The Dr Jo Show

00:00:00:00 - 00:00:10:16
Unknown
Chris Means is gearing up to turn nurses and midwives into killers. And we need to tell him we don't want this in New South Wales. It's a Greens plan, but it will take labor and Chris means to get it over the line.

00:00:10:16 - 00:00:11:12
Unknown
do they want to do this?

00:00:11:13 - 00:00:15:08
Unknown
How are they going to do it? And that's today on the Doctor Joe Show.

00:00:16:24 - 00:00:38:18
Unknown
Abortion was made legal up to birth in New South Wales in 2019. And there was a huge fight. It was a Liberal government. Gladys Berejiklian, who was the premier at the time, and it was a coalition, essentially a pro-abortion, liberal labor, Greens and independent MPs who made this happen. The people of New South Wales, it was very clear that they were uncomfortable with this.

00:00:38:20 - 00:00:39:00
Unknown
The

00:00:39:00 - 00:01:05:10
Unknown
Daily Telegraph had a number of headings about their concerns around this, around abortion up to birth. The people turned out en masse. There was over 10,000 that marched, through Martin Place saying they didn't want this to happen. But ultimately, the pro-abortion forces in the parliament and pro-abortion sections of the media. So the Sydney Morning Herald, the ABC, the Guardian, they were all aggressively pushing this abortion up to birth legislation under the smokescreen of decriminalization.

00:01:05:12 - 00:01:22:24
Unknown
So this is something that has happened everywhere. It's not like the pro-abortion side came out swinging and said, we want abortion up. Too bad for any reason. That wasn't what they said. They said, we want decriminalization. We don't want women going to jail for having an abortion. And the reality was no woman had gone to jail in anyone's recent memory.

00:01:22:24 - 00:01:48:06
Unknown
In New South Wales, abortion was largely liberalized and available. But the difference that this legislation made was that after after a certain point after viability, it could happen with the approval of two doctors for any reason, and that was what the real contribution of the legislation was. It wasn't decriminalizing it. It was making it available and legal all the way through.

00:01:48:08 - 00:02:07:22
Unknown
They didn't say that's what it was about. That's what it was about. And that's how they got it over the line, essentially by, selling a lie that the mainstream media really propagated. Only the Daily Telegraph really asked questions, about this and had some critical articles. But on the whole, everybody just fell into line

00:02:07:22 - 00:02:24:20
Unknown
at the time, they said they would do a five year review of the abortion laws and here we are five years later and this review has just landed. So it's a report, that was published in September 2024 but wasn't actually made publicly available until late last week.

00:02:24:22 - 00:02:46:01
Unknown
And the timing is very interesting because there has been this pro-abortion campaign through The Guardian, the ABC, and the Sydney Morning Herald with academics and the Greens. I talked about this in my second episode of the Doctor Joe Show, which talks about this fake abortion access crisis that has been manufactured by the pro-abortion establishment because they want abortion to be free.

00:02:46:04 - 00:02:48:24
Unknown
They want it to be available on in every town center,

00:02:48:24 - 00:02:54:10
Unknown
and they want every health worker to perform it regardless of whether they want to or not. They want to override conscientious objection.

00:02:54:10 - 00:03:14:20
Unknown
So I talked about that in the second episode of the show, that this has been a brewing campaign for some months. But what we see now is this report by New South Wales Health, which is meant to be this five year review of the abortion up debate legislation. It essentially is now the next step in this campaign to get free abortion everywhere, performed by everyone.

00:03:14:20 - 00:03:29:22
Unknown
And so, surprise, surprise, the review is a stitch up. It's literally the shortest, worst review that I have ever seen done by a government department. It's a normative piece of work written by pro-abortion authors who want to see a pro-abortion outcome. It

00:03:29:22 - 00:03:33:21
Unknown
is the way that this report has been done. Let me tell you about the methodology.

00:03:33:21 - 00:03:49:06
Unknown
So they wrote to the abortion stakeholders. They essentially wrote to people that are in the business of abortion. 35 responded. And the entire report is based on anecdotal evidence from these 35 abortion stakeholders.

