strategies that already exist for Roma integration, gender equality and discrimination.

The draft report, which was adopted today by the Committee was prepared by Austrian MEP Ulrike Lunacek. The report calls on the commission to make proposals for the areas of employment, education, health and access to goods and services.

It is expected that the report will come before the Parliament in plenary in February however it is still possible that it may be included in the January session.

We are currently analyzing the report and will report further on it as soon as possible

The consequences of casual sex

The Irish Independent reports that there is a huge increase in the number of women seeking post abortion counseling from the Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA).

Bearing in mind previous rhetoric from pro-abortion sources, which claimed there was no need for post abortion counseling this is significant. It was probably inevitable that IFPA would try to counter the excellent counseling available from pro-life sources rather than allow it to be the ‘only show in town’.

It is also evident from the report that the current permissive approach to sex education continues to be an abysmal failure with STI rates reaching record highs in 2011, a 300% increase since recording began in 1995. Chlamydia, gonorrhoea and genital herpes reached their highest incidence rates, increasing by 19pc, 33pc and 44pc respectively.

Elsewhere there are reports of significant increases in the HIV/AIDS statistics for 2011

•          320 people were newly diagnosed with HIV in 2011.

•          235 were male and 85 were female.

•          8.8% of HIV infections were in 15‐24 year olds.

•          The highest proportion of new diagnoses in 2011 

            (42.5%) were among men who have sex with men 

            (MSM).

•          Heterosexual contact accounted for 34% of new 

           diagnoses. Among the heterosexual cases, 43% were 

           among individuals originating from countries with 

           generalised epidemics, 

           11% had a high‐risk partner or a partner known to be 

           HIV positive and 7% had a partner originating from a 

           country with a generalised epidemic.

•          5% of new diagnoses were among Injecting Drug Users 

           (IDUs).

•          Three Mother to Child Transmission (MTCT) cases 

            were diagnosed.

•          Ireland was reported as the country of birth for 119 new 

           diagnoses (37.3%) and sub‐Saharan Africa for 57 cases 

           (17.8%).  The number of diagnoses among people born 

            in sub‐Saharan Africa has declined from193 in 2003 to 

            57 in 2011.

The tragedy faced by young people arises from, and is compounded by, the advice they are given by those who should know better.  There is, and always has been, a time tested method of avoiding all of this, involving abstinence before marriage and faithfulness within marriage. It is a tragedy that sex education continues to go in the opposite direction.

Survey to be published on abortifacients in Pharmacies

Human Life International (Ireland) (HLII) have announced  in a press release that an unprecedented survey will arrive in EVERY pharmacy in Ireland North and South on Thursday December 12th.

The morning after pill and abortifacients are chemical warfare on unborn children and this survey aims to map which pharmacies do not dispense these deadly drugs.

Of the 14,000 supporters on Human Life International’s database, many have pledged to travel long distances to patron pharmacies which do not deal in these drugs.  HLII are constantly asked if they know of even one pharmacy in the country which doesn’t deal in these abortifacients so they decided to do something about it.

The pharmacy mailing, funded by supporters of HLII  includes the testimonies of three pharmacists who ceased dispensing these drugs on consciencious grounds.

According to the statement HLII are inviting pharmacists who have ethical qualms about dispensing abortifacients to contact them – confidentially if they wish.

HLII Executive Director, Patrick McCrystal, is a pharmacist who paid a heavy price of unemployment for 3 years for refusing to dispense them.

We plan to inform our supporters of the results of this survey for THEIR local area.

Pharmacists and other healthcare professional are invited to  view a special dedicated website www.positivepharmacy.org for scientific and ethical perspectives.

More information:  Rep of Ireland 094 93 75993     N. Ireland 02890 90923357

Human Life International (Ireland), Guadalupe Centre, Main Street, Knock. Co. Mayo.Upholding and defending Life, Faith and Family

TESTIMONIES
Pharmacist stops dispensing abortifacients

By Patrick McCrystal  M.P.S.I/ BSc Pharmacy (QUB)

I ceased dispensing  contraceptive pills and so-called “morning-after” pills in 1993. How could I as a healthcare professional  promote health and prolong life with integrity whilst dispensing drugs that terminated human life?  When a woman who has conceived presented in my pharmacy, I had a duty of care to two patients, not one.

