Tag: Abortion pill

abortion pill

Queensland MP avoids questions on abortion pill

Published on by EF TeamLeave a comment

On June 2nd, Robbie Katter introduced a disallowance motion seeking to halt the LNP’s regulation change that allows midwives to prescribe the abortion pill. While there are many aspects of the debate that deserve discussion, one issue sits at the very heart of the matter – and it is the issue that Health Minister Tim Nicholls failed to address.

by Matthew Cliff at Cherish Life

Regulative changes to abortion have been made by the LNP behind the scenes, whilst they have gagged the issue in the chamber.

Version 5 of the Extended Practice Authority for Midwives stated:

“For use in early medical termination of pregnancy. Only if the midwife has completed specified training and has been approved by their employer to administer or give a treatment dose of mifepristone and misoprostol (e.g. MS-2 Step).” 1

In March 2024, Version 6 of the Extended Practice Authority was introduced, stating “a course approved by the midwife’s employer that includes at a minimum:

– education about early medical termination of pregnancy medicine/s including indications, contraindications, management of common side effects and

administration;

– confirming pregnancy and gestation;

– pre and post termination counselling;

– cultural safety;

– mental health assessment and psychosocial screening;

– screening for domestic violence and reproductive coercion;

– screening for sexually transmitted infections;

– contraceptive advice;

– appropriate management;

– escalation and follow up.” 2

Version 5 & Version 6 (March 2026) below:

Screenshot 2026-06-03 at 11.46.31 am.png
Screenshot 2026-06-03 at 11.47.52 am.png

The critical difference is not the training requirements. The critical difference is that the requirement for employer approval has been removed. The change is clear:

Version 5 (March 2024): Midwives must complete training and receive employer approval to administer MS-2 Step.

Version 6 (March 2026): Midwives must complete training, but employer approval is no longer required.

That is a substantive regulatory change. Whether one supports or opposes it, Queenslanders and their elected representatives have every right to ask why this safeguard was removed and what justification exists for doing so.

Robbie Katter did not dispute that training remains in place. His question was straightforward: Why was employer approval removed? Mr Katter stated at the beginning of his speech, “a course approved by the midwife’s employer. That has been taken out. That is a glaring omission in the change that is being proposed to this new regulation.” 3

Yet Health Minister, Tim Nicholls (who voted with Labor to allow abortion up to birth in 2018) failed to engage with the issue. In fact, he went further, stating, “nothing in the updated extended practice authority introduces, alters or expands such provisions. Nothing in these amendments changes the existing legal or clinical framework in that area … So in every step along the way the requirements are unchanged.” 4

This is blatantly false. As stated clearly above there has been a change. Nichols obfuscates and spends all his time arguing about version 7, 5 which is not relevant to the discussion as it applies to nurses not midwives. 6 So, either he has misunderstood the nature of the motion, he has intentionally lied or it is a classic red herring?

Furthermore, Nicholls focuses on training requirements rather than addressing the removal of employer oversight, in doing so he sidesteps the central concern. The debate is not about whether training exists; it is about why an additional layer of accountability that previously existed has been taken away.

Queenslanders deserve a direct answer. Until the Government explains why employer approval was removed, it cannot credibly claim to have addressed the question that was put before it.

Rather conveniently the Speaker of the House LNP MP Jon Krause (Scenic Rim) then halted debate and moved straight to the vote without any opportunity for further questions.

The vote was as follows:

LNP, Labor, Greens MP and Independent (Noosa) voted against.

The Katter Australian Party voted for it.

By Matthew Cliff. This article was first published at Cherish Life and was used here with permission. Cherish Life is one of the largest pro- life organisations in Australia. Cherish Life Queensland was founded in 1970 (as Right to Life Queensland), to advocate for the right to life from conception until natural death.

