when unrestricted abortion isn't enough: the back-up plan
By Diogenes (articles ) | Aug 10, 2010
An Australian Olympic athlete, Keli Lane, faces charges that she murdered her own baby. According to prosecutors, Lane was driven by her ambition to play water polo in the 2000 Olympics.
So when Ms Lane became pregnant five times between 1992 and 1999, she allegedly resolved to avoid the responsibility. Her first two pregnancies were terminated. Two babies were secretly carried to term and adopted out, in 1995 and 1999.
In between, in 1996, she bore a child. But motherhood was not part of the plans, and Lane was back in social circulation, attending a wedding party with her boyfriend, just hours after leaving the maternity ward. Authorities charge that she disposed of the infant.
Now you might ask: In the contraceptive age, why would a woman who doesn’t want a baby become pregnant five times in a decade? The Sydney Morning Herald explains:
Although Ms Lane was taking the contraceptive pill, she drank heavily and would keep up with the boys.
We already know that many woman think of abortion as the back-up plan, for when contraceptives fail. The case of Keli Lane raises another question: What’s the back-up plan when a pregnant woman who rejects motherhood can’t or won’t have an abortion?
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach seven million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
Our Fall Campaign
Progress toward our year-end goal ($63,989 to go):
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: Catilieth -
Aug. 17, 2010 1:05 AM ET USA
My question has always been, "If a mother can kill her child before it exits the uterus, why can't she kill it afterwards?" Why is it that a person's spacial location determines whether or not he can be killed? Following the abortion logic (where one is located determines whether or not one can be killed), perhaps there will be more locations where murder will be accepted.....