WHEN Melbourne sonographer Jane (not her real name) told the young Afghani Muslim bride that she was expecting a girl, she felt she had just handed out a death sentence.
“It was the worse scan in my 15 years in the profession,” she told me.
“My patient came in recently for a routine 20-week obstetric foetal wellbeing scan. She asked the gender of the baby. In the room were family members.
“I said the baby looked healthy and most likely a girl. The grandmother spoke aggressively in another language and left the room slamming the door, followed by the uncle and a little boy.
“The mother was crying hysterically. You would have thought I had just told her that her baby had died.
“I thought the little boy was theirs and that they would be happy for a girl. But the father, who was older, told me his firstborn was also a girl – the boy was his nephew.
“I have no doubt about the intentions of the father. The mother may have wanted to keep that child but there was little doubt in my mind she would be aborted.”
Jane went home and cried. She spent days agonising, even wondering if she should leave her profession.
As a result of gender requests, which she believes can lead to abortion, she is increasingly reluctant to reveal a child’s sex. Many colleagues feel the same, not wanting to be complicit.
“Things have changed,” she says. “This used to be a joyful job, showing pretty pictures to couples happy with the baby. Now there is more insistence on revealing the sex early and you fear what they will do with the information.”
She knows many cases where the initial predictions have been found wrong with later screening.
“It’s not a diagnosis, more a prediction. There are conditions that can mask the sex, such as un-descended testes. I’m sure babies are being terminated based on wrong information.”
Jane’s account follows a Sunday Herald Sun report that a baby girl was aborted in Melbourne at 19 weeks because her parents wanted a son. Melbourne doctor Mark Hobart refused to refer them for a termination. It has since emerged that Dr Hobart is pro-life. This does not change the nature of the request. Many doctors who have no issue with abortion would baulk.
“The parents were upfront and told me that was the reason for the abortion,” Dr Hobart said. “I just couldn’t believe it. It was the husband who did all the talking – he was so insistent.”
A spokesman for Federal Health Minister, Tania Plibersek, reduced this act of discrimination to a “clinical matter”. Australia is a signatory to the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development, agreeing to do all it can to achieve its objectives, including those on gender equality, equity and empowerment of women.
For example, governments are urged to take the necessary measures to prevent infanticide, ante-natal sex selection and trafficking in girl children. What’s the point of signing if a baby girl can be eliminated because her parents wanted a son?
Ms Plibersek would, I’m sure, oppose female foeticide and infanticide, which results in about 200 million fewer girls in the world a year according to the UN.
In her recent book, Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys over Girls, and the Consequences of a World Full of Men, Mara Hvistendahl writes: “They were selected out of existence.”
It appears easier to condemn sex bias practices when they happen far away, but not at home.
The Medical Board said it would not pursue the case because terminations are allowed up to 24 weeks. Including for being female.
The governing body of our medical profession has simply wiped its hands of a harmful discriminatory practice condemned around the world. And if the mother was under pressure not to give birth to a girl, she also is a victim.
While no one knows the extent of the practice in Australia – surely one case is too many – and while not all cases will be driven culturally or apply only to girls, perhaps Jane’s story will help others in the field come forward with their experiences.
Rather than provide and underwrite sex-selective abortion, we should be signalling strong opposition to ante-natal sex selection as part of our broader goals to eliminate gender inequality and bias.
The Medical Board should investigate. Eliminating babies of the “wrong” sex is not about health, therapy or healing. It is about reinforcing prejudice. And it can never be seen as just a clinical matter.
As published in the Sunday Herald Sun May 5 2013
7 Responses
What a tragic story. Thank you for writing about this issue Melinda. Unfortunately it seems many prominent feminists are only troubled by sex selective abortion when it happens overseas.
I wonder how many abortions are sought on these grounds, and if many parents even acknowledge it to their doctors.
I am prolife because of my Christian beliefs but I will not bring that into this comment. For what reason do people choose males over females? For thousands of years nature has kept it an even balance but with gender selection the balance will be thrown severlel out of kilter. I understand that to some people the male is a dominant sex but by limiting the females who are born wont that cause there to be less females to satisfy the needs of the male. This will lead to more rapes and abuse of females. Also are these ethnic groups simply trying to breed super armies or something? Common sense has to be used. Doctors have sworn to help and save lives, not take life. By allowing abortion to take place and forcing doctors to comply even though it goes against their beliefs, aren’t the powers to be forcing the doctors to break their own oath?
Well that just reinforces a woman’s insignificance doesn’t it? A man telling his wife that he won’t tolerate the birth of a daughter. We really are just here to serve men’s needs, no matter what they are?
I say it again…. I will vote for whichever party will tackle gender issues seriously.
Minister Plibersek does not mean its clinical, she means it’s too hard to get a handle on so can’t be dealt with as policy or legislation. It would be very difficult to address but this is too important not to try.
You would be forgiven for thinking that whilst we have a female PM and a female Health Minister that they should give gender equity a bit of thought!
Another nail in the coffin of the Hypocratic Oath.
Come on politicians, this is a BIG issue and the practice goes against our cultural values as Australians. Surely we are not being asked to accept this on the basis of political correctness or multiculturalism?
Melinda, you should look into the position regarding pre-implantation genetic diagnosis as part of the IVF process. Unless things have changed, I was under the impression that under the NHMRC guidelines (which clinics have to follow if they want to stay accredited), sex selection is currently banned.
It is a double standard to have a ban on sex selection of embryos, yet effectively allow it at a later stage of development. It should be banned whatever stage of human development.