I knew human life was sacred from the moment of conception.  I knew that if I consented to dispensing a drug with an implicit abortifacient mechanism, I was complicit on an attack on a fellow human being.  

It was a very difficult decision-making time, with very few I could really talk to.  Then I discovered “Pharmacists For Life International” based in U.S.A.  What a relief to discover that somewhere in the world there were pharmacists defending human life in this manner.   When I eventually ceased dispensing contraceptive products in 1993, I was subsequently unemployed for three years, despite attending about 30 interviews in North and South Ireland.

 The pharmacy magazine “Chemist and Druggist” carried my two page article “What Kind of Prescription?”   highlighting the pharmacists ethical dilemma of dispensing abortifacients in 1994. The Scottish Pharmacist Association invited me to debate the MAP at their annual conference in 1995, a debate I won. 

It wasn’t good enough when people said to me: “You can’t impose your morality on others.”   By continuing to dispense these drugs against my increasingly uneasy conscience, I was letting others morality be imposed on me.

In a statement to Catholic Italian pharmacists, Pope John Paul II said: “One cannot accept being party to attacks on life…or on procreation.”(1993).   

In 1995, he made the dramatic statement “Whoever attacks human life in some way attacks God himself”  (Evangelium Vitae ; The Gospel of Life)

The idea of coming before God at the judgment at the end of my life and discovering that through my dispensing of abortifacients I had in some way attacked God was something I simply couldn’t do.   It was then I wrote my first book: Contraception and Evangelium Vitae, highlighting the clinical evidence for the abortifacient nature of contraceptive pills and drugs.

About the same time I discovered the statistics revealing that the distribution of contraception actually increases the abortion rate not reduces it.  Even Family Planning Agencies know that.  As someone deeply opposed to abortion, by my dispensing contraception as a pharmacist, I now realised I was party to fuelling the abortion crisis, not reducing it.

Now I am working with to inform the general public of ALL the facts before they make up their mind on contraception.  My most recent book “Who’s at the Centre of your marriage…the Pill or Jesus Christ?” highlights contraception’s disintegrating effect on marital harmony.

We have all been shocked by the reports of chemical attacks on children in Syria.  Abortifacient products are nothing less that chemical attack on children in the womb.

A expanded version of Patrick’s testimony is at www.positivepharmacy.org

Caroline Hubert, Pharmacist testimony

In 1988 I registered as a pharmacist in the UK. In 1994, I became uneasy about supplying what I then understood to be ‘abortifacient’ contraceptive devices and medications. At the time I believed that the ‘morning after pill’ and IUD were the only such ‘culprits’.

As I prayerfully considered the spiritual implications of supplying these products, I became increasingly convicted that my role in authorising their supply was a significant compromise of my own moral integrity.

My personal research into the actions of these products revealed to me that even before the implantation of the early embryo, human life is well under-way. What implants in the womb days after conception is not simply one ‘fertilised egg-cell’ but a developing ‘blastocyst’ consisting already of many cells.

Discovering that somehow impacted me. At that point I made a decision to stop supplying the MAP and IUD as I could no longer in conscience provide a product which I understood would destroy a human life – even at the earliest stage of development. Scripture is clear - ‘Thou shalt not kill’.

On that same day I came accross an article written by Patrick McCrystal in our UK trade magazine ‘The Chemist and Druggist’. This article exposed some uncomfortable new information. This researcher concluded that in fact all oral ‘contraceptive’ drugs and devices have an intrinsic abortifacient potential. One particular quote particularly challenged me. It is apparent that with COC pills which are least likely to have an abortifacient action, there was a possibility in one year in the USA for 12 million users to have up to 5 million chemical abortions!

I then realised the enormity of the decision which lay before me.

As a pharmacist I liked to provide a good service and to give customers satisfaction. Taking a decision to refuse to supply such prescription items could invite much hostility. I prayed at length about my response feeling very fearful of the potential consequences. After 3 months of wrestling with the issue I finally stopped supplying any products with an intrinsic abortifacient potential.  I was employed as a pharmacy manager by a chain of pharmacies in the south of England.

