You

...can stop injustice.

 Starting
in the
womb
Every day in the U.K., 540 innocent babies are denied justice
and executed with no judge, no jury, and no trial.1 If that’s not
unjust, I don’t know what is. Since 1968, the United Kingdom
has the blood of more than 7 million babies on its hands.2
The U.K. has some of the most permissive abortion laws,
abortion is legal all nine months of pregnancy.3 `

What will you do to stop injustice?

1,2 Department of Health Statistical Bulletin. 2009│ 3The Abortion Act of 1967.│
*For full citations visit www.40daysforlife.com/london.

20 week preborn baby

Learn more about the injustice... Good Counsel

Pregnancy Help

p. 3 Who is wounded by 8
p. Discover the cover-up about 0800 096 2518
www.goodcounselnet.co.uk
abortion? abortion that harms women. Life Charity

p. 4 What physical damage is 9

p. What are the long-term
0800 915 4600
0207 240 1275—London
www.lifecharity.org.uk
done to those who have effects of this injustice on the
abortions? world? Abortion Recovery Care and Helpline
Help After An Abortion

0845 603 6501

p. 5 How are abortions done? Produced and Designed by: www.archtrust.org.uk
Silent No More Recovery — 24 hour
p.6-7 Do you know when a 0141 226 5407
unitedkingdom@silentnomore
baby’s heart begins to beat awareness.org
2855 Anthony Lane S., Suite B7 www.silentnomoreawareness.org
humanlifealliance

and brain waves start? Minneapolis, Minnesota 55418 USA

Rachel’s Vineyard
Distributed by:
www.humanlife.org
651-484-1040 07505 904656
www.rachelsvineyard.org.uk
Abortion Recovery InterNational
www.abortionrecovery.org
40 Days of prayer, fasting and community
outreach to bring about the end of abortion. Get More Chastity Education for Schools &
Other Help

40DaysforLifeLondon@gmail.com Copies! Natural Family Planning Training and

www.40daysforlife.com/london Advice from FLI-UK
07947 698195 0208 857 9950 / www.flionline.org
2 Human Life Alliance © 2011 │ Advertising Supplement
 I Still Remember...
hat week-long horror of a roller coaster ride when my ready for this? What about the wedding? What about our

T then-fiancée found out she was pregnant. She asked if I’d

like to do the nursery in a Warner Brothers theme or
Disney. My first thought was “Oh NO! NO!!!!!!” I was
terrified. I regretted immediately that conversation we had at
the very beginning of our relationship— that we would never
get an abortion should she become pregnant. Now I was
stuck. I wanted an escape hatch. I wanted out... any way out.
Although I said I would support her, I was really trying to
find that escape hatch.
Telling my parents was hard. My father encouraged us
to have the baby; my mum cried, not knowing “whether to be
happy or sad” for us. Her parents were worse. After we told
them the news, her father demanded that we “take care of
this” because he didn’t want there to be unseemly appear-
ances in his family. I had found my escape hatch. Even
though I argued fiercely with him before we left, once we
were alone I started gently emphasizing her father’s
positions. What would everyone say? Are we really
plans? I didn’t think of the baby... not really. Not then. I was
in a panic and I wanted out and that was the way I was
playing it.
I don’t remember how I finally changed her mind— it
took about a week, but I did it. I remember being with her at
the clinic, with one of her friends, smoking outside and then
driving her home thinking “Thank God it’s over!”
The child would be about 13 or 14 years old now.
When I look at our two children, I know there ought to be
three. I don’t know if the baby was a boy or a girl. I keep
thinking it was a girl, probably because my wife wanted one
so badly. Although I still struggle with depression and guilt,
I eventually found forgiveness. My wife is not ready to take
that step. So I must continue to try and help her bear that
burden and make up for the crucial time I failed her.
Used with permission from Fatherhood Forever
Foundation. www.fatherhoodforever.org
Ryan

Questioning

“T im, I think I’m pregnant.”
My boyfriend sighed deeply, his gaze remaining
fixed on the TV. He then muttered something that
made me feel completely deserted.
I knew from firsthand experience how tough
it was to raise a child as a single mother. I already
had a two-year-old daughter, Jennifer, from an
earlier unsuccessful marriage. When my
pregnancy was confirmed, Tim’s non-committal
response to my distress and his move 400 miles
away, left me despondent and convinced that
abortion was the “easy way out.” I was already
struggling financially with one child. How could
I raise two?
I felt desperately alone. I often cried myself
to sleep. I decided to confide in a couple of
college professors who collected money to fly me
out of town to have an abortion. Now I felt
obligated to go through with it. Still, I agonized!
I was summoned to the room where the
abortions were performed. I could hear a woman
sobbing hysterically in the recovery room. That
memory still haunts me.
As the doctor was examining me prior to
performing the abortion, he suddenly stopped and
said to the nurse, “Get her out of here! She’s too
far along!” Relief instantly washed over me! How
odd. I had thought I wanted an abortion, but now
felt instantly relieved to know I was still pregnant.
I decided to muster every ounce of
courage to deal with my pregnancy.
My ambivalence turned into love for
the
my preborn daughter, Melanie. It took
energy and creativity to support the
“easy
three of us, but my two daughters
inspired me to do great things. I
finished my degree; then I went on
to get my Master’s and Ph.D.
When we endure something
tough, our character and self-esteem are
way
strengthened. Many women who have
confessed to me that they’ve had
abortions have discovered that the
“easy way out” is just an illusion. Some
are in abusive relationships, on anti-
out”
depressants, or just seem detached from
life. Some sadly remember their aborted
child’s “would be” birthday each year.
I cannot promise that it will be easy. I
can only promise that the anguish will pass
and that there are people who will help
you through this trying time. One day
you will look back on the birth of
your child and know that you
did the right thing.
Dr. Angela Woodhul
l

