Dear Premier Richard Court

I would firstly like to state how disappointed I am that you did not respond to my previous correspondence, especially when I have received replies from other politicians. So, I ask you to please ensure that you give this fax the due and respectful consideration.

It is with a just anger that I have listened to the recent parliamentary debates regarding the de-criminalisation of Abortion. The Criminal Code Amendment Bill commended to the House on March 10 basically means abortion on demand. This is quite surprising considering that you yourself have claimed to be pro-family and pro-life through what you have stated about the gift of life.

Offering a "mental health" justification for abortion will be the same as abortion on demand because this term lacks clarity. Any woman will be able to claim that her pregnancy will have some negative consequence for her 'mental health'. Every pregnancy could potentially apply to subsection 'c' in the proposed changes in the criminal code. What pregnancy does not result in "personal, family, social or economic consequences?"

Furthermore, subsection part 'd' seeks to justify abortion on the sole ground that the woman gives her consent, a lower standard of informed consent than that required by the High Court of Australia for every other medical procedure. (Of course, the doctor may believe, according to subsection 201A(4) that no consent is required when he/she deems it impracticable for a woman to obtain consent.) Are you planning to ensure that women be given the full information they should be given? The evidence, of a very probable link between abortion and breast cancer for example? The possible infertility that can occur? How their child will be disposed of? Blood poisoning, 'anesthetic misadventure' or 'spontaneous gangrene' of the ovaries leading to death as has occurred to as many as 100 women, per year, who currently die from legal abortions in the States. (Of course, most of these deaths are not directly attributed to the abortion.) Or, perhaps the lesser detrimental risks of cervical lacerations, placenta previa, ectopic pregnancies, pelvic inflammatory disease and endometriosis? How about the psychological effects abortion results in?( The Facts Of Life. Brian Clowes, PhD. 1997. Human Life International) Have you been informed yourself of the many women who now turn to "Women Hurt By Abortion" for help?

Do you plan to suggest that Doctors tell the truth, as one would expect, about the woman's child? Its beating heart? The fact that the child has a completely different genetic make-up and whose respiratory system, nervous system, circulatory system and digestive system are already functioning? Will the mother be told that her child responds to her voice, wakes and sleeps with her and dreams; reacts to light and to heat, squints, frowns, and whose body is sensitive to touch? Will every woman be given the opportunity to be told how her so-called 'organ' or 'blob of tissue' will be affected, like a person undergoing open heart surgery is told AND shown? Will she be given the opportunity to see "The Silent Scream"? And now, that we have reached a stage where disabled people are deemed worthy in our society, are we going to go backward and say they are not, by killing deformed babies, who have so much to offer our society? If you cannot be prepared to ensure that all the above is done, how can you advocate abortions in Western Australia? At least, how can you not BUT ensure that abortion does not continue to be allowed merely for convenience?

Premier Court, please inform yourself before it is too late. You are our representative! You are meant to make decisions based on facts and truth, not convenience and definitely not on who can shout louder.

Naturally, the introduction of Cheryl Davenport's Bill wishes to go further. Not only should abortion be legalised, but it will now be able to be performed legally throughout the whole period of gestation, thereby allowing for the partial-birth abortion procedure which 17 states in the United States have made illegal during 1996-7 because it is too heinous a crime. Why call it anything else when that is exactly what it is? I can just see Dr. David Grundmann having a field day as his slaughter of the innocents is permitted here where he intends to set up shop!

Premier Court, you will be personally and partly responsible for the premature death of innocent children and the destruction of any values our society still has, as well as the harm given to aborted women, if you do not personally do something to prevent the de-criminalisation of abortion from proceeding. I beg you, to do everything in your power to ensure that all members of our society, born and unborn, are protected.

I am not against a pregnant woman seeking medical treatment when necessary and which may cause harm to her unborn child. This is unfortunate. However, it is not the direct killing of a child.

I have heard this evening, that you are leaving the state this Wednesday and that, therefore, a decision may be made before then. Please, do not let your impending trip lead to a rash decision on such a fundamental issue which will have far-reaching ramifications.

Thanking you in anticipation