My company accepted my position as a conviction of conscience and I continued to work at this branch for the next 10 years until I left to accommodate the needs of my own growing family of 8 children. Interestingly and unexpectedly the prescription business prospered during this time.

Controversial Estrela report rejected by European Parliament

The European Parliament today rejected the highly controversial Estrela Report on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights.  Two alternative texts were proposed and the second one amendment 2 was adopted by 334 votes to 327 with 35 abstentions. The fact that amendment 2 was approved meant that the original report was therefore defeated.

This result is an important victory for common sense and a victory for democracy that shows the vital importance of standing together. The cooperation of like-minded groups led to the defeat of this radical agenda.  The will of the majority held sway over the voices of anti-life and family MEP’s and pressure groups, responsible for the writing of the report, and who refused to make any significant changes to it even when it was sent back to the FEMM committee by the Parliament.

The Estrela report and resolution would not have been binding but nevertheless would, if approved, have represented a significant statement by the Parliament for the future and it also included areas beyond the competence of the EU and which are reserved for Member States, such as parental rights, sexual education, human dignity and freedom of conscience. 
The report also contained a declaration of a human right to abortion

This is just one battle in a war on life and family and we have to be alert because those who seek to impose their values on us, never rest, we need to be vigilant, there will inevitably be a counter attack, initially using the media. We are aware of another equally bad draft report known as the ‘Lunacek Report’ which is already in the pipeline.

LINK to DRAFT REPORT PR\1006230EN.doc PE521.599v01-00

On the EU Roadmap against homophobia and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity (2013/2183(INI))

Dangerous Estrela report for new vote in EU Parliament on Tuesday December 10th

On Tuesday 10 December the European Parliament will meet in plenary to vote on a new version of the "Report on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights" put forward by Edite Estrela, the radically pro-abortion MEP. We urge all pro-life and pro-family supporters to email their MEPs to encourage them to vote against this very dangerous report.

The report suggests that abortion is a human right, calls for compulsory sex education for all children in and outside of school, and attacks conscientious objection for healthcare professionals. It is believed that Vicky Claeys, president of the European section of the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) has claimed publicly to having been a co-writer of the report.

When the original version of the report was debated in plenary on 22 October, MEPs rejected it and voted to send it back to the FEMM women’s committee. On 26 November the FEMM's women's committee again passed the report and has now sent a new version forward to the plenary for 10 December. The new version of the report is extremely dangerous and must be rejected in its entirety.

The contact details for MEP’s from every European Member State can be accessed on this link. Simply enter the name of the Member State to list the MEP’s and click on individual names to find contact details.

The Estrela report is very dangerous because it:

• says that abortion is a human rights concern, uses the myth of backstreet abortion to claim moral high ground yet no national or International law states abortion is a human right (section 33)

• gives free reign to abortionists, calls for the non-prosecution of abortion (section 36)

• presents liberal abortion laws, sex education, contraception as the ideal (section AK)

• says attention should be devoted to killing unborn children, claims sex education and contraception prevents unwanted pregnancies, contrary to the peer-reviewed evidence (section AE)

• calls for the rejection and overriding of all pro-life laws (section 7)

singles out and attacks traditionally pro-life countries for protecting unborn children (section U)

• wants the EU to skirt around the right of Member States to implement pro-life laws and policies, via EU strategies and policies about public health (section 13)

• wants new EU Member States to make access to abortion and contraception easier, considering prolife laws and policies as obstacles (section 17)

• wants to curtail countries from protecting its citizens, born and unborn (section 29)

• calls for abortion on demand on spurious “risk to health or life” grounds, discriminates against unborn children conceived in rape, makes no mention here of support for mothers who do not want to abort (section 66)

• again calls for the non-prosecution of abortion, dictates to EU Member States and countries wanting to join, making pro-abortion position a requisite for membership (section 37)

• attacks large families (section 26)

• attacks and wants to curtail conscientious objection to abortion, attacks faith based hospitals and staff (section 34)

• targets children and teens, calls for children, teens, young adults to act as sex education propagandists in the EU and even to candidate countries (section K and section 40)

• calls for compulsory anti-life sex education for primary school children onwards (section 41 and 45)