ENDNOTES

  1. Queensland Health. “Medicines and Poisons Act 2019 Extended Practice Authority ‘Midwives’”.Queensland Health Website. Accessed 3 June, 2026. https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/Work-of-the-Assembly/Tabled-Papers/docs/5825t0329/5825t329.pdf. 9. ↩︎
  2. Queensland Health. “Extended practice authority: Midwives – version 6.” Queensland Health Website. Accessed 3 June, 2026. https://www.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0026/1108943/epa-midwives.pdf. 7. ↩︎
  3. Queensland Parliament. “RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS: Tuesday, 2 June 2026.” Hansard. Accessed 3 June, 2026. https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/events/han/2026/2026_06_02_DAILY.pdf. 1599. ↩︎
  4. Queensland Parliament. “RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS: Tuesday, 2 June 2026.” Hansard. Accessed 3 June, 2026. https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/events/han/2026/2026_06_02_DAILY.pdf. 1601. ↩︎
  5. Queensland Parliament. “RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS: Tuesday, 2 June 2026.” Hansard. Accessed 3 June, 2026. https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/events/han/2026/2026_06_02_DAILY.pdf. 1601. ↩︎
  6. Queensland Health. “Extended practice authority: Nurses – version 7.” Queensland Health Website. Accessed 3 June, 2026. https://www.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0030/1108947/epa-registered-nurse.pdf ↩︎
pro-abortion lobby

Why is the LNP advancing the agenda of the pro-abortion lobby?

Published on by EF TeamLeave a comment

The LNP has questions to answer over its involvement with pro-abortion lobby interests, especially in light of its parliamentary ‘abortion gag’.

By Matthew Cliff at Cherish Life

Tragically, an expansion of Queensland’s abortion access regulations is now being implemented. This expansion enables “trained” nurses and midwives to perform abortions (Medicines and Poisons (Medicines) Amendment Regulation 2026).1 Shockingly, it is the Queensland LNP government who is quietly advancing this regulatory framework, despite having opposed the original amendment introduced by Labor in March 2024.2

Let’s back up, the Health and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2024 was introduced by then Labor Health Minister and Minister for Women Shannon Fentiman on 7 March 2024. The amendment passed because Labor had the numbers in the chamber at that time.3

pro-abortion lobby
Shannon Fentiman, Qld Labor MP for Waterford

This Act forms part of the broader Queensland Health Termination of Pregnancy Action Plan 2032, a long-term policy framework that was designed by the Pro-Abortion lobby to expand access to abortion across the state.4 Pro-Abortion stakeholders included in collaborating on the TOP Action Plan 2032 include, MSI International (who, as we will see, benefits financially from this push),5 The Australian College of Midwives (the principle professional organisation for midwives which has adopted a pro-abortion policy)6 and The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (another organisation captured by anti-life ideology).7

When the legislation passed in March 2024, it did so under a Labor majority, with opposition from the Liberal National Party (LNP), One Nation and the Katter’s Australian Party.8 Yet more recently, under the direction of Health Minister Tim Nicholls, the LNP government has moved to implement the regulatory framework necessary to roll out the Act.9

pro-abortion lobby

Within the Termination of Pregnancy Action Plan 2032, one of the key milestones for the Pro-Abortion lobby was to commit to “amending the Termination of Pregnancy Act 2018 and Criminal Code Act 1899, to enable nurses and midwives with appropriate qualifications and training to perform a medical termination of pregnancy through the use of termination of pregnancy drugs.”10 In practical terms, this represents a shift in how abortion is accessed in Queensland.

Three key implications arise from this change. First, the law now allows nurses and midwives to participate directly in medical abortions. Whilst framed as a measure to improve access, especially in rural and remote Queensland,11 this reform effectively cuts through any red tape to allow more pills to be sold and consequently making midwives and nurses complicit in the mass killing of Queensland’s unborn children.