Advertising Supplement │humanlife.org 3

 The Long-Term Effects of Abortion
T hey tell you, “It’s a quick fix.” They say, “It will
solve your problems and allow you to get on
with your life.” They’re wrong. Few women
have been told that having an abortion carries lasting
physical and psychological consequences. If they had
been warned, would their “choice” have been
abortion?
One woman who wishes she had known better is
Ann Marie. As a post-abortive woman, she shares,
“Abortion changes you forever. I thought the abortion
would free me up from a responsibility I felt I was not
ready for. Instead it held me in bondage to feelings of
regret, remorse, depression, and despair. My soul
became a slave to self-hatred and worthlessness. My
sanity was the price I would pay. Women deserve better
than abortion.”
These feelings of depression and despair are some
of the common psychological complications from
abortion. Pregnant women who abort have a six times
higher rate of suicide than those who carry their babies
likely to attempt suicide than teens who have not had an
abortion.2 A recent study found that, compared to women
who gave birth, women who aborted were 65% more
likely to be at risk of long-term clinical depression.3
“Abortion Changes You
Forever...” _ Ann Marie
In addition to these psychological problems,
women are susceptible to serious physical complications
due to the nature of the procedures used to abort
children. Women can face perforation of the uterus,
hemorrhaging that requires transfusion, cardiac arrest,
endotoxic shock, major unintended surgery, infection
future ectopic pregnancy, infertility, hysterectomy,
stillbirth, miscarriage, and premature birth than women
who have not had abortions.5
Women who abort are not only putting their own
lives and health at risk; they also endanger the lives of
their current and future children. Women who abort are
144% more likely to physically abuse their children.6
In addition, women who have undergone previous
abortions have a 60% higher risk of miscarriage.7
The physical and psychological consequences of
abortion are devastating. Ann Marie is just one of the
many voices of hurting post-abortive women.
Countless other women have come forward to share
their stories about the aftermath of abortion. Read
some of their accounts at www.silentnomoreaware
ness.org/testimonies/index.aspx. There is hope and
healing after abortion—see page two for post-abortive
resources. `
European J. Public Health. 2005.│2 Stress, Depression and Suicide:
1

A Study of Adolescents in Minnesota. (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota

to term.1 Teenagers who abort are 10 times more
resulting in hospitalization, convulsion, undiagnosed
ectopic (tubal) pregnancy, cervical laceration, uterine
rupture, and death.4
Women who abort are more likely to experience
Extension Service, 1986).│3 Medical Science Monitor. 2003.│4 Abortion
Practice. 1990.│5 Detrimental Effects of Abortion: An Annotated Bibliography
with Commentary. 2002.│6 Acta Paediatrica. 2005.│7 BJOG: An International
Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. Dec. 2006.│*For full citations visit
www.40daysforlife.com/london.

I was
and pregnant
18
s ince I had already enlisted in the Air Force, I thought I had to have
an abortion in order to make something out of my life. My best
friend drove me to the abortion clinic. It was like an assembly line.
When the ultrasound was being performed, I asked to see it, but this wasn’t
allowed. So much for “an informed decision.” Then I asked how far along
I was. I was told I was nine-and-a-half weeks pregnant. That hit me hard.
I started doubting and wanted to talk
to my friend, but I wasn’t allowed to
do that either. Don’t make the
When it was my turn, the nurse same mistake...
told me that I was going to feel some
discomfort, like strong menstrual
cramps. The truth is that the abortion was more pain than I’ve ever felt
in my life. It felt like my insides were literally being sucked out of my
body. Later, I went into shock.
After the abortion, I tried to make up for it by trying to get pregnant
again. I wanted my baby back, but I never got pregnant again. I don’t
know if I can ever have another baby. I named my baby. Later I found out
this is part of the grieving process.
Two-and-a-half years later, I ended up in the hospital with bulimia. I
felt that no one had punished me for what I had done, so I was punishing
myself. I was obsessed with women who were pregnant, and my life was
in shambles! I was suffering from post-abortion trauma. When I was 21
years old, I received help from a woman who was involved with pro-life
activism. I went through a programme called “Conquerors.” Not only
did I experience forgiveness, but I was also challenged to help others. I
answered the challenge and started sidewalk counselling.
There is a healing process that comes from getting involved in
the pro-life movement. I talk to youth groups and students and share
my testimony. To them, and to you, I plead, “Please don’t make the
same mistake I did.”

Michelle
4 Human Life Alliance │ Advertising Supplement
 Abortion Metho ds
Emergency Contraception – Plan B
the lining of the uterus, which, if fertilisation occurs,
abortionist cuts the placenta and umbilical cord into
pieces and scrapes them out into a basin. The uterus is
again suctioned out to ensure that no body parts have
been left behind. Bleeding is usually profuse.10

can prevent an embryo from implanting, causing an

(The Morning-After Pill)
Emergency Contraception (EC) contains synthetic
progestogen (not to be confused with naturally occur-
ring progesterone) and is a large dose of the common
birth control pill, designed to be taken as a single dose
within 72 hours after “unprotected sex.”
EC works in three ways. First, it attempts to stop
ovulation. Depending on where a woman is in her
cycle, ovulation may or may not have already occurred
before EC was taken. Second, EC attempts to stop
fertilisation by impeding the transportation of the
sperm and the egg. Third, EC tries to stop implantation
by altering (thinning) the lining of the endometrium
(or uterus) so the embryo cannot implant and receive
nourishment from the mother. The first two methods
are contraceptive, but if they fail, the third method can
cause an abortion because it occurs after fertilisation.
(See “What About Birth Control?” below.)1
ellaOne – Ulipristal Acetate (UPA)
EllaOne is a selective progesterone receptor modulator
(SPRM). SPRMs block the action of the hormone
progesterone, which is necessary for ovulation and
implantation to occur. Progesterone also maintains
the lining of the uterus and supports the embryo.
Currently, the only other legal SPRM drug available
in the United Kingdom is RU-486 (mifepristone).
Although ellaOne acts similarly to RU-486, it is
being billed as an emergency contraceptive.2 EllaOne
is designed to be taken as a single dose within 5 days
of “unprotected sex.” It is thought to inhibit and
delay ovulation, attempting to prevent fertilisation.
However, ovulation may or may not have already
occurred before ellaOne was taken. EllaOne also alters
abortion.3,4
RU-486 – Mifeprex (The Abortion Pill)
Mifeprex blocks the action of the hormone proges-
terone which is needed to maintain the lining of the
uterus and provides oxygen and nutrients for the baby.
Without it, the baby dies. Mifeprex is used in
conjunction with the drug Cytotec (misoprostol),
which is taken two days after Mifeprex, causing
uterine bleeding (sometimes profuse), strong
contractions, and expulsion of the baby.
The pregnant woman first visits the abortionist to
obtain the Mifeprex pills, returns two days later to
receive misoprostol, and returns a third time to verify
that the abortion is complete. The failure rate of this
method is about 8 percent if the pills are taken within
7 weeks and up to 23 percent at 8-9 weeks. If the baby
survives the abortion, there is a high risk that he or she
will suffer mental and/or physical birth defects from
the misoprostol.5,6
Vacuum Aspiration
In this first trimester procedure, the abortionist inserts
a hollow plastic suction tube into the dilated cervix.
The uterus is emptied by either a manual syringe or
high-powered suction machine. The baby is torn into
pieces as he or she is pulled through the hose.7,8,9
Dilation and Suction Curettage (D&C)
This is similar to the vacuum aspiration but is gener-
ally used after 14 weeks. After the baby is suctioned
out of the uterus the abortionist inserts a curette, a
loop-shaped, steel knife, into the uterus. With this the
Dilation and Evacuation (D&E)
Once the cervix is dilated considerably farther than
in first trimester abortions, the abortionist inserts a
narrow forceps that resembles a pliers. This instrument
is needed because the baby’s bones are calcified, as is
the skull. The abortionist inserts the instrument into
the uterus, seizes a leg or other part of the body and,
with a twisting motion, tears it from the baby’s body.
The spine is snapped and the skull crushed. Body parts
are then reassembled and counted to make certain that
the entire baby has been removed and that no parts
remain in the womb.11,12,13,14
Induction or Prostaglandin Abortion
Labour is induced using prostaglandin drugs, and the
cervix is dilated. To ensure the baby will be dead upon
delivery and to start uterine contractions, the abortion-
ist may inject saline (salt water) or urea (a substance
found naturally in urine and blood). To guarantee
against a live birth and legal complications, doctors
will inject the drug Digoxin or potassium chloride
directly into the baby’s heart to kill the child before
delivery. Other times the baby is delivered alive and
left without medical intervention until he or she dies.15
This method is used in the second and third
trimester.16 `
*For full citations visit

whaatboutBirth Control?
www.40daysforlife.com/london.

