So now we know how evil the WHO is

WHO wants to abolish time limits for abortion
Foreign

20 april 2022

kl. 07.00

0
While states in the United States and countries in Eastern Europe are taking steps to restrict women's access to abortion, others are actively working to abolish virtually any regulation of such an intervention.

A new guideline from the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends, among other things, that all time limits for when an abortion can be performed be abolished, that all requirements for scanning before the procedure be abolished and that abolition require third-party approval when girls and women have an abortion. .

WHO guidelines are recommendations for clinical practice and health policy worldwide and are therefore aimed at, for example, hospitals and politicians. In short, the guidelines say that all obstacles to abortion can force women to have illegal and unsafe abortions. Some argue that scientific studies show that restrictions on access to abortion have no effect, arguing that there is no reason to have them.

At the same time, the WHO believes that countries should restrict the right of healthcare professionals to say no to abortion on ethical and religious grounds.

Forget the ethical aspect
But the Canadian professor of health ethics Eike-Henner Kluge at Victoria University believes that the WHO guidelines do not address the ethical aspect of abortion, which according to him shows that the organization is not interested in ethics but in promoting a politically correct position. He is not impressed by the level of ethical reflection in the guidance.

- When it comes to abortion, three parties must be taken into account: the woman, the fetus and the man. The central question is whether what is aborted is a human being or not. The WHO is only interested in one of the three parties and does not at any time acknowledge that there is a question of when a fetus becomes a human and abortion thus becomes unethical, says the professor.

”Inte health”
Eike-Henner Kluge is particularly critical of the WHO's argument that restrictions on when an abortion can be performed during pregnancy are arbitrary and not based on science. That is not true, claims the professor, who personally relates to the official criteria for when a person is declared brain dead.

- According to these criteria, a person can be considered dead when there is no longer any brain activity. When working with these criteria in the final stages of life, one must also do so at the beginning of life. And here I believe that there is enough brain activity at 22-24 weeks to say that it is a human and that it would therefore be wrong to kill it ", says Ehan and adds that the WHO's failure to recognize that abortion is a ethical issue is reflected in all other proposals in the guidance on abolishing the regulation of abortion:

- After all, countries have restrictions on access to abortion precisely because, unlike the WHO, they recognize that there are ethical implications to the procedure. These restrictions do not increase the risk of women seeking illegal abortions, as long as the country in question guarantees them the right to have an abortion at an early stage.

The staff can say no
Although the WHO considers that virtually all regulation of abortion is meaningless because it does not affect the actual number of abortions, it does not completely oppose regulation regarding doctors' right to refuse to assist in abortion. In virtually all countries, including Denmark, healthcare professionals can refuse to help with an abortion if it is against the person's conscience.

But even this right can stand in the way of women and girls being able to have an abortion as soon as possible, according to the WHO, which therefore demands that healthcare professionals be prevented from exercising this right in "urgent and emergency situations".

https://samnytt.se/who-vill-av....skaffa-tidsgranser-f