Babies Born Alive After Abortions: Data and Transparency

Few subjects are more emotionally and politically charged than abortion. That makes accuracy especially important.

Australian government records confirm that some babies are born alive following abortion procedures.

Australia needs transparent national reporting, clear clinical standards and an unequivocal commitment that every child born alive receives care appropriate to their individual condition.

What does “born alive” mean?

Queensland’s current clinical guideline defines a live birth as the complete birth of a baby who then displays signs of life, regardless of gestational age or birthweight.

Evidence presented to a federal Senate inquiry explained that the statistical definition may include breathing, a heartbeat, voluntary movement or pulsation of the umbilical cord.

Once a child has been completely born and is showing signs of life, the child is no longer simply part of a pregnancy. Queensland’s guidelines now states that the baby acquires a legal status and rights independent of the parent and must receive care in accordance with the baby’s best interests, good medical practice and the individual clinical circumstances.

What statistics are available?

A fact sheet prepared by Professor of Law Joanna Howe compiled the publicly available records for Queensland and Victoria between 2010 and 2020.

The fact sheet reported:

On that compilation, 724 neonatal deaths associated with termination procedures were recorded across the two states over eleven years.

The underlying Queensland data is genuine. Queensland Health’s 2020 report recorded 41 neonatal deaths in which “termination of pregnancy, fetus and newborn” was listed as a selected condition. Its 2022 report recorded 50 neonatal deaths in that category.

These figures deserve public attention, but their meaning must be described precisely.

The Queensland table permits multiple conditions to be reported for the same death. It does not provide, within that table, the child’s exact gestation, diagnosis, duration of life, treatment received or clinical viability. The category therefore cannot by itself prove that all 41 children in 2020—or all 328 children over the earlier period—were capable of surviving or were improperly denied treatment.

The Victorian figures also require context. In 2020, its neonatal deaths following terminations were associated with suspected or confirmed congenital abnormalities. The broader Victorian records include many pregnancies terminated following diagnoses of severe fetal conditions, rather than simply elective procedures involving otherwise healthy pregnancies.

Why can a live birth occur?

A live birth is most likely following a later medical termination involving the induction of labour where fetal death has not occurred before delivery.

A 2018 European study examined 241 terminations performed between 20 and 24 weeks without prior feticide. All involved fetal anomalies or genetic abnormalities. Signs of life were recorded in 122 cases, or 50.6 per cent. Median survival was 32 minutes, with the longest recorded survival being 267 minutes.

That study demonstrates that live birth is medically possible. It does not establish that these children were healthy, viable or likely to survive with intensive treatment. The study population specifically consisted of pregnancies affected by fetal anomalies or genetic conditions.

Current guidance from the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists states that live birth becomes increasingly common from approximately 22 weeks when an abortion is performed without feticide. Feticide is therefore usual practice after that gestation, although it may be omitted where the baby has a condition considered incompatible with life or where parents request an opportunity to spend time with the baby after birth.

A live birth in these circumstances is not necessarily an unexpected “failed abortion”. In some cases, it is an anticipated possibility within a planned induction and palliative-care process.

That distinction should not be used to erase the baby’s humanity. It should instead inform what type of care is medically appropriate.

The case of Jessica Jane

One of Australia’s most troubling documented cases occurred in Darwin in July 1998.

Jessica Jane was born alive following an induced termination and lived for approximately 80 minutes. The Northern Territory Coroner found that she cried, moved, breathed and had a heartbeat. She weighed 515 grams and was later assessed as having been approximately 21 to 22 weeks’ gestation.

The attending nurse initially placed Jessica in a kidney dish before wrapping her in a warm rug. The nurse repeatedly checked her and contacted the doctor responsible for the procedure. According to the nurse’s evidence, when she explained that the child was alive and had good Apgar scores, the doctor responded, “So?” and stated that he would see the mother in the morning.

The doctor gave no instructions concerning the child’s care. The nurse told the inquest that she wanted to do more but felt her hands were tied. The medical evidence ultimately accepted by the Coroner was that Jessica was not expected to survive because of her extreme prematurity.