To see what an abortion looks like visit www.herestheblood.com (Warning:Graphic Photos)

A
ccording to scientific research, all hormonal
contraceptives have the capability to cause an
abortion (the pill,1 patch,2 mini-pill,3 jab,4 vaginal
ring,5 emergency contraception,6 intrauterine devices,7,8
etc). Hormonal contraceptives work in three ways: by
attempting to stop ovulation (the release of the egg from
the ovary), by thickening cervical fluids to prevent
fertilisation, and by thinning the lining of the uterus to
prevent implantation. The first two methods are
contraceptive, but if they fail, the third method can
cause an abortion since it occurs after fertilisation.
Hormonal contraception does not always stop
ovulation. When breakthrough ovulation occurs, there
is a possibility of fertilisation. Studies have shown that
ovulation rates in women taking oral contraceptives
ranged from 1.7 to 28.6 percent per cycle. Ovulation
rates for women taking progestin-only pills (the mini-
pill) ranged from 33 to 65 percent.9 When these
contraceptives do not stop fertilisation, they are
designed to cause an abortion by making it difficult
for the embryo to implant and receive nourishment
from the mother. Birth control manufacturers insist that
their products do not terminate an existing pregnancy.
However, they have redefined the terms “conception”
and “pregnancy” to mean implantation rather than
fertilisation (implantation happens 7-10 days after
fertilisation).10
Emergency contraception (EC) is a large dose of
morning-after pill and is designed to be taken as a single
dose after “unprotected sex.” Documented side effects
from EC include nausea, abdominal pain, fatigue,
headache, dizziness, vomiting, diarrhea, breast
tenderness, menstrual changes,11 and ectopic pregnancy.12
Contrary to popular arguements, increased access to EC
does not decrease the rate of pregnancies and surgical
abortions.13 In England, sexually transmitted infection
rates have increased significantly since EC became
widely available.14
Contraceptive failure is the most common reason
given for abortion. In one UK study, 62% of women who
had abortions were using contraception at the time when
they fell pregnant.15 To give an idea of the failure rates, if
100 sexually active women used condoms for one year,
15 would fall pregnant. For the mini-pill, 8 would fall
pregnant out of 100.16 `
1 Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceuticals. “Full US Prescribing Information.”
│2 Ibid.│3 Ibid.│4 Pfizer Inc. “Depo-Provera and Depo-subq Provera US
Physician Prescribing Information.”│5 Shering-Plough Corporation. “NuvaR-
ing Prescribing Information.”│6 Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc. “Plan B Full US
Prescribing Information.”│7 Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc. “Paragard Full US
Prescribing Information.”│8 Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals. “How
Mirena works.”│9 Larimore and Stranford. Archives of Family Medicine.
Feb. 2000.│10 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Sep.
1965.│11 Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc. “Plan B Full US Prescribing Informa-
tion.”│12 Harrison-Woolrych, Mira, MD. “Progestogen-Only Emergency
Contraception and Ectopic Pregnancy. Prescriber Update 2002.”│13 Obstet
Gynecol. Dec. 2007.│14 Paton, David. “Random Behavior or Rational
Choice? Family Planning, Teenage Pregnancy, and STIs.” Nov. 2003.│
15 London: Marie Stopes International. 2009.│16 The British Pregnancy

the common birth control pill. EC is also known as the Advisory Service. Accessed 2010.│*For full citations visit www.40days
forlife.com/london.
Advertising Supplement │humanlife.org 5
 Social J u s t i c e i n
Begins
D a y 1 : Fe rtili sati on
respiratory system. The gende
determined, and family resem
well.12 By the end of the month
4-5 The sperm joins with the egg to form one cell. This
systems of her body are funct

We e k s single cell contains the complex genetic makeup for

every detail of a new human being—the child’s sex,
hair and eye colour, height, skin tone, etc. After
fertilisation, nothing new is added but oxygen,
nutrition, and time.1
4 t h M o n t h ( 1 3 - 1 6 We
By the end of the fourth month
inches in length and weighs a
Her ears are functioning and s

“I want the general public to know
what the doctors know—that this
is a person; that this is a baby. That
this is not some kind of
blob of tissue…”
Dr. Anthony Levantino, Former Abortionist
1 st M o n t h * ( 1 - 4 We e k s )
The first cell divides in two, and cell division
continues as the newly formed individual
travels down the fallopian tube to the uterus.
More than 500 cells are present when this
tiny embryo (the blastocyst**) reaches the
uterus 7 to 10 days after fertilisation.2
Foundations of the brain, spinal cord, and
nervous system are already established,
and by day 21 the heart begins to beat in
a regular fashion with a blood type often
different from the mother’s.3 Muscles are
forming, and arms, legs, eyes, and ears
have begun to show.
* From Conception
**The blastocyst is the stage at which many
researchers want to destroy the embryo in
order to harvest stem cells.
2 nd M o n t h ( 5 - 8 We e k s )
By six weeks, brain waves can be detected

by electroencephalogram, and the brain is

controlling 40 sets of muscles as well as the
organs.4 The jaw forms, including teeth and taste
buds.5 The baby begins to swallow amniotic fluid, and
some have been observed hiccupping.6 During this
time, the stomach produces digestive juices, and the
kidneys begin to function.7 Fingers and toes are
developing, and at seven weeks the chest and
abdomen are fully formed.8 Swimming with a
natural swimmer’s stroke in the amniotic fluid,
she now looks like a miniature human infant.9, 10
3 r d M o n t h ( 9 - 1 2 We e k s )
Unique fingerprints are evident and never change.11
The baby now sleeps, awakens, and exercises her
muscles by turning her head, curling her toes, and
opening and closing her mouth. Even though mum
cannot feel movement yet, the baby is very active.
She breathes amniotic fluid to help develop her
heartbeat, as well as external
begins to feel baby’s moveme
first that will become stronger.
has been performed on babies
5t h Mont h (17 -20 W
If a sound is especially loud, th
reaction to it. Thumb-sucking h
during the fifth month.15
6t h Mont h (21-24 W
Oil and sweat glands are functi
delicate skin is protected in the
special ointment called vernix. S
size and strength while her lung

