All of your points are emotive not logical. The reality is you not think abortion should be allowed, so stop talking about sex selection as if it the thing you're worried about.

Sex selection abortion is not limited to Asia. It is widespread in our liberal Western democracies too.

United Kingdom:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9104994/Sex-selection-abortions-are-widespread.html

USA:
http://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aejapp/v1y2009i2p1-34.html

Of course it is happening in Australia. And the fact that you can now find out the sex of a baby from 7 weeks of pregnancy makes it very, very easy to do.
http://healthland.time.com/2011/08/10/controversial-blood-test-can-determine-babys-sex-earlier-than-ever-but-at-what-cost/

Ironical that the consequence of the feminists fighting internationally for more freely available abortion should be this.

Typical of those who want to control everything.

As with the global warming crowd, all you have to do is invent some catastrophy senario, & the ratbags will come running.

Excellent article, Sonja,

You have presented the height of hypocrisy of our deluded darling feminists and their lapdogs like Kenny.

Sonja is exposing the incredible tragedy of the anti female gendercide that is taking place both in Australia and to a far greater extent in countries like India and China where male babies are highly prized but female babies are despised and unwanted. The feminists who have rightly championed the cause of women the world over should be up in arms over this terrible war against women. Alas their silence well tells the story. We should be very thankful to people Like Sonja Courupis who is a true feminist and not a false one.
Warwick Marsh

I totally agree with the push to recognise that babies are born from conception and that the voice of the defenceless should be championed until this injustice is set right.

Here's a question for the forum.

I wonder out of Australia's 1.2million aborted babies, how many Nobel peace prize winners there could have been or scientists that cured cancer or AIDS etc

We will never know as they never got a chance to fulfil their potential.
Lets give them that chance.

A few false assumptions in this article. As far as my acquaintances are concerned, 100 percent are aware of gender selection practices in countries like China and India, and furthermore, many get some grim satisfaction knowing that as a result there are now over 60 million Chinese men who are without a female partner and whose parents cannot look forward to a subservient daughter-in-law to care for them in their old age. The phrase 'serves them right' comes to mind. I believe gender selection is actually illegal in China, although parents of a daughter in remote rural areas may be given permission to try for a son. The problem of gender selection in China is probably self-limiting - the generation of single children will have a different outlook from their parents on whom the one-child policy was first implemented.

Where on earth does the figure of one in three Australian women having an abortion come from? Some women have multiple abortions instead of using contraception, has the 1-in-3 'statistic' been arrived at by assuming one abortion per woman?

The reduction in gender ratio will actually increase females mate options.

I wonder what the situation would be if it were male numbers being reduced? We would end up with fewer males and many more females without partners, then finding themselves in situations where finding a mate, any mate would be considered desirable.

Would this situation be considered a 'war on women' or 'war on men'?

I think that any way it goes there will always be the cry that society is against women. Even the women, after all they're the evil vixens having the abortions aren't they?.

In the end though, is the whole argument is about removing reproductive choice from couples who want to choose the sex of their child? Or is it just about abortion period?

I suspect the latter.

First full disclosure:

I do NOT seek to make abortion illegal. At least in the first trimester I have no problem with abortion.

However we also have to face the fact that gender selection abortion is only the beginning. As good genomic analysis becomes readily available – say in about ten years – babies are going to be aborted for all sorts of reasons.

Some possible future reasons for abortion:

--Risk of being gay

--Risk of not being very bright

--Likely not to be good looking

And so on.

There are always trade-offs. The trade-off for allowing abortion is that women may make choices you do not like.

C'est la vie

Great article Sonia! I cannot comprehend the attitude towards unborn children that permeates the minds of those who wish to set them aside as if they were nothing - whether male or female! Damaging one human life is a stroke against every human. Human dignity, human rights and human equality are set aside by every act of abortion. Whatever happened to 'live & let live'? We desperately need to align with our Maker's laws of love: to love God and love our neighbour as we love ourselves - in that order!