Second, this shift raises serious ethical and financial questions. MSI International has the exclusive rights to MS-2 Step (the Abortion pill), meaning they benefit financially from every medical abortion in Australia. In terms of statistics, between 2019 to 2024, MS-2 Step has been prescribed 212,029 times nationwide, with 99,075 prescriptions in Queensland alone.12

Each course of the drug costs $391.06 to the Australian taxpayer, subsidised to $25.00 for the patient.13 This equates to an estimated $82.9 million in public expenditure nationally, and approximately $38.7 million in Queensland alone from 2019 to 2024. These funds are directed to MS Health, part of a global network linked to MSI Australia.14

Third, this regulatory framework directly engages with the Termination of Pregnancy Act 2018 – the very legislation Premier David Crisafulli has effectively placed under a “gag order.” This raises an obvious question: is this a contradiction? On one hand, the government is actively advancing regulations that shape and expand how the Act operates. On the other, it is restricting open debate and discussion among Queensland’s elected representatives. Put simply, they are willing to act on the legislation—but not willing to allow it to be publicly scrutinised.

So, this development prompts three important questions:

1. Are the LNP fully aware that, through these actions, they are effectively implementing the Termination of Pregnancy Action Plan 2032 – a central strategy of the pro-abortion lobby, spearheaded by Labor MP Shannon Fentiman?

2. Why is the LNP government now advancing the implementation of legislation that they previously opposed, why not pursue an amendment instead?

3. Isn’t it contradictory for you to amend regulation and yet not allow any other public representative to even discuss or debate the changes?

These are significant questions – that the Queensland public demand answering!

Fascinatingly both Qld Queensland Health Minister Tim Nicholls and Premier David Crisafulli voted against the legislation at the time.15 Now, Tim Nichols is certainly no ally to the Pro-Life movement. Queenslanders need to be reminded that Tim Nichols, the health minister of Queensland, is ideologically aligned with the Pro-Abortion Lobby, so aligned in fact that he was one of three MP’s that crossed the floor and voted with Labor in support of the 2018 Termination of Pregnancy Act.16 An act which has resulted an even larger number of abortions in Queensland since it was enacted.

pro-abortion lobby
Tim Nichols, Queensland Health Minister and LNP Member for Clayfield

Furthermore, scrutiny is warranted in relation to training and oversight proposed in the amendment. Under the new framework, nurses17 and midwives18 authorised through an Extended Practice Authority (EPA) may administer abortion drugs.  However, basic questions remain about the nature of the required training:

1.  Who is behind the training?19

2. What type of Pre and Post abortion counselling is conducted and again, by whom?20

Surely if organisations with a direct interest in abortion provision are involved in shaping these frameworks, concerns about bias and conflicts of interest inevitably arise.

Equally significant is the issue of conscientious objection. What protections exist for nurses and midwives who, on ethical or religious grounds, do not wish to participate in abortion procedures or related training? Without robust safeguards, there is a risk that healthcare professionals may experience pressure, whether direct or indirect, to act against their deeply held convictions.

In sum, the Health and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2024 represents a horrendous turning point in Queensland’s abortion provision landscape. Most distressingly it now makes those nurses and midwives who have undergone their “training” complicit in the deaths of more and more unborn children in this state.

So what’s next – we need your help, by submitting the following petition you will send an email to key LNP members of whom we are seeking answers on those important questions listed above. (Click here to access the petition and email)

By Matthew Cliff. This article was first published at Cherish Life and was used here with permission. Cherish Life is one of the largest pro- life organisations in Australia. Cherish Life Queensland was founded in 1970 (as Right to Life Queensland), to advocate for the right to life from conception until natural death.