The central failure was not necessarily the absence of aggressive resuscitation. At that gestation, intensive treatment may have been medically futile. The deeper failure was the absence of proper preparation, responsibility, protocols and clear recognition that a living child had become a patient deserving individual assessment and humane care.

The Coroner concluded that the circumstances of Jessica’s birth should not diminish her status as a human being and that children born alive following terminations deserved dignity, respect and appropriate medical or palliative attention.

The case is more than 25 years old and should not automatically be presented as evidence of current routine practice. It nevertheless demonstrates why assumptions, inadequate documentation and a “responsibility vacuum” can have grave consequences.

What care is required today?

Queensland’s updated guideline is considerably clearer than the 2019 version quoted in Professor Howe’s fact sheet.

It now states that a baby born alive must receive care in the baby’s best interests and according to the individual circumstances.

For a child born before 22 weeks and one day, the guideline says expert clinical opinion considers active interventions such as oxygen therapy or intravenous lines medically futile and potentially capable of prolonging suffering. It directs clinicians to provide warmth, gentle handling, holding and comfort.

For later gestations, or where a life-limiting condition is involved and feticide has not been performed, the guideline calls for multidisciplinary planning and palliative care consistent with best-practice standards.

This means that “medical care” cannot always be equated with attempted resuscitation.

In some circumstances, the appropriate treatment will be neonatal intensive care. In others, aggressive intervention will offer no reasonable prospect of survival and will merely increase pain. Proper palliative care is still medical care. It should involve comfort, warmth, symptom management, dignity and human contact—not abandonment.

The relevant question is whether the child received the same individualised clinical assessment that would have been provided to another premature baby of the same gestation and condition.

The national data problem

Australia does not have a consistent, easily accessible national reporting system covering babies born alive following terminations due to the evil feminists who have obfuscated this information.

The available state reports generally do not tell the public:

• the child’s precise gestational age and weight;
• the medical reason for the termination;
• the signs of life observed;
• whether a neonatal specialist assessed the child;
• what active or palliative treatment was provided;
• how long the child lived;
• whether the child was considered clinically viable; or
• whether the death was independently reviewed.

The 2022 federal Human Rights (Children Born Alive Protection) Bill proposed specific duties of care and mandatory statistical reporting. A Senate committee heard sharply divided medical, legal and ethical evidence. It ultimately made no recommendation, and the bill lapsed at the end of the parliamentary term on 21 July 2025.

What should change?

Australia should establish nationally consistent reporting for every live birth following a termination procedure. The data should include gestation, birthweight, diagnosis, signs of life, duration of survival and the care provided.

Every liveborn child should also receive an individual clinical assessment. Decisions about resuscitation should be based on gestation, physical condition, prognosis and accepted neonatal standards—not solely on the fact that the birth followed an abortion.

Where survival-focused treatment is not appropriate, meaningful palliative care should be mandatory and documented. No living child should be abandoned, treated as medical waste or placed outside ordinary systems of clinical responsibility.

Deaths involving unexpected circumstances, disputed viability or possible failures of care should be independently reviewed.

A call for truth, dignity and accountability

The existence of children born showing signs of life following termination procedures is a documented medical reality.

It is equally true that the available headline numbers do not tell us how many were viable, how many could have survived, or whether appropriate palliative or life-sustaining care was withheld. Feminists are deliberately concealing or obfuscating this data so that these evil murderers are not held accountable.

A child born alive is a patient deserving dignity, assessment and appropriate care.

Australia should not be afraid to collect the information required to determine whether that standard is being met.

References

1. Joanna Howe, Fact Sheet: Babies Born Alive After Failed Abortions.
2. Queensland Health, Perinatal Deaths, Queensland 2020.
3. Queensland Health, Perinatal Deaths, Queensland 2022.
4. Queensland Clinical Guidelines, Termination of Pregnancy, amended August 2025.
5. Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, Human Rights (Children Born Alive Protection) Bill 2022—Report.
6. Coroners Court of the Northern Territory, Inquest into the Death of Jessica Jane [2000] NTMC 37.
7. Springer S et al., “Fetal Survival in Second-Trimester Termination of Pregnancy Without Feticide”, Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2018.
8. RANZCOG, Clinical Guideline for Abortion Care.