6 We e k s
6 Human Life Alliance │ Advertising Supplement
n t h e Wo m b .
er can be visually
mblances may appear as
developed.16 In a recent study, 70% of babies born
between 22 and 26 weeks lived past age one, thanks
h all the organs and to modern medicine.17
tioning.13
7 t h M o n t h ( 2 5 - 2 8 Wee k s )
eeks) The baby can now recognize her mother’s voice. She
exercises by stretching and kicking as she grows
h, the baby is 8-10 even bigger. She uses the senses of hearing, touch,
about one-half pound. and taste, and she can even look around with open
she hears her mother’s eyes at her watery home.18 If the baby is a boy, his
testicles descend from the abdomen into the
scrotum.19

8 t h M o n t h ( 2 9 - 3 2 We e k s )
The skin begins to thicken, with a layer of
fat stored underneath for insulation and
nourishment. The baby swallows a gallon of
amniotic fluid per day and often hiccups.20
Though movement is limited, due to 2 4 We e k s
cramped quarters, the baby’s kicks are
stronger, and mum may be able to feel an
elbow or heel against her abdomen.21

“But I think the greatest thing that got

1 0 We e k s
noises like music. Mum
ent—a slight flutter at 1 American Baby. 1989.│2 Mayo Clinic Family Health Book.
9 t h M o n t h ( 3 3 - 3 6 We e k s )
Gaining one half pound per week, the baby
to us was the ultrasound… The baby
is getting ready for birth. The bones in her really came alive on TV and was
head are soft and flexible to more easily
mould for the journey down the birth canal.22
moving…. That picture of the baby on
Of the 45 generations of cell divisions the ultrasound bothered me more than
before adulthood, 41 have already taken
place. Only four more come before
anything else…. We lost two nurses.
adolescence. Ninety percent of a
They couldn’t take looking at it.”
person’s development happens in Dr. Joseph Randall, Former Abortionist
the womb.23 `

.14 Lifesaving surgery 2003.│3 Moore and Persaud. The Developing

Human.│4JAMA. 1964.│5 Langman’s Medical Embryology. Lega l ly Pr
s at this age. 1995.│6Early Human Development. 1985.│7 The Gale
Encyclopedia of Medicine. 2nd ed. │8 Mayo Clinic Family
Health Book. 2003.│9 Valman & Pearson. British Medical
ot ec t ed
We ek s ) Journal.│10 Mayo Clinic Family Health Book. 2003.│
11 Moore and Persaud. The Developing Human.│

he baby may jump in 12 Flanagan. Beginning Life. │13 Cunningham,

has been observed MacDonald et al. Obstetrics.│14 Flanagan. Beginning

Life.│15 Clinical Reference Systems Annual 2001.│
16 The Gale Encyclopedia of Medicine. 2nd ed.│
17JAMA. 2009 | 18 Ibid.│19 Clinical Reference Systems

Annual 2001.│20 Ibid.│21 Ibid.│22 Ibid.│23 Sassone,

We e k s ) Robert L. “Interview with Prof. Sir A. William Liley.”
ioning. The baby’s The Tiniest Humans.│*For full citations visit
www.40daysforlife.com/london.
e amniotic sac by a
She grows rapidly in
gs become more

Advertising Supplement │ humanlife.org 7

 Abortion
A Woman’s Natural Way

Women who experience at least one full-term pregnancy

of Resisting Breast Cancer
9 Breast Cancer A premature delivery before 32 weeks doubles the risk of breast cancer
How does abortion affect this process?

in their lifetime develop four types of breast lobules (a
lobule is a unit of breast tissue consisting of a milk duct
and glands). During adolescence, the majority of lobules are
Type 1 and Type 2, which are immature and cancer
susceptible. Throughout the first trimester of pregnancy, the
number of Type 1 and 2 lobules rapidly increase. As a result,
breasts have more sites for cancer to start. In the second
trimester, the breast lobules start maturing into Type 4 lobules,
which are cancer resistant. By the end of the third trimester,
85% of the breast has fully matured. Only 15% of the lobules
remain immature and cancer susceptible, leaving fewer
opportunities for cancer to start. After birth and weaning, Type 4
lobules regress to Type 3. There is evidence of permanent changes
because it leaves the breast with more places for cancer to start. In the same
way, abortion also stops the progression of breast lobule development. This
prevents the development of Type 4 and subsequently Type 3 cancer-
resistant lobules. Induced abortion of a normal pregnancy results in
increased risk of breast cancer for the mother because more Type 1
and 2 lobules remain.
Approximately 90% of miscarriages occur in the first trimester. However,
What about miscarriages?
the vast majority of natural miscarriages in the first trimester do not
increase the risk of breast cancer. In these cases, pregnancy hormones are
lower than those of a normal pregnancy due to either a fetal or ovarian
abnormality. Therefore, a breast may not have grown more Type 1 and 2

“But Experts say...”

lobules (sites where cancer starts) in response to pregnancy hormones, or
in the genes of Type 3 lobules which provide life-long cancer at least very few. `
resistance.
Adapted with permission from: Breast Cancer Prevention Institute. “Reproductive Breast Cancer Risks and Breast Lobule Maturation.” 2007.│Breast Cancer Prevention Institute. “Breast Cancer Risks and
Prevention: Fourth Edition.” 2007.│*For full citations visit www.40daysforlife.com/london. Recommended Resources: See www.bcpinstitute.org/reproductive.htm and www.abortionbreastcancer.com

the
The Biology of Breast Development By Dr. Beata Klepacka
reast cancer is the most common cancer in the UK and accounts for more than a quarter of all
Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4

cancers in women, 1 in 8 women will be affected. Breast Cancer UK states that only 10% of breast
After adolescence, a
woman has Type 1 and
been
B
cancer can be attributed to genetic factors. This leaves 90% where the cause is unknown. It has long
established that an early complete pregnancy is a protective factor against breast cancer.1 Keeping a
first pregnancy rather than aborting reduces the risk of breast cancer. In the context of a rising incidence of
Type 2 lobules.

breast cancer, pregnancy events and breast cancer need to be seriously investigated.
Abortion stops the process

The first study showing a link between abortion and breast cancer was published in 1957 and found a
three-fold increased risk.2 In 1981, the issue made news in the UK when a US epidemiologist found a 240%
increased risk of breast cancer following the abortion of the first pregnancy.3 A year later, a study was
published to refute this—it did not distinguish between induced abortion and miscarriage.4 In 1996, a
1st trimester - increase in

detailed review and meta-analysis of 23 epidemiological studies where abortion and miscarriage were
Type 1 and Type 2 lobules
here

distinguished found a statistically significant increased risk of 30%.5 In the context of a high background
leads to increased cancer

incidence, this increased risk is significant. In 2000, in defence of this paper which elicited a strong negative
risk.