• wants to make sex education a human rights concern (section 42)

• dictates that the homosexual agenda must be promoted in schools (section 51)

• wants the EU to impose abortion as part of overseas development assistance (sections 76, 81, 85)

• anti-life definition of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHRs) purported as a human right, essential for highest level of health (sections G, 1, 4, 14, 25, 67)

Consultation proposed by NI Justice Minister David Forde to introduce abortion in certain circumstances

Northern Ireland's Justice Minister - David Ford caused furor yesterday when he announced his intention to consult on changing the law to allow abortion in some circumstances. In an initiative that corresponds closely with what pro-abortionists are currently attempting to do in the South of Ireland the new consultation Ford proposes is the killing of special-needs babies who may die before or shortly after birth and unborn babies conceived through rape or incest.

Abortion is still a criminal offence in Northern Ireland and the law protects the lives of unborn babies. It is essential that the law should be upheld and that David Ford does not succeed in changing it.

This is essentially about eugenics not women’s health and is based on the idea that people with 'imperfections' are not worthy of life. It stems from the eugenicist ideology popular during the Interwar period, which was promoted by  Marie Stopes and Margaret Sanger and embraced by Hitler.

One has to feel sympathy for parents faced with such devastating news that their baby will not survive but this is no excuse for terminating a life. Every member of the human family is entitled to live as long as he or she is capable of so-doing

Abortion is not the answer it simply kills babies and wounds mothers.

Research shows that women who have abortions due to poor fetal diagnosis have much more severe and long lasting mental health problems afterward, but support services such as perinatal hospice can help to give a more peaceful experience for the family.

The concept of perinatal hospice care has been around in the US for some time and doctors and nurses see with their own eyes how parents who choose to carry their child to term have a very peaceful experience and enjoy the time they can spend with their child even when the child dies naturally at birth due to a severe handicap. Instead of all the stress of an abortion, parents have an opportunity to have loving contact with a child who may not live long but who can be a blessing for the short time he or she may have to live.

Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Bill 2013

Our Colleague Seamas de Barra has carried out an analysis of the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Bill 2013, which is set out below. This bill has many similarities to the British Government’s Mental Capacity Act of 2005 and the Blair government's claims about that Act. The Blair government's Mental Capacity Act 2005 enshrined and expanded euthanasia by neglect in English law.

The (English) Mental Capacity Act 2005 enshrined the principles of the 1992 Bland Judgment in English statute law, expanded to cover a much wider range of circumstances. Tony Bland, who was severely brain-damaged, was dehydrated to death following a ruling by the Law Lords, that tube-delivered food and fluids was medical treatment and could be withdrawn from him in order to cause his death.

Enshrining euthanasia by neglect is actually the first step towards active euthanasia.

Seamas de Barra writes:

I refer to the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Bill 2013, the Order for whose Second Stage is due to be made on Tuesday, 3 December 2013, and whose Second Stage is to be commenced then. I attach a copy of the Bill and the Explanatory Memorandum at the end of this e-mail.

The Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Bill 2013 was presented at First Stage on July 15, 2013. A related Bill, the Advance Healthcare Decisions Bill 2012, No. 2 of 2012, a Private Member’s Bill, sponsored by Deputy Liam Twomey Fine Gael, was withdrawn by Minister for Health and Children, Dr James Reilly, in January 2013, if memory serves me well. Deputy Twomey, as Senator, had sponsored a previous Private Member’s Bill in the Seanad, of the same title in 2010, the Advanced Healthcare Decisions Bill 2010, No. 26 of 2010. It seemed to me at that time that the two Twomey Bills could be have been used to introduce euthanasia by the back door into Ireland.

I have speed-read through the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Bill 2013, No. 83 of 2013. It is a relatively long Bill –– over 100 pages including three Schedules, the Third Schedule being the Convention on the International Protection of Adults, the Hague, January 13, 2000.

       It seems to be tightened up significantly compared with the previous Bills, but nevertheless there are certain matters in this Bill that are matters of concern. I refer you to section 4 (2), (a), (b), and (c); section 25 (a) (vi), (vii); section 27 (4), section 41 (2) (b), section 54 (3), and 54 (3) (a), (b), section 70 (1), (a), and (b).