This highlights the absolute hypocrisy of the feminist movement and a very clever angle taken by the courageous Senator John Madigan. How can gender selection be a "women's health" issue? Now that John Madigan has brought this out into the open, let's see how many other politicians have the courage to stand and be counted. Pro-life voters must stop supporting EMILY listers and Pro-abortion candidates at the polling booth. On judgement day the Good Lord probably won't accept that you voted for the Pro-abortion candidate because his party had a better tax policy.

secular feminist whose dogmas are self centred and bereft of any moral decency. No wonder our youth are hopelessly lost with these people brainwashing people through the educational institutions. Not satisfied with messing their own lives up they want others to follow them. Most of them are accompanied by emasculated males.

John Madigan wants to amend our constitution to give us a say which I applaud.He needs to give the Muslim issue a rest since they will label him a racist like Pauline Hanson.

The reason they are premoting this mentality in developing countries is that women produce children and the elites perceive this planet to be way too over populated thus threatening their power base.

I thought it was a good article and much more balanced than usual on this issue.

I still find it amusing how whenever this issue arises it's a case of, 'women this and women that...' Men's voices have been completely silenced. In fact, more than silenced, men's voices are seen as unwelcome and illegitimate. It's like men are not part of society and bare no responsibility for the future of the children born or aborted.

That is an astounding, complete and utter victory for feminists. Women make all the decisions while men are illegitimate (until it's time to pay the bill). I think they would call that 'equality'.

Equal rights for unborn women!

As a pro-life feminist and Labor member I applaud Sonja's heartfelt article as a person who was almost aborted myself. One size does not fit all, and it is good people like Sonja are giving women real choices and options. When people who have a difference of opinion are attempted to be silence, that is not democracy, nor is it free speech.

My body my choice, for sure, but it isn't just my body to think about. Well done Sonja.

For other pro-life feminists reading this, you may want to visit our website http://actlaborforlife.weebly.com/ on how to keep democracy and true social justice alive from conception.

Sonja Couroupis is to be congratulated for writing this piece. The pro-abortion lobby is rendered speechless against the spectre of gender-selection abortions. What they don't want to acknowledge is that abortion never draws a line in the sand - it's always seeking out new victims and the practice of killing the unborn is becoming increasingly horrific and grotesque. Babies born gasping and left to die after late-term abortions is a common occurrence in the RWH in Melbourne. How can this be a good thing? Are we insane?
If sex-selection abortions are not being recorded in Medicare stats, then they must be -- as all Medicare-funded abortions must be recorded. They are in Finland and the dreadful effects of abortion are sharply in focus as a woman's subsequent medical history shows increased risk of suicide and death by violence, just to name two.
Pro-aborts are terrified they are losing their ideological grip.
Once you abort a child for any reason whatsoever, there is no excuse not to abort him or her for no reason at all. Just say the magic words, "her choice". What a pathetic reason for killing someone.

There is only one reason for a woman to have an abortion and that is where her life is genuinely in imminent and serious danger if the pregnancy continues. If the child is not viable and her condition can not be managed until both are able to survive then there is only one unfortunate option. All other reasons for abortion are spurious. Medical professionals have the responsibility to care for both mother and child. Gender selection is no less acceptable than the physical/psychological well being of the woma.

Whoever inspired Senator Madigan to make this stand should have a long ans serious think about why they did this. Those who are euphorically supporting him should do the same. If we expect our pro life politicians to make a stand for life then we should make sure that the reason and the outcome are clear and unequivocally advantageous to The Cause.

Sit down quietly and list reasons why so many people think abortion is acceptable. Try and imagine how gender selection could be wrapped up in any one,, or several, of those reasons. If a butcher is willing to perform an abortion and the women agrees to have one, then they will find a reason to do so. Passing this bill removes only one statistically insignificant reason. The Medicare card will still be swiped before the woman gets past the reception desk and a Medicare item number will be entered and the child will be killed in spite of what the newly enacted law might specify.