reaction in the UK and US, the Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology in the UK stated that this paper
has “no methodological shortcomings and could not be disregarded”.
Based on more recent prospective studies, the UK media, the abortion industry and RCOG (Royal
College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology),6 claim that there is no link between
End of 3rd trimester - 85%
of lobules become cancer
abortion and breast cancer. However, it is important to bear in mind that only
resistant Type 4.
limited interpretations of the data can be made due to the suboptimal quality
of the design of
these studies. In 2007, a British statistician Dr. Patrick
For exam- Carroll published a study on predicting
ple, the Danish female breast cancer incidence in eight
Melbye Study, European countries using national data.
After birth and weaning,

Among seven risk factors, induced

lobules become lifetime
which claims that
resistant Type 3.
there is no abortion was found to be the best
evidence of a link, predictor of breast cancer incidence.14
on face value
seems like a strong study being based on a database of all 1.5 million
For more information on this subject visit:

Danish women between 1935-78.7 But the data on cancer was collected
www.bcpinstitute.org/reproductive.htm.

over the last 10 years of this 33 year period, whereas on abortion only over
the last 5 years!
The Lancet analysis in 2004 claims that retrospective studies are known to come up with a link between breast cancer and
induced abortion, while prospective studies do not show a link.8 In its conclusions, the Lancet implies that the data from prospec-
tive studies are more robust. It proposes that the reason for the link between abortion and breast cancer being seen in retrospective
studies is that women who have breast cancer are more likely to disclose that they have had an abortion than those who don’t have
breast cancer (a phenomenon called recall bias). However, in the papers where recall bias was investigated, this hypothesis was refuted.9 I
propose another explanation—prospective studies like those considered by the Lancet 2004 analysis and the RCOG guidance in 2004 have
methodological flaws making them unable to answer the question of whether there is a link. For instance, they do not follow women long enough
to see if the cancer develops (the follow up should be 30-50 years at least). Some do not take into account the increasing incidence of abortion:
they compare older women who are more likely to have breast cancer and less likely to have had abortions with younger women who are more
likely to have had an abortion and less likely to have breast cancer; they are therefore unable to demonstrate a link.10, 11 A good example of this
kind of design flaw is the EPIC study from 2006 quoted in the British Pregnancy and Advisory Service journal Abortion Review: it has a short
follow up period—average 6.6 years!12 By contrast, the retrospective studies that show a link are comparing women of the same age; one with
breast cancer, the other without. A recent study of this kind which again demonstrated a link is the Turkish case control study, 2009.13
In summary, the opinion-forming bodies should adopt a more critical approach to the studies put forward regarding the abortion breast
cancer link and not state as fact that there is no link when there is not enough evidence behind such a statement.
1 Bull WHO. 1970.│ 2 GANN. 1957.│3 Br J Cancer. 1981.│4 Br J Cancer. 1982.│5 J Epidemiol Community Health. 1996.│6 RCOG. 2004.│7 N Engl J Med. 1997.│8 Collaborative Group on

Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. 2004. Mar Breast cancer and abortion: collaborative reanalysis of data from 53 epidemiological studies, including 83000 women with breast cancer from 16
countries. Lancet. 2004.│9 J Natl Cancer Inst. 1994. Int J Cancer. 1995.│10 Breast Cancer Prevention Institute. 2004.│11 J. Of American Physicians and Surgeons. 2005.│12 International Journal of
Cancer. 2006.│13 World Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2009.│14 Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. 2007.│*For full citations visit www.40daysforlife.com/london.

8 Human Life Alliance │ Advertising Supplement

Eugenics Legacy clinic and Marie Stopes donated money.14 Her clinic worked with the Abortion

M
arie Stopes, the British birth control pioneer, is viewed as a women’s
rights advocate, but her motivation was a belief in eugenics. Her organi-
sation, the Society for Constructive Birth Control and Racial Progress,
demanded more children from the ‘fit’ and fewer from the ‘unfit’. In 1919 she
challenged, “Are these puny-faced, gaunt, blotchy, ill-balanced, feeble, ungainly,
withered children the young of an Imperial race? …Mrs. Jones is destroying
the race!1
Like many eugenicists, she applauded the Nazi eugenics programme and
played an active part in the Berlin ‘racial science’ conference in 1935.2 She
admired Hitler, and sent him a book of her poetry.3 In 1942, she wrote the
following, “Catholics, Prussians, The Jews and the Russians, All are a curse, Or
something worse...” 4 She disinherited her own son for marrying a woman who
needed glasses. Stopes left her clinic at 108 Whitfield Street to the Eugenics
Society upon her death.
Marie Stopes International (MSI) has an annual income of £100 million.5
Today, in the UK, Marie Stopes carries out 42% of NHS abortions and 75% of
private abortions. MSI’s headquarters are in London; however 98% of their
impact is in the developing world.6,7
Margaret Sanger, American contemporary and counterpart of Marie
Stopes also believed in coercive sterilization of the ‘unfit’.8 Both Stopes and
Sanger saw the white race as the pinnacle of evolutionary development. Sanger
remarked about her “Negro Project” in 1939, “We do not want word to go out
that we want to exterminate the Negro population...”9
Sanger helped found the International Planned Parenthood Federation
(IPPF) and made eugenics and population control palatable in a post holocaust
world through obfuscation. The goal was to keep the poor and minorities from
having more children than wealthier whites.
IPPF has an annual income of $140 million. It provides over 1.1 million
abortions worldwide every year.10 Its’ global headquarters are in London.
Helen Brook was a fellow of the British Eugenics Society.11 In the late
1950s, while working for the Family Planning Association, she went to the
DHSS, the Colonial office and the West Indian High Commission to express
her concern over the high birth rate of West Indian immigrants.12 She was given
approval to provide birth control advice to black newcomers and founded the
Brook Advisory Centre in 1964 to deal specifically with West Indian mothers
Law Reform Association, referring for abortion before the 1967 Abortion Act.
All the Brook Centres in London and most of the other locations are
situated in areas where there are high numbers of black ethnic minorities
and poor whites. From 1977-1997, tax payers contributed over £30
million to Brooks. The contraceptive ‘evangelization’ of the young has
intensified, despite teenage pregnancy rates rising. Over the 20 year
period 185,000 school girls in the UK became pregnant, with
over half of them having abortions.
Martin Cole, another member of the Eugenics
Society15 founded the Institute for Sex Education and
Research, responsible for producing explicit sex education
materials and using female therapists as surrogate sexual
partners in treatment. In 1968, Cole founded the Birmingham
Pregnancy Advisory Service which became the British
Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS). Its current CEO, Ann
Furedi, worked for the Birth Control Trust—part of the Galton
Institute, previously known as the Eugenics Society. Ann Furedi
is a fierce proponent of abortion up to birth. In 2004, BPAS was
exposed for sending women more than 24 weeks pregnant for
illegal abortions in Spain. BPAS is the largest private sector
abortion provider in the UK, carrying out 50% of the private
sector NHS abortions. They perform 80% of the post 20 weeks
abortions.16 Their annual income is £23 million.17
Black and Asian women continue to account for dispropor-
tionately high numbers of abortions in the UK. Black women are
2.8% of the female population and account for 10% of the abor-
tions. Asian women are 5.7% of the female population, and have 9%
of the abortions.18 Abortion is also used as a eugenic tool against the
disabled. 92% of preborn children diagnosed with Down syndrome
are aborted.19 A child with a disability can be aborted up to birth in
the UK.
Article by Ann Farmer, author of Prophets and Priests:
the Hidden Face of the Birth Control Movement, and
By Their Fruits: Eugenics, Population Control and the
Abortion Campaign.
Edited by Dr. Beata Klepacka

