Jerome's Commentaries

Abortion law remains unchanged

Section:	Home
By:	Lynn Lee
Publication:	The Straits Times 28/08/2008
Source:	The Straits Times website
No. of words:	429

ALTHOUGH Singapore now needs more babies, the country's pro-choice abortion law will not be changed.

Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan gave two main reasons for it.

One, the abortion policy was not put in place to curb population growth.

When abortion was made legal in 1974, it was to 'safeguard the health and well-being of the woman who has, for various reasons, decided to terminate her pregnancy', Mr Khaw told Parliament on Wednesday.

Two, restricting or forbidding abortion would not help to grow the population. 'It is simplistic to assume that one fewer abortion equals one more baby,' he said.

Hong Kong and Poland have banned abortion on demand, only allowing it if it is to save the mother's life.

But Mr Khaw noted that their fertility rates were no better than Singapore's 1.29. This is way below the 2.1 rate for a population to maintain its size in the long run.

Mr Khaw was replying to MP Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC) and Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong.

Mr Siew had asked if the Government would stick with the pro-choice law, while Mr de Souza had asked if it would consider shortening the 24-week timeframe for abortion.

Rejecting his call, Mr Khaw said there was no medical evidence to support such a change.

The timeframe is accepted by medical experts as the cut-off mark for abortions as after six months in the womb, the foetus is said to be able to survive outside of it.

Mr Khaw said he had consulted medical experts once again in preparing his answer.

They told him the timeframe was still valid, as the latest studies show the survival rate of a foetus dropped sharply prior to 24 weeks in gestation.

Should future research show otherwise, then the timeframe could be reviewed, the experts added.

'So that is the position that I take.

'Let us base our decision purely on science so that we take the emotions out of this particular subject,' said Mr Khaw, adding that the abortion issue has always generated emotional and opposing views.

In the meantime, the Government will continue to insist on counselling for all women considering abortion, the minister said.

It would open their eyes to the risks involved and other options, such as carrying the baby to full-term and then giving it up for adoption.

Women who choose this route will be paired with couples seeking to adopt via the Community Development, Youth and Sports Ministry and non-governmental organisations.

'This is the current arrangement, and I think we will continue with it,' said Mr Khaw.

The motive for Singapore’s pro-choice abortion laws stated in this article seems to relate only to a fertility rate that would most probably not fall. This article happens to put forth a false dilemma. Singaporeans have to embrace either pro-choice or pro-life. However, pro-choice doesn’t seem to affect Singapore’s fertility rate, therefore pro-choice should be followed. It fails to show the extensive ethical implications involved.

Firstly, Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan made a comparison to Poland and Hongkong’s fertility rate. He fails to cite the other end of the spectrum. Egypt’s fertility rate is 3.17, way above the 2.1 rate. Their country and religion forbids the abortion of foetuses. I say, it is safe to logically assume that it is because of the pro-life stance Egyptians take that allows for such high fertility rate.

Secondly, no one can possibly refute the statement that no civilised society permits one human to intentionally harm or take the life or another human without punishment. Since life begins at conception, abortion is akin to murder as it is the act of taking human life. Abortion is in direct defiance of the commonly accepted idea of the sanctity of human life.

While it cannot be said whether an abortion is an unforgivable event, it is certainly an unforgettable event. An abortion wrecks havoc with the psychology and the future life of the entire family. The woman, who has lost her child, at any time between the pregnancies, will never be the same. While the woman may be the hardest hit by an abortion, one also has to think about the mental and emotional state of the entire family. While physically only the woman undergoes an abortion, mentally and emotionally it is the entire family who loses a part of their mind and body forever. Anesthesia is available only for the physical structure of the human body, not for the emotional and mental state of a person.

Most of the time, women go through abortion because they are not prepared to raise a child yet, or do not want a child. Adoption is a viable alternative to abortion and accomplishes the same result. And with so many Singaporean families with stable income wanting to adopt a child, there is no such thing as an unwanted child.

Some would then question about non-consensus pregnancy resulted from rape or incest etc, or human rights to choose what they want. In the instance of rape and incest, proper medical care can ensure that a woman will not get pregnant through use of pills, injections etc. The perpetrator of such acts should be punished. Instead, abortion punishes the unborn child who committed no crime. For women who demand control of their body, control should include preventing the risk of unwanted pregnancy through the responsible use of contraception or abstinence.

More often than not, those who choose abortions are often minors or young women with insufficient life experience to understand fully what they are doing. Many have lifelong regrets afterwards. As the Singapore government often helps its citizens to make informed decisions such as the CPF issue, why not make the decision to outlaw abortion – one that has many lasting benefits to the population of Singapore?

Jerome Ong (20)
3B