Our enemies are right when they say his is a thinly veiled attempt to raise the issue. What would happen if they decided to support the bill and it passed? Nothing! When the issue is raised again in the future for another reason then they are likely to ask why that reason was not important in 2013. In fact they would be entitled to ask.

To be continued.

Part 2

If Senator Madigan has a chance of holding the balance of power in the new Senate then this exercise will probably ruin that chance. It might result in even more anti life politicians being elected.

What about the private health funds? Do they insure for abortion? They cover procedures that Medicare does not. You might just find you have an increase in private health insurance because Medicare will not cover gender selection.

Senator, at the very least, please defer this bill until you determine what the prolife numbers in the new Senate will be.

Joan of Arc
I have just checked the current ACT federal representatives. There are two women, Kate Lundy and Gai Brodtmann. They are both Emily's Listers. The other is Andrew Leigh who is a strong supporter of the ACT Labor policy platform which includes abortion, euthanasia, same sex marriage, and other dubious issues.

assembly reps include Katy Gallagher, Yvette Berry, Mary Porter and Joy Burch. THey are all Emily's Listers. The four male government members are all avid supporters of ALP social policy and what they see as women's rights. If you are a member of the ACT ALP branch you pledge to support party policies and support the election of ALP candidates. Who are the pro life ALP candidates that you supported during the October 2012 Assembly election? Will you turn your back on ALP policy and support any pro life ACT candidates on September 14? Please surprise me and say "Yes".

Congratulations to Senator John Madigan for raising the selective abortion of female fetuses as an issue for the major parties to consider, and commendations to Sonia Courpis for her perceptive article.
Stephanie Peatling, Sydney Morning Herald columnist's ad hominem attack (27/2/13) on Senator Madigan as an "old, white man", was a sexist, racist and ageist comment that and would undoubtedly breach former Attorney General Nicola Roxon's draft anti-discrimination Bill.
However, I have news for Stephanie, I am a small, brown Asian female, the category First De Facto Tim Mathieson is so enthusiastic about, and I applaud Senator Madigan's effort to bring the tragedy of female feticide to centre front stage of the election campaign.
There are millions of missing women in India, my country of origin, because of gendercide, which has been happening ever since abortion was legalised and ultrasound became available to identify the sex of the baby in utero. Although sex-selected abortions are illegal in India, they still occur on a large scale. This is the crowning achievement of the old white feminists' agenda - the wholesale elimination of members of their own sex for no reason other than being female!
Even for women in developed countries, abortion is not a good idea - it increases the risk of breast cancer (losing the protective effect of a full-term pregnancy), increases the risk of premature birth (and cerebral palsy) in subsequent pregnancies, increases the risk of depression and suicide, and worst of all, women who have abortions realise 18 years later they have lost a friend and relative they would have loved and who would have loved them.
Endeavour Forum Inc., the organisation I represent, is holding an NGO "Parallel Event" on Gendercide at the UN Commission on the Status of Women in New York on Saturday, 9th March 2013. The main presenter is Reggie Littlejohn of Women's Rights Without Frontiers. Other speakers include US attorneys Samuel B. Casey and Allan Parker
Babette Francis

Any writer who supports abolition of abortion for any reason is to be commended for their courage. Comments drawn from opposing groups can be in bad taste. In keeping with the practice of aborting babies I guess.

So, the last card being played by those who support human child abortion is the 'desperate and shameless card' http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2013/02/20/abortion-and-politics-big-morality-vs-small-decisions/ 'I know she's a very young person and I'm killing her but who cares?'