THE
and young unmarried whites.13 The Eugenics Society donated a house for the
1 Daily Mail. 1988.│2 The Nazi Connection: Eugenics, American Racism, and German National Socialism. 1994.│3 M. Stopes, Letter, August 12, 1939, British Library Stopes Collection. 1992.│4 In Rose, op cit, p. 219.│
5 Marie Stopes International. 2008.│6 Marie Stopes International. Accessed 2010.│7 Marie Stopes International. Annual Review 2006/07.│8 Ibid. 9 M. Sanger, Letter to Clarence Gamble, December 10, 1939. Sophia Smith
Collection, in Franks.│10 IPPF. 2009.│11 Eugenics Review. 1967. Abortion. 1977. Potts was a member of the Eugenics Society Council (Eugenics Review. 1968).│12 Clinical Practice. 1984.│13 General Practice 4.5.84.│
14 ALRA Minutes, November 4, 1964 and December 15, 1964. (ALRA Collection, Wellcome Institute (SA/ALR).│15 Eugenics Watch. Accessed 2011.│16 Christian Medical Fellowship. 2004.│17 The Christian Institute.

2009.│18 Department of Health. 2009.│19 National Downs Syndrome Cytogenetic Register. 2008.│*For full citations visit www.40daysforlife.com/london.

In the late 1700s, a British humanity is over. In the 1970s the world will undergo represented enormous advances in medical technology
vicar named Thomas famines—hundreds of millions of people will starve to that left more mothers with healthy children and extended

OVER
Malthus wrote a long tract
called Essay on the Princi-
ple of Population. In it, he
theorized that burgeoning
death in spite of any crash programmes embarked upon the lives of the elderly. Contrary to Ehrlich’s dire predic-
now.” tions, the boom has not led to uncontrollable famine and
As the world experienced the biggest population death. Rather, actual statistics show that population
increase in world history, the panic spread. But as more growth in most of the world has been accompanied by

population
human population would sober heads soon real- incredible productivity, technological

“Our numbers didn’t double

rapidly outpace existing
food supplies. This theory
was picked up in 1968 by
American biologist Paul
ized, not only is the
world not overpopu-
lated, we’re also in no
danger of becoming so.
advancement, and public health (see
Julian Simon’s The State of Humanity,
because we suddenly started breed- a collection of scientific papers on
population change). The verdict is in:

MYTH Ehrlich, whose famous As Steven Mosher ing like rabbits. They doubled far from rapaciously expending

because we stopped dying like flies.”

book, The Population notes in his book
Bomb, opines that “the Population Control:
battle to Real Costs, Illusory
feed Benefits, “our numbers
didn’t double because we suddenly started breeding like
rabbits. They doubled because we stopped dying like
flies. Fertility was falling throughout this period, from
an average of 6 children per woman in 1960 to only
2.6 by 2002.” As Mosher goes on to point out, fertility
rates have since fallen so much that many societies are
in danger of becoming extinct.
To merely maintain its population, a nation’s
fertility rate must be at least 2.1 children per woman.
Unfortunately, every developed country is currently
at or below this level. The average fertility rate of the
U.K. is 1.96, while the current rate in Europe is a
dismal 1.5. With the acknowledgement of looming
economic disaster, governments in Russia, Japan,
Australia, and most European countries have intitiated
monetary “pronatal” incentives for having children—
incentives that have not yet proven effective in raising
fertility rates. At the very least, the world’s population
will never double again.
The population boom of the last century actually
resources, developed societies have
consistently figured out ways to
make fewer resources stretch further.
People are our greatest resource.
As demographer Julian Simon remarks in his book The
Ultimate Resource, “it is a simple fact that the source of
improvements in productivity is the human mind, and a
human mind is seldom found apart from a human body.
And because improvements — their invention and their
adoption—come from people, it seems reasonable to
assume that the amount of improvement depends on the
number of people available to use their minds.”
And yet . . . the myth persists. It is imperative that
people be educated as to how much the myth of overpop-
ulation actually harms societies and nations, and that it is,
in fact, an obsolete theory.`
Colin Mason is the Director of Media Production for the Popu-
lation Research Institute. To contact him, email colin@pop.org.
For more information on this topic, check out PRI’s cartoon
series debunking the overpopulation myth. You can find them at
www.overpopulationisamyth.com.
Advertising Supplement │ humanlife.org 9
 You Might Think, “I could never give my baby away.”
W
omen don’t usually consider adoption as the first solution
to an unplanned pregnancy. Many times, they think “I
could never give my baby away.” However, if a woman
isn’t ready or able to be a parent, adoption can be a positive
solution for her and her baby.
When women learn they can research adoption without
obligation and find accurate, non-judgemental information, they
realise that adoption isn’t “giving your baby away.” Even if
adoption isn’t right for you, it may be right for a friend.
Now, let’s address some popular myths behind the
response, “I could never give my baby away.”
MYTH: I don’t want to deal with the father or
worry about his role in my baby’s life.
FACT: With adoption, as long as you are unmarried, you
can totally separate from your baby’s father and provide a posi-
tive father figure for your baby’s future. He does not need to
know about the adoption. If you are married or put the father on
the birth certificate, he would need to agree to the adoption—he
may wish to look after the child himself or have contact with the
child, even if you don’t. If you are in a situation where you are in
fear of your husband, social services will be able to help, placing
you and your children in a place of safety.
MYTH: I don’t want to give up my plans.
FACT: With adoption, you can make a future for your baby and
pursue the goals you have for your own life. You can choose how
involved you want to stay in your child’s life after the adoption and
be independent of the responsibilities of raising a baby.
MYTH: I can’t tell my family.
FACT: You can make a confidential adoption plan and hide
your pregnancy. Only the adoption professionals you trust, the
adoptive family you choose, and the loved ones you include
will know about your pregnancy and your plans. If
needed, you could even relocate temporarily to keep
your situation private.
MYTH: I wouldn’t want someone I didn’t know to
raise my baby.
FACT: Your social worker will discuss with you about what kind
of family you would want your child to grow up in. You can talk to
your social worker about meeting up with a prospective family or
being in letter contact before agreeing to the adoption.
MYTH: I will never see my baby again, and I’m not
sure I want that.
FACT: When you are pregnant, preparations for adoption can
begin, but arrangements can only be made when your baby is born –
you will be completely free to change your mind. Even when your
baby is already placed in an adoptive family, as long as the court
order for adoption has not yet been applied for you can ask for your
baby back immediately. Once the social worker is satisfied that your
baby is settled in the adoptive family, they will apply for an adoption
order with your permission. Even once you have given your permis-
sion, you can withdraw it as long as the court order has not yet been
granted. This cannot happen till your baby is at least 4 months and
has been with the family at least 3 months. If you are certain, there is
a faster procedure called ‘freeing.’ If you are very uncertain, tell your
social worker, who could arrange more temporary fostering, till you
are sure of what you want. Also, you can arrange to have continuing
contact with your baby once adopted – either face to face or by letter
if you want.
Who do I contact if I am considering
adoption for my baby?
Good Counsel
0800 096 2518
www.goodcounselnet.co.uk