            Section 4 (2), (a), (b), and (c):

           

            (2) Notwithstanding any other provision in this Act, the High Court, and not the court, shall have jurisdiction relating to every matter in connection with—

(a) non-therapeutic sterilisation,

(b) withdrawal of artificial life-sustaining treatment, or

(c) the donation of an organ,

where the matter concerns a relevant person who lacks capacity. 

Before the Second World War in Germany physically-handicapped and mentally-handicapped persons were sterilized. If you have seen the film Judgment at Nuremberg, starring Spencer Tracy as Chief Trial Judge, Judge Dan Haywood, and Burt Lancaster as German judge during the Nazi period, Ernst Janning, this comes up as one of the charges against Janning. Oliver Wendell Junior, a prominent U.S. judge in the 20th century agreed with that policy, and I believe that Negroes who were in the custody of the State were sterilized; I think it may still be the case where people are in receipt of welfare in certain U.S. states that it is conditional on their being sterilized. If that is not still the case, it was the case until very recently. 

Section 25 (a) (vi), (vii): 

(a) may, without prejudice to the generality of section 23(2)(b), authorise a decision-making representative for the relevant person to make decisions on behalf of the relevant person in respect of any one or more than one of the following matters:

(vi) whether or not the relevant person may travel outside the State;

(vii) granting or refusing consent to the carrying out or continuation of a treatment of the relevant person by a healthcare professional; 

Section 27 (4):

(4) A decision-making representative for a relevant person shall not refuse consent to the carrying out or continuation of life-sustaining treatment for the relevant person. 

Section 41 (2) (b):                                                                                                                                          (2) A personal welfare decision—

(b) extends to giving or refusing treatment by a person providing healthcare for the donor other than refusing life-sustaining treatment. 

Section 54 (3), (a), (b):

(3) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent an informal decision-maker, pending a decision concerning any relevant issue by a court or High Court exercising its powers under this Act, from—

(a) providing life-sustaining treatment for a relevant person, or

(b) doing any act which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary to prevent a serious deterioration in the health of a relevant person. 

Section 70 (1), (a), (b):

(1) In this Part— 10 “adult” means a person who—

(a) as a result of an impairment or insufficiency of his or her personal faculties, cannot protect his or her interests, and

(b) has reached 18 years of age; 

For all the above reasons I think the Bill should be withdrawn.

Séamas de Barra, 

Significant pro-life, pro-family success in the UN General Assembly

Our colleague Peter Smith reports on a significant pro-life, pro-family success at the UN General Assembly as follows:

Under the inspired leadership of the Holy See's Nuncio, Archbishop Francis Chullikatt, the culture of death took a significant stumble at the Third Committee of the UN in New York last week.

There are around forty resolutions crafted by this UN committee in October and November each year. The worst resolution this year was on “Protecting Women Human Rights Defenders (WHRD)” . Now to the uninitiated this resolution sounds like a fine thing. However it is just a smoke screen used by those promoting both a right to abortion and the radical homosexual agenda.

To see what the opposition said about this resolution please see a quote from the “The international Coalition of Women Human Rights Defenders” own website  : 

“Also contentious were important references in the initial draft acknowledging the risks faced by those working on issues of sexual and reproductive health, reproductive rights and matters related to sexuality. [Such words are always used as a euphemism for abortion and birth control.] These references were excluded in later drafts of the resolution as a result of the opposition voiced by a number of States from Africa, Asia and the Holy See. It is regrettable and disappointing that the main sponsors and others were not able to secure specific language related to women human rights defenders working on these critical issues in the final text of the resolution.” 

The African group stood very strongly together , and  introduced L-docs , which are amendments that tabled just before the resolution is accepted. These were then accepted by the sponsor Norway as they did not want a vote , but a resolution accepted by consensus. This unusual step was taken because Norway and the EU  were not willing to accept changes of any significance during the long and protracted negotiations.