Who cares? well even those members of the abortion anti-culture whose imaginations and vision haven't been completely destroyed by callous indifference recognise it is demographic oblivion. http://ozconservative.blogspot.com.au/2013/03/hesitating-at-brink.html

Patrick Fagan's speech at a World Congress of Families, (in Sydney this year!) explaining how the anti-culture maintains despite the 'autonomous choice' to eliminate their own population and furiously extending the practices that lead to their negative fitness http://downloads.frc.org/EF/EF09H36.pdf

Basically they resort to theft through taxation as their numbers dwindle in order to fund their programs and culture wars, and indoctrinate as early as possible to help convert children and turn them against their families and the norms that help them flourish. Make them promiscuous and facilitate their first act of child murder as soon as possible.

Australians have absolutely had it. Forty years of this horror. No more! No more of this outrage! Look, politicians with even partially functioning intellects; faint hearted public intellectuals - more calculating than principled, are able to oppose child murder despite their excessive instinct for self preservation. At this late stage how much merit it will get them in heaven is another matter.

Even the Swiss recognise its either their country or child killing - they can't have both. They couch in the idiom that an insane materialistic society will listen to but still http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/swiss-bid-to-ban-abortion-for-economy/story-fn3dxix6-1226586457070

So no. I am not working extra this week to fund the killing of babies. And I am not supporting any political party that it silent about this abominating sacrilege that causes the desolation of whole societies.

It is disgusting that such a thing is even being discussed as acceptable or within the platform of 'women's rights'. WHy should it be a crime to be a girl?! TO have the gender that a wise God rightly assigned to you? Humans are not factory objects - they come as they are and we have no right to interfere and engineer things to our greatest selfish interests. Such a discriminatory crime as sex selection abortion should be absolutely unthinkable and even abhorrent to any reasonable person.

Abortion is legal in Australia.
While I may not necessarily have an abortion myself , I would never presume to know or understand the reasons other women feel they need to have abortions.

We can't 'force' pregnant women to carry pregnancies to full term if they don't want to.
What are you going to do to stop it, tie them to a bed until they give birth?

It's better to encourage effective contraception, of which the best is abstinence.... Men keep it in their pants, and women keep their legs crossed, unless they are willing to accept a pregnancy.

Killing babies based on sex as a criteria could also be extended to abortion of babies based on IQ or physical attributes (if technology permits)! I wonder if fathers and mothers-to-be would want their babies killed because the children in the wombs did not meet the parents'expectations. Where will killing stop? Already, more than 100, 000 babies are killed through abortion in Australia each year. More babies and women/men will suffer if abortion is widely permissible and encouraged.

Gay couples might want to avoid the opposite sex too. A lesbian couple might want another shot at the turkey baster if the foetus is not a girl.

Determining sex is inexact and at 16-20 weeks. What do they do? If the ultrasound looks as though there is a little added bit, get the doctor to spring into action?

While most do not disagree with access to abortion, usually because of hardship to the mother, the ethical problems are significant. However at the end of the day it is those who decide must bear responsibility. I cannot decide for others. The male partner can never be equal in the decision, with a split vote always being decided by the mother. Where the latter applies, should the man be held responsible later? Another ethical problem that will never be put to a vote.

Any society that permits the abortion of girls is heading for madness.
Nature intended an equal number of each boys and girls to be born for
very good reasons.
Natural selection found that the mother/father/children system was the
most viable system which is why polygamy and polyandry has been banned
in all mature societies. It just works better.

China has already got itself into a problem with the result of gender
manipulation in its one child policy. The one child policy would be
fine if it was not for the preference for boys.

Nature intended for boys and girls to be partners for life.

@Candide and Bugsy
"...many get some grim satisfaction knowing that as a result there are now over 60 million Chinese men who are without a female partner and whose parents cannot look forward to a subservient daughter-in-law to care for them in their old age. The phrase 'serves them right' comes to mind."
" The reduction in gender ratio will actually increase females mate options."
Actually, historically the simple solution to any female shortage is simply to attack and raid the next village/town/city/country to get all the women you need. It doesn't matter if you disagree with such a soultion, it will happen regardless:
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/beautiful-brides-vietnam-sale-china
http://www.china.org.cn/china/2011-12/03/content_24065440.htm

The consequences of abortion are just so bad to women no matter what the angle.

