NRL News
202.626.8824
dadandrusk@aol.com

Abortionist accused of willingness to abort based on baby’s gender makes first court appearance

by | Dec 19, 2014

 

By Dave Andrusko

Abortionist Prabha Sivaraman

Abortionist Prabha Sivaraman

This latest twist slipped by me. I just learned that last week a doctor accused of offering to abort a baby because the mother said she wanted a boy appeared in Manchester Magistrates Court.

The trial is part of a mind-numbingly complicated set of circumstance, the most important point of which is that the Crown Prosecution Service decided to drop their prosecution against Dr. Prabha Sivaraman. (More about that below.)

Sivaraman was one of two abortionists in Great Britain caught on video allegedly agreeing to abort a baby because the child was a girl. There will be another hearing to decide whether to issue a separate summons against the second abortionist in January.

The 46-year-old Sivaraman is “accused of conspiracy to procure poison to be used with intent to procure abortion,” according to the Daily Mail’s Jennifer Newton, which is contrary to section 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act. “At an appointment in February 2012, Dr Sivaraman is alleged to have offered an abortion to a woman who said she wanted it due to her baby’s gender.”

The trial is thought to be the first of its kind in the U.K. What makes the case unique, Newton explained, is that while “almost all criminal cases in England and Wales are brought to court by the Crown Prosecution Service, any individual or group with evidence that a crime has been committed can present evidence to a court to initiate a private prosecution.”

In this instance, the prosecution is being brought privately by Aisling Hubert. As NRL News Today reported previously, Hubert, 21, is being supported by the pro-life groups Christian Legal Center and Abort 67.

The Daily Mail gave very little of the background. Newton said that Sivaraman was represented by defense attorney Jonathan Barnars and that District Judge Khalid Quereshi oversaw the proceedings. The case will next be heard at Manchester Crown Square on January 15.

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.”

Click here to read the December issue of
National Right to Life News,
the “pro-life newspaper of record.”

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 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 (as noted above) “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 the aforementioned 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.”