St. Mary Mackillop and the miraculous bookstore rescue

Beijing, China, Aug 31, 2018 / 02:30 pm (CNA).- An official Chinese state media outlet has denied any imminent change to the country’s national two-child policy. The announcement follows media speculation that such a change was being considered in response to China’s rapidly aging population.

On Aug. 27, family-planning related clauses were removed from China’s marriage and adoption laws leading many major media outlets to report that this could signal an upcoming change for the two-child policy.

Chinese authorities responded on Aug. 28 with two explanatory articles in the “China Daily,” the state-sponsored English-language newspaper, which provided explanations from legislators that these “family planning-related clauses” were only removed to eliminate redundancy; the Population and Family Planning Law that stipulates that couples can have only two children still remains on the books.

China has strictly controlled its population for nearly four decades through a government policy of contraception, abortion, and sterilization.

Its former one-child policy was expanded in 2015 to a limit of two children per family in response to the growing age imbalance facing the country, with nearly 10 percent of the population over the age of 65.

“The statement from China Daily does not eliminate the possibility that China is considering the abolition of its brutal population control program.  It does, however, clarify that the deletion of family planning content from the civil code sections on marriage and adoption law is irrelevant to this potential policy change,” explained Reggie Littlejohn, the president of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, a pro-life aid and advocacy organization focused on China.

Whether the standing committee of the National People’s Congress will amend the Population and Family Planning Law due to the changing demographic situation in the country “requires further consideration,” according to one of the publications.

Earlier this month, concerns were raised that Chinese population control efforts could reverse course entirely when two researchers proposed that the Chinese government force couples with fewer than two children to pay into a “procreation fund.”

“Given the desperation the Chinese government faces because of its rapidly aging population, I could see a move by the Chinese government to pressure all couples who are eligible to have a second child into having a second child, whether they want a second child or not,” commented Littlejohn, “The Chinese Government needs to stop functioning as womb police and let go of the idea that women’s bodies are domain of the state.”

“We continue to press for the complete elimination of all coercive population control measures, effective immediately.  Now, under the two-child policy, all couples can have two children.  Single women and third children, however, remain at risk for forced abortion,” she continued.

There have been at least 336 million abortions and 196 million sterilizations in China since the government first implemented population control measures, according to 2013 statistics from its national health ministry.

[…]

Canberra, Australia, Jun 9, 2018 / 03:57 am (CNA/EWTN News).- A new law in Australia will require Catholic priests in Canberra to break the seal of confession to report child abusers, drawing adamant opposition from Church officials.

“Priests ar… […]

Melbourne, Australia, Jan 31, 2019 / 01:47 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Though Australia’s Victoria state requires doctors with conscientious objection to abortion to refer women to another provider, a study published Thursday found that some doctors are noncompliant, “with adverse effects on access to care for some women.”

“Conscientious objection to abortion, the law and its implementation in Victoria, Australia: perspectives of abortion service providers”, by Louise Keogh, was published Jan. 31 in BMC Medical Ethics.

Victoria’s Abortion Law Reform Act 2008 allowed conscientious objection to direct participation in abortion, but mandated that conscientious objectors refer their patient to a non-objecting practitioner for treatment and advice.

The referral requirement, Section 8, is opposed by some, who argue that “it compromises practitioners’ religious or moral stance on abortion by compelling those with a CO to be complicit in allowing access to abortion through the act of referral,” and there have been calls for its repeal.

Keogh wrote that despite the 2008 law abortion access “remains restricted in practice, particularly in rural areas.”

Her study aimed “to explore health professionals’ understandings of the inclusion of Section 8 in the Abortion Law Reform Act, as well as their perceptions of how Section 8 has been implemented in the Victorian health system and its impact on care.”

The study was conducted through 19 interviews with individuals who are either directly involved in abortion provision, or provide abortion access counselling, or are involved in policy or advocacy related to abortion access.

“All nineteen participants were able to relate specific stories about doctors subverting, misusing or directly contravening the law,” Keogh stated.

The Guardian reported that Keogh worked with Family Planning Victoria, the Royal Women’s Hospital, and Women’s Health Victoria in conducting the interviews.

In addition to doctors, participants reported that conscientious objection has been invoked by telephone staff in government services, pharmacists, and Catholic hospitals.

Keogh maintained that the referral requirement “is designed to allow for the moral integrity of the doctor, but only so far as this can be maintained while not causing harm to patients.”

In 2013, Dr. Mark Hobart, a Catholic, was disciplined for refusing to refer a couple who sought the sex-based abortion of their unborn daughter.

“I refused to refer the patient because there was no medical reason to do it and it offended my moral conscience,” Hobart told Nine News Australia.

“It’s very wrong, I don’t know any doctor in Victoria that would be willing to refer a woman that wanted to have an abortion just because of gender at 19 weeks.”

He said the investigation shows that the state’s abortion law “stops doctors from using their conscience whether it is appropriate or not.”

The Medical Board of Victoria began an investigation after board members complained that the incident called into question his professional conduct.

Neither the woman nor her husband filed a complaint against him, the Daily Mail reports.

Victorian law also bars any protest within 150 meters (nearly 500 feet) of a clinic or hospital where abortions are procured.

[…]