athleen DeZeeuw’s son, Patrick, was conceived in rape when she was completed a nine-year study on pregnancy outcomes of sexual assault victims.

K 16. “I feel personally assaulted and insulted every time I hear that
abortion should be legal because of rape and incest,” stated Kathleen.
“Having lived through rape and also having raised a child ‘conceived in rape,’ I
feel that we’re being used by pro-abortionists to further the abortion issue, even
though we’ve not been asked to tell our side of the story.”
Twenty-five years after the abortion of her child, Edith Young, a
12-year-old victim of incest, agonized that, “the abortion which was to ‘be in
my best interest’ just has not been. As far as I can tell, it only ‘saved their [my
parents’] reputations,’ ‘solved their problems’
and allowed their lives to go merrily on.”
As traumatic as rape is, abortion does not Abortion accentuates
un-rape the mother. In fact, studies show that
most women who become pregnant through
rape don’t want an abortion. Patricia, a victim
traumatic feelings associated
of rape, said: “In my experience, abortion only
compounded the trauma and pain I was already with sexual assault.
experiencing[…] While it may seem to be the
quickest and easiest solution to a painful, humiliating ‘problem,’ abortion is a
band-aid approach. For me, the effects of abortion are much more far-reaching
than the effects of the rape.”1 In the only major study of pregnant rape victims
ever done, Dr. Sandra Mahkorn found that 75 to 85 percent chose against
As part of their research the authors found that after any abortion, it is common
for women to experience guilt, depression, feelings of being “dirty,” resentment
of men, and lowered self-esteem. These feelings are identical to what women
typically feel after rape. Abortion only adds to and accentuates the traumatic
feelings associated with sexual assault. Rather than easing the psychological
burdens, abortion adds to them.
The stories above are just the beginning of what is being exposed sur-
rounding the tragedy of abortion due to rape and incest. Reardon, Makimaa,
and Sobie identified testimonies from 192 women
who became pregnant as a result of rape or incest
and 55 children conceived in sexual assault and
compiled them in their provocative book, Victims
and Victors.4
Pregnancy resulting from sexual assault
should be a contraindication for abortion. A doctor
treating a sexual assault victim should advise
against abortion precisely because of the traumatic
nature of the pregnancy. The testimonies and studies confirm that both the
mother and child are helped by preserving life, not by perpetuating violence. `
1 The ‘Hard Cases’ of Abortion. 2000.│ 2 The Psychological Aspects of Abortion. 1979.│ 3 The ‘Hard Cases’ of

abortion.2 Joan Kemp, a rape crisis centre counselor, said, “I am familiar with
Abortion. 2000.│ 4 Victims and Victors. 2000.│*For full citations visit www.40daysforlife.com/london.│For further
information visit www.afterabortion.org.
no case of incest-related abortion that did not make matters worse for the
victim.”3
Studies also show that incest victims rarely ever voluntarily agree to
abortion. Instead of viewing the pregnancy as unwanted, the incest victim is Does the abortion industry really care about

 LiveAction.ORG
more likely to see the pregnancy as a way out of the incestuous relationship rape victims? See for yourself in the Mona Lisa
because the birth of her child will expose the sexual activity.
Researchers David C. Reardon, Julie Makimaa, and Amy Sobie Project at
10 Human Life Alliance │ Advertising Supplement
 The Science f Sex 
uring sexual activity, powerful hormones are released in the brains of men and women that

D produce lasting bonds with their partner. The most influential of these hormones are oxytocin
and vasopressin. Oxytocin is a bonding hormone released during childbirth and nursing that
causes the mother to bond with her infant. It is also released during sexual activity and acts as
emotional super glue between partners.1 Both men and women have oxytocin and release it during
sexual activity, but women are more affected by oxytocin and men by vasopressin, another bonding
hormone released during sex. Vasopressin helps a man bond to his partner and instills a protective
instinct toward his partner and children.2,3
This bonding effect of sex, due to the hormones oxytocin and vasopressin, can be compared to
duct-taping a couple’s arms together. Imagine ripping off the tape and using the same piece of duct
tape to wrap the girl’s arm to a new guy’s arm. What happens is not exactly pleasant. By switching
partners several times, particles of skin and hair left on the tape reduce the adhesiveness so it doesn’t
attach effectively. The same is true of sex. Research suggests the ability to bond and produce oxytocin
is damaged by the stress hormones released during a break-up. Just like debris on duct tape, previous
sexual experiences reduce the ability to bond correctly. Oxytocin levels can return to normal if

Follow the
sexual activity is stopped and time is given to address physical and emotional healing.4 Refrain
from getting into a new relationship for a year or two and commit to save sex for marriage.

L o g ic
Conversely, imagine the duct tape was never removed. The duct tape would begin to
feel like a part of the arm and the adhesion would be strong.5 When a couple waits until marriage
to have sex, and remains faithful to each other during marriage, oxytocin and vasopressin increase the
biological bond between the husband and wife. `
abor tion
fference between 1 The Female Brain. 2006.│2 Nature. Oct. 7, 1993.│3 Progress in Brain Research. 1998.│4 Keroak, Eric, M.D. “Oxytocin: Is This
Why is the only di g the shor t distance of Nano-Peptide a Chemical Type of Human Super Glue?” 2006.│5 Ibid.│*For full citations visit www.40daysforlife.com/london.
llin
and unjustified ki es the
bi rth ca na l? St ephen Schwarz us four
the er e ar e on ly
show th
acronym SLED to a preborn child and a

 On October 27, 1968, abortion was legalized in the U.K.

be tw ee n
differences
rn : si ze , leve l of development,
newbo ency.
degree of depend

 Since 1968, 7 million preborn babies in the U.K. have

1
environment, and

S
r than
Size: Yes, embryos are smalle
but why is
newborns and adults,


gen era lly been killed due to medical abortions.2
that relevant? Me n are
l size
taller than women, but physica


More than one-fifth of all pregnancies end in abortion.3
doesn’t equ al valu e.