So RMW, you think that countries like China would invade another country for the purpose of taking their women, rather than say, go through a culture change to value women more?

Yeah, I suppose it's possible.

Women are pretty much stuffed either way, with choice of abortion it's bad for women (you might even get your country invaded), without choice of abortion, you're forced to have babies or just not have sex outside of marriage, lest you be disgraced.
Man, I am SO glad I aint a woman.

As fetuses are not human, all discussion along these lines is oppression of Women and should be referred to the Human Rights commission and re-educated, forcefully if need be.

@McMackie
Human foetuses are not human? Who do you think you're fooling? Then again, how do we know you're human?
By the way, do you also denounce all those official medical advice that tells women not to drink alcohol to avoid harming their foetuses?

This article is extremely light on any facts and logic but quite full-on with the emotive propoganda.

Yes, we all know that sex selective abortions occur in China and India, but I challenge you to find a case of sex selective abortion in Australia other than the one referred to in the article (of which we know little about the couple' full circumstances). To suggest that because it happens in China and India, then it must be happening here is either naive, manipulative or both. In China and India there are powerful disincentives to have girls such as the single child policy, dowries, brides must move into husband's parents home and care for them in their old age. These factors don't exist in Australia.

Why the need to create a law based on something which we have no evidence of occurring in Australia?

Yes, these cultures discriminate against women and something should be done to improve the rights and welfare of women in these countries. However this has nothing to do with the reproductive rights of women in Australia and Senator Madigan's bill is nothing but a stunt.

Totally agree with you, Sonja. I can't understand why so-called feminists are not up in arms about this, but of course, the sisterhood don't want us to hear from post-abortive women about the awful damage this 'procedure' has done to their lives, relationships and psychological well-being

Sonia had wrote well of the discrimination happening here in silent way.
She had touched the incredible conspiracy of silence in regard with the complacent law of secrecy and is a protection to unmoral doing with government collusion.
Emily list are extremist feminist with political leaders like Julia and other’s college pursuing wrong ideology, Australian politicians on that standing are not carry out their duty as representatives in their position. Instead they are pushing EMILY list of unmoral choices.
Them, really need to resigned as is not appropriate for them to be pursuing false misleading interest contrary of the well being of women’s and society.
Here, a link that highlights birth healthy way to resolve the problem.
Abortion is not saving women life! Read the conclusion of International Symposium on Excellence in Maternal Healthcare! Country like Ireland: This Symposium puts an end to the false argument that Ireland needs abortion to treat women, and it was encouraging to hear the international speakers commend Ireland’s high standards of maternal healthcare and low rates of maternal mortality.”

http://www.symposiummaternalhealth.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/SYMP_Site_LITE.pdf
The evidence of abortion for sex selection in favour of male child is very high, country like China, India and social culture ignorance are killing many future women’s, here in a multicultural society many of culture or for bad choice are practicing choice abortion.
Australia must change law and disclose such abomination, by releasing data.

@luigi gigi I repeat, where is there any evidence that sex selective abortion is occurring in Australia to any extent other than the single case that the author cited? Conspiracy theories might get you all excited, but like most conspiracy theories, they lack real evidence and pander to biased beliefs. Yes, it does occur in India and China, along with an eaven greater number of other terrible injustices which are inflicted upon women. You should be disgusted about these injustices and be demanding that our government do more to help real human women by way of international aid and diplomacy.

The "International Symposium on Maternal Health" was organised by the medical college attached to the hospital in Ireland which caused the death of Savita Halappanavar (who was denied a medically necessary abortion) and it was a weak anti-choice attempt to defend why they think abortion is never necessary to save a woman's life. They presented NO peer reviewed studies to support any of their claims but stated their own biased, subjective personal opinions as fact. This is scientifically dishonest and morally wrong.