Footnotes

  1. Queensland Parliament. “Medicines and Poisons (Medicines) Amendment Regulation 2026”. Queensland Parliament Website. Accessed 27 April, 2026, https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/Work-of-the-Assembly/Tabled-Papers/docs/5826T0216/5826t216.pdf ↩︎
  2. Queensland Parliament. “Record of Proceedings: Tuesday,7 March 2024.” Queensland Parliament Website. Accessed 27 April, 2026. https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/events/han/2024/2024_03_07_WEEKLY.pdf. 605-606 ↩︎
  3. Queensland Parliament. “Record”. 605. ↩︎
  4. Queensland Health. “Terminaton of Pregnancy Action Plan 2032.” Queensland Health Website. Accessed 27 April, 2026. https://www.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/1316467/Termination-of-Pregnancy-Plan_Digital.pdf ↩︎
  5. Queensland Health. “Termination”. 5. ↩︎
  6. Queensland Health. “Termination”. 7. ↩︎
  7. Queensland Health. “Termination”. 8. ↩︎
  8. Queensland Health. “Termination”. 5. ↩︎
  9. Queensland Health. “Termination”. 4. ↩︎
  10. Queensland Health. “Terminaton of Pregnancy Action Plan 2032.” Queensland Health Website. Accessed 27 April, 2026. https://www.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/1316467/Termination-of-Pregnancy-Plan_Digital.pdf ↩︎
  11. ibid ↩︎
  12. Cherish Life. “Abortion Statistics Queensland.” Cherish Life Website. Accessed 27 April, 2026. https://www.cherishlife.org.au/abortionstatisticsqueensland ↩︎
  13. The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. “MIFEPRISTONE (&) MISOPROSTOL.” PBS Website. Accessed 27 April, 2026. https://www.pbs.gov.au/medicine/item/10211K ↩︎
  14. MSI Reproductive Choices. “Australia”. Accessed 27 April, 2026. https://www.msichoices.org/what-we-do/where-we-work/australia/ ↩︎
  15. Queensland Parliament. “Record”. 605-606. ↩︎
  16. Queensland Parliament. “Speech by Tim Nichols.” Queensland Parliament Website. Accessed 27 April, 2026. https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/speeches/spk2018/Timothy_Nicholls-Clayfield-20181017-750016482916.pdf ↩︎
  17. Queensland Parliament. “Extended practice authority: Registered Nurses – version 7.” Queensland Parliament Website. Accessed 27 April, 2026. https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/Work-of-the-Assembly/Tabled-Papers/docs/5826t0198/5826t198.pdf. 1. ↩︎
  18. Queensland Parliament. “Extended practice authority: midwives – version 6.” Queensland Parliament Website. Accessed 27 April, 2026. https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/Work-of-the-Assembly/Tabled-Papers/docs/5826t0197/5826t197.pdf. 1. ↩︎
  19. Queensland Parliament. “Medicines”. 1. ↩︎
  20. ibid ↩︎
unborn

Irish court imprisons man for unlawful killing of unborn child

Published on by EF TeamLeave a comment

A man who forced his girlfriend to take abortion pills that killed her nine-week-old unborn baby has been sentenced to prison by an Irish judge.

from The Christian Institute

A man who forced his girlfriend to take abortion pills that killed her nine-week-old unborn baby has been jailed at Letterkenny Circuit Court.

Last week, Judge John Alymer sentenced 28-year-old Adeleke Adelani to eleven years, with the final two years suspended, for the intentional destruction of an unborn life and five years with the last year suspended for causing harm to the child’s mother.

In 2020, Adelani locked the woman in a room and forced her to take five misoprostol 200mg tablets. Misoprostol is normally prescribed by abortion clinics to cause the termination of the unborn child. The court heard a recording in which he threatened: “It’s either you eat this or I beat that kid out of you tonight.”

Forgiveness

In a victim impact statement, the woman — who has since married another man — told the court: “When he wrongfully imprisoned me and caused the termination of my nine-week pregnancy, he took far more than my freedom.

“He took my child. He took my sense of safety. He took a future that I had already begun to plan and love.

“My baby was real to me. I had hopes, dreams, and a bond with the life that was growing inside me, and all of it was violently stolen from me in a moment of cruelty that I will never forget.”

She said she had forgiven the defendant, testified to the importance of her faith, and paid tribute to her husband, “who treats me with the love, dignity and kindness I always deserved, but in Christ, who carried me when I could not carry myself”.

However, she explained, “I will always grieve my child. I will always remember what was taken from me. Healing does not erase the loss, it only means I learned how to live with it.”