L
Each year, 49% of women in the U.K. who have abortions have had at least
Level of Development: True,


one previous abortion.4
embryos and fetuses are less
uld
developed than you and me. Sho 62% percent of women reported using a
dren have mo re righ ts tha n
older chil contraceptive method at the time of the
their younger siblings? Som e


people say that self-awarenes
s unintended pregnancy.5
an. If tha t wer e
makes one hum
true, newborns would not qua
lify as Women age 19-21 have the most


human bei ngs. abortions.6

E
has White women are 88.2% of the female population and account for 76% of all
Environment: Where you are
you are . Doe s abortions, black women are 2.8% of the female population and have 10% of
no bearing on who
cha nge whe n you cro ss
your value abortions, and Asian women are 5.7% of the female population and have 9% of
et or roll ove r in bed ?


the stre abortions.7,8 (See “Eugenics Legacy.” on p. 9)
Location cannot change the
n
essential nature of the prebor 91% of abortions in the U.K. are funded by the NHS with over
n to hum an. If the
from non-huma half (58%) taking place in the independent
preborn are not alre ady hum an,


, sector under NHS contract.9
merely changing their location
dow n the
moving them eight inches A developing baby’s heart
birth canal, can’t ma ke the m so.
begins to beat at 21 days. 10

D
ility
Degree of Dependency: If viab
The Abortion Act of 1967.│2-4 Department of Health, Abortion Statistics for 2009. │5 London: Marie Stopes International.
valu abl e hum an bei ngs ,
1
makes us
2009.│6-9 Department of Health, Abortion Statistics for 2009. │10 Color Atlas of Life Before Birth. Yearbook Publishers.│
lin or
then all who depend on insu
*For full citations visit www.40daysforlife.com/london.
able.
kidney medication are not valu
s who sha re blo od
Conjoined twin
type and bod ily sys tem s wou ld
also have no right to life.

In short, although humans

differ immensely with
hments, and degrees
respect to talents, accomplis equally valuable
Tell us what you think!
of development, they are
mon human nature. `
because they share a com
40DaysforLifeLondon@gmail.com
www.40daysforlife.com/london.com
The Case for
from: Klusendorf, Scott.

07947 698195
Adapted with permission the Cul ture. Cro ssway. 2009.
ns to Engage
Life; Equipping Christia g.c om for mo re inform ation.
Visit www.prolifetrainin

Advertising Supplement │humanlife.org 11

 Breaking the Chains of
I NJUSTICE
I t’s a woman’s choice!
Is it really? Sixty-four percent of women in a 2004 study
reported feeling coerced and forced into their abortions.1 And
30 percent of women in a 2009 study having a second abortion
reported being in an abusive relationship. And that number
increased for women having three or more abortions.2 One
study showed the leading cause of death among pregnant
women is homicide.3 In India and China, the preference for
sons over daughters coupled with China’s one child policy
and forced abortions, have led to “gendercide,” sex selective
abortion of over 100 million girls.4 This problem is present in
the United States as well among Chinese, Korean, and Native
Americans.5
N ot a good quality of life.
Some people choose abortion because they do not want their
child to enter a difficult family situation. We do not kill three-
year-olds living in unhealthy environments. Instead, we try
to help these children and their families. There are so many
couples in the UK waiting, hoping, and praying for a chance
to adopt.
J ust a blob of tissue.
Simple tissue does not have a beating heart, brain waves,
fingerprints, or unique DNA. Medical science shows that
human life begins at fertilisation. “The development of a human
begins with fertilisation, a process by which the spermatozoon
from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise
to a new organism, the zygote.” 6 After fertilisation, nothing
new is added to the baby except oxygen, nutrition, and time.
U njustly threatens women’s health.
Countries with laws restricting abortion have the lowest
maternal mortality rates. Ireland has laws restricting abortion
and also has a maternal mortality rate of 1 death per 100,000
live births, the lowest in Europe.7 The United Kingdom, with
abortion on demand, has 8 deaths per 100,000 live births.8
We should ensure that women have access to competent birth
attendants and emergency care during their pregnancies.
S afe, legal, and rare.
The end result of an abortion is a dead baby along with poten-
tial complications for the mother such as cervical cancer, breast
cancer, infertility, psychological pain, and even death.
Abortionists do not care if abortion is rare. Aimee Thorne-
Thomsen of the Pro-Choice Public Education Project stated
that the number of abortions is “too low” and said, “Safe – yes.
Legal –absolutely. Rare – not the point.”9
Contrary to popular arguements, legalizing abortion does
Limited Edition: Please leave for the next person to read.
www.humanlife.org
not decrease its prevalence. In 1993, Poland passed a
law making most abortions illegal, and the number of
abortions decreased from 15,000 per year to 174 per
year by 2003.10
T hreatens women’s rights and
freedoms.
Science has shown that the baby is a unique, distinct
individual, separate from the mother. Society generally
limits people's “rights and freedoms” when it comes to
behaviours that are harmful or potentially harmful to
other people. We, as a society, are "anti-choice"
when it comes to theft, arson, murder, and a whole
host of other crimes.
I ’m personally opposed, but I
can’t tell others what to do.
What if U.K. citizens had been willing to
accept this justification for tolerating slavery?
Parliament took away the “rights” of slave
owners in order to give freedom and respect to
Black British people. Our youngest and most
vulnerable are still slaves to the life and death
decisions of others.
C ases of fetal deformity
No one’s perfect. Abortion for fetal deformities is a form of
discrimination against disabled people. U.K. records show
that when Down syndrome is diagnosed prenatally, 92%
are aborted.11 Who’s to say their lives aren’t worth living?
There are waiting lists of people who would be willing
to adopt a special needs child.12 When we make life and
death judgements based on “quality of life,” it can lead to
eugenics.
E abortions.
levates the number of backstreet
According to Education for Choice, up to 40 women
died due to illegal abortions in 1966 (the year prior to
the legalization of abortion in the U.K.).13 Any loss
of life is tragic, but this is nowhere near the alleged
thousands of deaths by backstreet abortions.
1 Medical Science Monitor. 2004. | 2 The Obstetrician and
Gynaecologist 2009.| 3 Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health.
2001. | 4 The Economist. March 2010.| 5 The New York Times. June
2009. | 6 Sadler, T.W. Langman’s Medical Embryology. 1995. |
7 World Economic Forum. 2010. | 8 Ibid. | 9 RH Reality Check.
Apr. 2009. | 10 Center of Information Systems of Health Care.
2001-2003. | 11 National Down Syndrome Cytogenetic Register.
2008. | 12 National Council for Adoption. Accessed 5/18/09. |
13 Education for Choice. 2005. | *For full citations visit
www.40daysforlife.com/london.
Advertising Supplement