Redefining choice: the use of aborted fetuses in Australia

This 'scientific addiction' leads researchers into very hypocritical situations; take the case of a 2009 research paper, which studied the role of the trophoblast (a type of cell) in creating a healthy placenta. The study was funded by Monash University and the National Health and Medical Research Council; the abstract explains that the researchers were interested in promoting successful pregnancies. The paper then goes on to state that the placentae used for the research were taken from 'healthy women undergoing first-trimester suction termination of pregnancy (6-10 wk) for psychosocial reasons.' Thus the healthy aborted fetuses that are used in the research will help create healthy living fetuses, which in turn may or may not then be aborted.

The words of pediatrician, Gerald Gaull, describe the view of a great body of contemporary researchers:

"Rather than it being immoral, what we are trying to do, it is immoral - it is a terrible perversion of ethics - to throw these fetuses in the incinerator, as is usually done, rather than to get some useful information."

as quoted in "Beyond Abortion"by Suzanne M.Rini

As things stand, there is no simple way for parents with a conscientious objection to know that the termination of healthy fetuses was responsible for their own 'healthy pregnancy'.And it is very troubling in this age of 'choice' to think that Australians have no choice when it comes to their tax-dollars and donations being used to fund research which relies on aborted baby parts. Consumers have no choice when it comes to using products whose lineage has included research on aborted babies. And preborn Australians have no choice when it comes to the use of their dismembered little bodies for scientific research after their ignominious deaths.