Coercion

In sentencing Adelani, Judge Alymer said that he had been “fully aware” of the woman’s “expressed desire to keep her baby and completely aware of the potential appalling emotional consequences of terminating the pregnancy without her consent”.

He described the forced abortion as “an extreme act of physical and emotional violence”, and noted: “While she is very forgiving of you in a very Christian way, it is clear the appalling emotional trauma she suffered as a result of your actions.”

Outside the court, Garda Detective Inspector Paul McGee acknowledged the victim’s “unwavering strength and resolve” throughout the investigation and trial, and said that her decision “to share her experience brings attention to the hidden reality of abuse that takes place behind closed doors”.

The Christian Institute exists for “the furtherance and promotion of the Christian religion in the United Kingdom and elsewhere” and “the advancement of education”. It is a nondenominational Christian charity with more than 60,000 supporters throughout the UK, including more than 5,000 churches. The Christian Institute is committed to upholding the truths of the Bible which we believe is inerrant and the supreme authority for all of life, and is committed to upholding the sanctity of life from conception.

Chemical abortions are not safe

Chemical abortions: not safe for mother or baby

Published on by EF TeamLeave a comment

Australia has loosened restrictions on chemical abortions yet new data proves they are less safe for mothers than the authorities would have us believe.

The abortion pill has become the preferred method of terminating a pregnancy for most Western women, including in Australia. Legally available since 2006, it now accounts for up to 60% of Australia’s 90,000 abortions.1

This increase has been exacerbated by a loosening of restrictions around who can prescribe the pill. Yet a new study from the US should be raising the alarm among those who believe that medication abortion is a safe option for women.

Chemical abortions in Australia

In Australia, the abortion pill is produced by Marie Stopes International under the name MS-2 Step and was formerly known as RU-486. The new name reflects the two-stage protocol for a chemical abortion: first the drug Mifepristone is consumed to stop progesterone production; this effectively stops the unborn baby from accessing nutrition from its mother. Then 36-48 hours later, the drug Misoprostol is taken to expel the dead child.

If the second pill is not consumed and high doses of progesterone are given to the mother after the first pill, then there is a good chance that the action of the abortion pill can be reversed and the baby saved.

Doctors previously required special certification in order to prescribe MS-2 Step, but since August 2023, the Therapeutic Goods Act has allowed any GP to do so. Additionally, nurses, midwives and other medical professionals are now legally able to prescribe the abortion pills, as explained in our previous article.

New South Wales’ new bill

The state which most recently jumped on the abortion access bandwagon is New South Wales.  The bill,  put forward by Greens MP Amanda Cohn, brought NSW into line with the other states except Tasmania, enabling chemical abortions to be prescribed by endorsed midwives and nurse-practitioners.

Major amendments saw the most controversial sections of the bill scrapped, including a section that would force health professionals who had a conscientious objection to abortion to facilitate the termination of pregnancies and another that would have forced pro-life doctors to refer women for abortions.

There were concerns that parts of the bill could have led to the closure of Christian and Catholic hospitals for refusing to perform abortion procedures. Even though the bill’s authors said it referred to public institutions and contained no mechanism to enforce compliance, the possibility for amendments to be made in the future caused a huge backlash.

One upside to the new law is that the section related to data collection was expanded – something sorely needed in all those Australian states which currently do not collect data, ie all states and territories other than South Australia and Western Australia.

A timely new ctudy

Yet a new study, released by the American Ethics and Public Policy Centre (EPPC) in May of this year, could throw a spanner in the works of this expanded access to the abortion pill. The study, the largest of its kind, analysed the insurance claims related to more than 800,000 mifepristone abortions over a period of six years.

The results were startling, with almost 11% of women reporting a serious adverse event within 45 days of their abortion. The study did not include ‘mild’ or ‘moderate’ adverse events in its conclusions; mental health consequences were included in the category ‘other abortion-specific complaints.’

