Abortionist

 

G.B. abortionist alleged to have agreed to sex-selective abortion to appear in court next month

By Dave Andrusko

Abortionist Prabha Sivaraman

One of two abortionists in Great Britain caught on video allegedly agreeing to abort a baby because the child was a girl will appear next month before Manchester and Salford Magistrates’ Court.
Next January there will be another hearing to decide whether to issue a separate summons against the second abortionist.

Forty-six-year-old Dr. Prabha Sivaraman will face an allegation of “conspiracy to procure poison to be used with intent to procure abortion” contrary to section 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act. The case is the first of its kind to come before a court in the United Kingdom.
Sivaraman was filmed in an uncover investigation by The Telegraph newspaper in 2012. She was working both for private clinics and the National Health Service Hospitals at the time and was recorded telling a woman, “I don’t ask questions. If you want a termination, you want a termination.”
The Telegraph’s John Bingham reported that the second abortionist, Dr. Palaniappan Rajmohan, “was filmed at the Calthorpe Clinic in Edgbaston, Birmingham, agreeing to conduct the procedure even though he told the undercover reporter: ‘It’s like female infanticide, isn’t it?’”
The prosecutions are unusual on several grounds, beyond being the first tried under the Offences Against the Person Act.

As reported previously by National Right to Life News Today, the Crown Prosecution Service chose not to charge either abortionist.

After a 19-month investigation, the CPS did so not because there wasn’t sufficient evidence, but because prosecution would not be in the “public interest.”
This provoked an outcry that transcended the customary pro-and anti-life divide. For now, it culminated last week in a 181-1 vote in Parliament in favor of the Abortion (Sex-Selection) Bill, which MP Fiona Bruce introduced on behalf of a cross-party group that included 11 other female MPs.

The Bill is not a new law, but “merely clarifies that nothing in section one of the Abortion Act [of] 1967 allows a pregnancy to be terminated on the grounds of the sex of the unborn child,” Ms. Bruce said. However, for its own reasons, the government of David Cameron is “not behind the change,” according to The Daily Mail.
The court case against the two abortionists is also unusual because “It is part of a rare private prosecution brought by a pro-life campaigner and supported by the Christian Legal Centre after the Crown Prosecution Service decided against charging Dr. Sivaraman and another physician featured in the Telegraph investigation,” Bingham reported.
That pro-lifer is Aisling Hupert. According to Bingham

“Gender-abortion is a horrible practice, said Miss Hubert.

“I took this dramatic step because those who should have done so were effectively turning a blind eye.

“Again we have seen the establishment stand silent in the face of the abortion industry, hoping that the horrors will be swept under the carpet and the problems go away.

“But justice demands that something is done and that people are held to account for their actions.

“The law can only protect if it is enforced.”

Andrea Minichiello Williams is chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre. She said:

“There has been public outcry over revelations of gender abortion in the UK but no official action has been taken against the doctors.

“We are proud to stand with this brave young woman as she battles for justice for unborn children and shames those who should have done so.

“The establishment has become complicit with the abortion industry because it is too frightened to stand up to it.”

Source: NRLC News