Abortion = Violation of personal values and preferences, Unwanted and Coerced Abortion are the order of the day but who is listening, certainly not the Canadian Government?
“Our findings indicate, as a conservative estimate, that two-thirds of women experienced their abortions as a violation of their own values and preferences. A majority of women who had abortions (60%) reported they would have carried to term if they had received more support from others or had felt more financial security, and one-fourth described their abortions as either unwanted or coerced. On average, only women who described their abortions as wanted and consistent with their values and preferences (33%) attributed any benefits to their abortions. All other groups were more likely to attribute an increase in negative emotions and a decline in mental health to their abortions, report more stress when questioned about their abortion experiences, and appear less likely to participate in surveys initiated at abortion clinics as compared to women for whom the abortion is wanted and consistent with their values and preferences.”
- that two-thirds of women experienced their abortions as a violation of their own values and preferences..
- A majority of women who had abortions (60%) reported they would have carried to term if they had received more support from others or had felt more financial security..
- And one fourth described their abortion as either unwanted or coerced…..
According to the study, women who reported being pressured into an abortion by either their male partner or a family member also reported statistically significant levels of:
- Negative emotions due to their abortion
- Interference with daily life, work, or relationships
- Intrusive thoughts, including flashbacks to the abortion
- Frequent feelings of loss, grief, or sadness about the abortion
- Increased levels of stress answering questions about the abortion
Tessa Longbons, Senior Research Associate at Lozier Institute and co-author of the study, said:
“Abortion does not empower women. Quite the opposite, the abortion industry enables and gives support to those who seek to control women. This coercion can have long-lasting mental health repercussions, and now that the FDA allows the abortion pill to be dispensed without a woman ever seeing a doctor, the abortion industry’s coercion problem may only get worse. “Women deserve to be fully informed, and they deserve better than abortion.””
““Freedom of Choice” No longer reflects the reality behind most women’s experiences with abortion…” AND YET…..
In Pat Maloney’s latest blog she outlines the millions of dollars our Federal government has committed to groups who promote or provide induced abortion both at home and abroad, while at the same time threatening Christian and Pro-Life pregnancy support agencies who are actually offering these mothers the help that an overwhelming majority of them have stated they need – financial, emotional, physical, and practical support!
We fully agree with Dr Tessa Longbons “Women deserve better than abortion. We call on the Federal Government to cease its paternalistic view that it knows better than women what they need. Women have spoken and they need help to bring their babies to term not help in killing their own children! Just in case you did not know Action Canada which is fully funded by the Federal Government is just Planned Parenthood in disguise – is it any wonder we have this assault on the tiniest Canadians and their vulnerable mothers?
Please see Pat’s article below on her information request.
NAF Canada gets $1.5 million to improve killing skills of abortion doctors
I finally received my ATIP regarding the $1,469,150 in funding given to the National Abortion Federation in 2022. It took Health Canada over a year to provide me with the information. (What is supposed to take 30 days took 450 days or 15 months.)
First. NAF is concerned that more women are getting medical abortions and less women are getting surgical abortions. They will train more doctors to do surgical abortions. They don’t want this “skill” to vanish.
Second. The document uses the term “pregnant people” throughout. It’s not actually just women who get pregnant anymore.
Third. The funding went to NAF under the THE HEALTHCARE POLICY AND STRATEGIES PROGRAM. The thing is, this program was meant for “home and community care; palliative and end of care; mental health care; and other Federal provincial territorial and emerging priorities”. So how does the government justify granting dollars for training abortion doctors to kill babies? By using a program designed for actual health care, and diverting the dollars into abortion programs. Read their wiggle words here:
“The 43.3 million for the new sexual and reproductive health initiative is is a new investment and is separate from the program (THE HEALTHCARE POLICY AND STRATEGIes PROGRAM ) core budget. This funding will be provided for the program using its existing authorities (i.e. we will just make it fit here). The terms and conditions of the program allow for contribution funding to flow to other levels of government, non-governmental and not-for profit organizations, who in turn may further distribute funding to third parties to conduct approved activities.”