Serious adverse events included: repeat surgical terminations due to an incomplete abortion; haemorrhage, including some requiring a blood transfusion; sepsis and ectopic pregnancy. A staggering 5% of women required a visit to a hospital emergency department. The findings call into question the existing FDA statistics of adverse events after Mifepristone occurring only ‘0.5%’ of the time.

Chemical abortions adverse events statistics

SOURCE: Ethics and Public Policy Centre

The EPPC is calling for a thorough investigation of the drug by the FDA, which is still using data from its original decade-old studies, and in recent days, the Commissioner of the US Food and Drug Administration has committed to conducting a review of Mifepristone. However, without providing any details or an official statement from the FDA, a review remains to be seen.

Those studies relied on a relatively small number of cases, whereas the EPPC study uses data from 28 times as many abortions. Additionally, the EPPC is calling for the FDA to return to its original, more stringent guidelines for dispensing Mifepristone, such as physician-only prescription in a clinical setting with ready access to high-level medical intervention, if required.

Those guidelines may be contrasted with the current ones, in place since 2023, which mean that women can access a mifepristone abortion after only one telehealth consultation with any approved healthcare provider – who doesn’t have to be a physician. Additionally, healthcare providers have no obligation to report an adverse event unless the patient dies. In the US, the drug is also available by mail-order pharmacy for those living in states which have banned abortion.

Ineffectiveness of chemical abortions

Included among the serious adverse reactions to the abortion pill is a high failure rate. The American study found that more than 5% of chemical abortions fail – somewhat higher than the rate currently quoted by the abortion industry of around 3-4%.

The EPPC study found that “According to the insurance data, 5.26 percent of women undergo a second abortion attempt within 45 days of the first, indicating that the first mifepristone abortion attempt failed.” Not only that, it was also reported that 1.58 percent of mothers were given a second dose of misoprostol but not a second dose of mifepristone, suggesting that the baby was killed by the first drug but not completely expelled from the mother’s body.

The extra dose of misoprostol therefore increases the likelihood of adverse reactions specific to that drug, including effects such as shivering, chills, diarrhoea, abdominal pain, hyperthermia, nausea, vomiting, flatulence, constipation, dyspepsia, headache, breakthrough bleeding, menstrual irregularities, syncope (fainting), lethargy, weakness, and vertigo. 

By including the number of repeat abortions in their data, the EPPC concluded that a massive “13.51 percent of women—roughly one in seven—experience at least one serious adverse event or repeated abortion attempt within 45 days of first attempting a mifepristone abortion.“

Chemical abortions effectiveness statistics

SOURCE: Ethics and Public Policy Centre

Incomplete data

A second recent study, this time from the Charlotte Lozier Institute, looked at over 28,000 emergency room visits that followed a chemical abortion. The ER visits took place within 30 days of the abortion and it was found that during the 5-year study period, 84% of the admissions were wrongly classified as being ‘miscarriages’ rather than ‘adverse abortion events.’ Additionally, around half of the miscoded cases were high-level medical emergencies.

These findings underscore the fact that the true number of adverse reactions to the abortion pill are not known. The vice president and director of data analytics at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, Dr. James Studnicki, commented on the findings:

“When abortion-related emergencies are disguised as miscarriages, it impairs a doctor’s ability to make informed, evidence-based decisions. That isn’t just a documentation error—it’s a public health crisis. The abortion industry’s push for concealment is unethical and dangerous. Women deserve honest guidance and proper medical care, not advice that jeopardizes their health.”

Conclusion

The recent death of the inventor of mifepristone, Étienne-Émile Baulieu, has helped keep the topic of chemical abortions in the news. After Baulieu’s passing, his widow commented, “His research was guided by his commitment to progress through science, his dedication to women’s freedom and his desire to enable everyone to live better and longer lives.”

Obviously missing from this glowing tribute is concern for the millions of babies who have been put to death via Baulieu’s chemical abortions. As we are learning, chemical abortions are also harming far more women than previously thought – all in the name of “freedom.”

by Kathy Clubb

  1. Due to limited data collection, most Australian abortion statistics are estimates. ↩︎