Good Commentary On "After Birth Abortion."

Here’s a good commentary on the recent academic article advocating “after birth abortion.”

The infanticide controversy: the authors

On February 23 the Journal of Medical Ethics published “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?”, an article by two Italian ethicists working in Australia. They argued that infanticide is morally permissible, essentially because the new-born is not yet a person, that is, a being conscious of his or her own interests.

The rest is history. There was a tsunami of media coverage, a hurricane of vituperative commentary on the airwaves and in newspaper comments, and much agitated discussion in bioethics blogs. It was even denounced in the US House of Representatives (see the video above). more

Excellent Commentary On "After Birth Abortion"

Here’s an excellent commentary by my colleague Dr. Peter Saunders about the so-called “after birth abortion” furor.

Leading bioethicists conclude infanticide no different from abortion
Two bioethicists have stirred up huge controversy this week by publishing an article suggesting that infanticide is equivalent to abortion.
 Writing in the Journal of Medical Ethics, Alberto Giubilini from the University of Milan and Francesca Minerva from Melbourne University argue that foetuses and newborns ‘do not have the same moral status as actual persons’ and conclude that ‘after birth abortion (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled’. more

More On "After Birth Abortions"

Here’s more on the controversial bioethicists who believe in “after birth abortions.”

Bioethics After Birth Abortions: Killing Non Persons

Dr. Francesca Minerva and Alberto Giubilini released and article to The Journal of Medical Ethics where they were quite blunt on how to approach life going forward. It’s almost refreshing to hear people speak frankly on the side of death. Here is what they say:

Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus’ health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled. more