The full description of the Health Care Policy and Strategies Program from their website. You won’t see anything in here about using these funds for abortion programs. Never mind that this government already spends a gazillion dollars on all kinds of “sexual and reproductive health”. Apparently they need to spend more.
“The Health Care Policy and Strategies Program provides time-limited funding for projects to non-profit organizations and other levels of government for projects that aim to improve the accessibility, quality, sustainability and accountability of Canada’s health care system. The program supports the federal government’s commitment to maintain a strong and effective publicly funded health care system. Health Canada supports project proposals from organizations based on the program’s 4 priority areas: mental health care, home and community care, palliative and end-of-life care other federal, provincial/territorial and emerging priorities. One-time funding through contribution agreements supports projects that: increase understanding, knowledge and research on data, policies, best practices, products, technologies and processes including identifying gaps, needs and trends identify, develop, implement, assess and promote new or modified tools, approaches and models that promote people-centred health care systems identify, develop, implement, assess and promote new learning opportunities, skills development, standards, products and technological solutions. Projects should aim to increase opportunities for collaboration and coordination among federal, provincial and territorial governments, other health care policy makers, service providers, users, researchers and other stakeholders. The program cannot provide funding to individuals or for-profit organizations, and cannot fund the delivery of health care services. For more information, email the Health Care Policy and Strategies Program: email@example.com.”
Fourth. Other recipients of this (up to $25,168,166) cold blooded killing of children in the womb (future ATIPs perhaps?):
- Action Canada
- Community-Based Research Centre
- Canadian Centre for Gender and Sexual Diversity
- Centre for Sexuality
- Egale Canada
- Sherbourne Health Centre Corporation
- Sex Information and Education Council of Canada
- Trans Care BC
Fifth. Pages 279 and 342:
“research indicates there are key barriers and challenges related to in inequitable and variable access to sexual and reproductive health information and services in Canada. The availability of effective SRH interventions, in particular for populations for marginalized groups, including women (women are marginalized…who are they kidding?), youth, LGBTQ2 people, racialized Canadians, and indigenous populations, remains a gap across Canada.”
“health care policy and strategies program (HCPSP) sexual and reproductive health fund (SRHF). INFORMATION SESSION FOR SRHF REVIEW COMMITTEE MEMBERS OCTOBER 14TH, 2021. priority areas for action. “in some cases women, transgender and non binary individuals are required to travel considerable distances if they wish to access abortion services which can have significant accessibility and financial implications.”
“Those with multiple intersection identities face even higher barriers to access sexual reproductive health information services. Too often they do not receive the same quality of care particulate particularly if they are from under served communities. Key populations: Indigenous people. Inter sex people. LGBTQ2 people. Newcomers, immigrants, refugees, international students. People with disabilities physical sensory and cognitive. Under served populations. Seniors. Sex workers. Women. Youth.” (seniors get abortions?)“
Where is their evidence for these subjective claims that “in some cases” and “too often” there are “barriers and challenges” to getting abortions? None is provided. We are simply expected to believe that they exist, because the government says so. They make all kinds of statements of fact with absolutely no supporting evidence or research. It seems they just want to justify their preoccupation with abortion for every imagined underserved segment of the population.
P 487 and 488.
Sixth. Here is a note from a possible Question period question:
“If pressed on whether the government will provide funding to organizations offering alternatives to abortion (i.e. Continuing the pregnancy)”
“Answer: This fund will not support initiatives that discourage or are opposed to freedom of choice or attempt to override the individual right to make decisions about their own bodies.“
The Government refuses funding to organizations that offer alternatives to abortion. Not a surprise of course, but seeing them write it in black and write that “continuing a pregnancy” isn’t worthy of funding, is a stark reality of this abortion obsessed regime under Justin Trudeau.
But if you want to kill your child, then we got money for you, and lots of it.
Finally, the Department of Health actually has a unit called the Sexual and reproductive health unit.