This very good result, was obtained for many reasons. Myself and my colleague Patrick Buckley, were there at the negotiations helping out as we usually do. Sharon Slater and Marie Smith both did a fine job even though not in New York. The African Group held together as I heard the South African president had upset some African leaders and as a penance agreed not the split this group at the UN. Another very clever tactic of Archbishop Chullikatt was to have several Africans on the Holy See delegation. They also helped keep the African Group on side. There was  help given by Muslim countries and Russia as well.

So the pro-aborts and LGBT advocates got no advancement of their agenda at this session of the Third committee. As I have said many times before, the Holy See at the United Nations is the conscience of the world on issues of life and the family as well as many other things.

Death of Alison Davis, head of SPUC division,"No Less Human"

SPUC report the sad news of the death of Alison Davis, the long standing leader of the SPUC division ‘No Less Human’, the division for disabled people within SPUC, Alison died this morning at 08:40 GMT, aged 58. She had been unwell for several years, and a long-term difficulty in eating resulted in her sad passing this morning.

SPUC Chief Executive John Smeaton in a statement earlier this morning said:

"Everyone in SPUC and the whole pro-life movement will be greatly saddened at her passing. Frail in body, she was full of strength in defence of the most defenceless human beings - disabled unborn children. Her keen insight and uncompromising solidarity have proved a powerful defence for the sick and disabled targeted with euthanasia. Her own early struggle with temptations to suicide made her an exceptional witness that life is always worth living. Alison's strong Catholic faith and her love of children moved her to care for orphans in India. Countless people touched by her life will now be praying that Alison, her family and her friends will receive the peace they seek."

Fr John Fleming, SPUC's bioethical consultant, said:

"Alison was a great pro-life warrior, and a wonderful example to us all of one who accepted her sufferings with astonishing equanimity. I also wish to pay tribute to Colin Harte, whose care for Alison was heroic, constant, and expert, and who greatly enhanced Alison's quality of life in every possible way."

Alison Davis and SPUC's division for disabled people ("No Less Human")

Alison Davis, who led SPUC’s No Less Human since 1982, had spina bifida and was a major commentator on anti-life philosophies and policies which discriminate, lethally, against disabled people http://www.spuc.org.uk/about/no-less-human/alison No Less Human, SPUC’s division for disabled people, their loved ones and carers http://www.spuc.org.uk/about/no-less-human/about// promotes the equal status, worth and rights of disabled people, including the most fundamental right of all – the  right to life, from conception to natural death. In spite of serious illness, Alison continued to write, publish and broadcast on the eugenic nature of the Abortion Act and on healthcare, government policies, which treat disabled lives as expendable – including major interviews on BBC’s Newsnight, the BBC World Service’s series Heart and Soul: Choosing Life and leading letters in the national newspapers throughout Britain. In addition, in August 2009 she published a paper showing how euthanasia has spread, starting with the 1992 Bland judgment, and how it has expanded as a result of the 2005 Mental Capacity Act and came to be implemented through the Liverpool Care Pathway.

In September 1982, in my report to SPUC’s national council, I proposed that Alison Davis should be asked to join the Council to represent SPUC’s Handicap Division, now known as No Less Human. The minutes state that my proposal "was warmly agreed by the Council".

Alison's early involvement in SPUC

Not long before, Alison, who had previously been in favour of abortion, had changed her mind on the issue, having read about a baby named Louise born in High Wycombe Hospital who was found to have both spina bifida and hydrocephalus. In Alison’s words:

"Her paediatrician, Dr. Donald Garrow, persuaded her parents that she would be ‘better off dead’ as she would be unable to walk, and would thus compare herself unfavourably with her two able-bodied sisters ...  Dr. Garrow made a video of her last days which was shown on daytime TV, and which I saw. Louise's face was grey, her eyes sunken. I wrote to Dr. Garrow at the hospital and explained that I was disabled to just the extent that Louise had been, and that I felt he had made a horribly wrong decision. In response he invited me to speak to his ‘team’ at the hospital, which I accepted. I cannot remember exactly what I said, but I pointed out that life with spina bifida and hydrocephalus could be full and happy, and that it was in any case wrong to deliberately kill any child on grounds of his/her disability."

Alison remained at the helm of SPUC’s work for disability rights ever since, speaking at SPUC’s Mother Teresa Rally in 1983 and joining SPUC's full-time staff in 2000.