00:03:49:06 - 00:04:15:21
Unknown
So people like, let me get the list out. Marie Stopes International, the biggest abortion clinic in the country, Family Planning New South Wales, which has a vested interest in more abortion clinics, 66 gynecology centers, Australia, Macquarie Street clinic, the private clinic and so on. Everyone that they, inquired about is in the system of abortion and largely speaking on that list of the 35, they all have a vested interest in abortion.

00:04:15:21 - 00:04:45:00
Unknown
I saw that there was 1 or 2 Catholic hospitals in there. So, Saint Vincent, for example, in Sydney, they probably gave evidence, critical of, of the legislation. But overwhelmingly of those 35 stakeholders, you know, 98%, in the business of abortion and want more abortion. So if you do a review and you write a report that essentially targets a, a group that wants to set an outcome, the report is going to say that we should get that outcome.

00:04:45:00 - 00:04:59:15
Unknown
That's not surprising. You know, if I go to my toddler and say, do you want more lollies? There aren't just going to be, yeah, of course I want more lollies. If you go to abortion providers and say, what's wrong with the system, they're going to say, well, there's all these barriers and we want more abortion because that's where their paycheck comes from.

00:04:59:15 - 00:05:25:23
Unknown
That's what they're passionate about. And so it's unsurprising that this review is not a robust piece of analysis of the first five years of the abortion law reforms in New South Wales. It's a stitch up. And so what's really striking from what comes out in this report is the absence of data. There is no quantitative data about the number of abortions that have occurred in New South Wales since 2019.

00:05:25:23 - 00:05:55:05
Unknown
There's no annual data. There's no demographic information about the types of women that are getting these abortions, of whether these abortions are increasing or decreasing, how old they are, what metro region that from that geographic locality, the reason for the abortion, the reason for the late term abortions. None of this data is in the report. And in contrast, in places like Queensland, New South Wales and South Australia, you actually have annual reporting on abortion data, so you can see how many abortions there are every year.

00:05:55:05 - 00:06:12:22
Unknown
You can see what the reasons are for late term abortions in Victoria and South Australia. South Australia produces the most comprehensive reports. They even reduce. They even release the complication rates of different types of abortion methods. None of this is in this five year report on the Abortion Law Reform Act that was introduced in 2019.

00:06:12:22 - 00:06:29:00
Unknown
And on the flip side, while there's no data, there's a hell of a lot of anecdote. There's so many quotes from pro-abortion insiders saying what they want. It's like their wish list of what they want the government to do. So let's take a deep dive now into this report.

00:06:29:08 - 00:06:59:10
Unknown
So the executive summary makes it clear that there were 35 written submissions from key stakeholder groups. These were organizations directly involved in the business of abortion, including expert advice from the New South Wales Health Safe Access to Abortion Care Working Group. So there's a specific working group that's been set up about abortion safe access to abortion care. You can tell by their name the normative, the normativity built into that name, safe access to abortion care and the words abortion care are used throughout this report.

00:06:59:10 - 00:07:21:21
Unknown
So there's bias language all the way through in terms of how they frame and view abortion. It's not like when someone's doing heart surgery or, getting treatment for diabetes. We don't need to call that diabetes care or heart surgery because we don't need to brainwash people. Everybody knows that when we're treating diabetes, that's health care. Or when we're dealing with a heart surgery, that's health care.

00:07:21:21 - 00:07:42:05
Unknown
We're restoring a person back to health. But because abortion involves killing an innocent human being, a person with no voice or rights, we have to brainwash people. And the language in this report is abortion care. And whenever you say that, guys, whenever you say that in a media report or in an official government document, you know that the authors have been captured by a pro-abortion establishment.

00:07:42:05 - 00:08:00:07
Unknown
The report makes three recommendations. The first is that nurses and midwives should be able to administer chemical abortion drugs. So we can talk about that in a minute. The second recommendation it makes is that, there should be new policy documents and training around conscientious objection.

00:08:00:09 - 00:08:14:22
Unknown
And the third is around making sure that there's better data notification. So let's deal with the first one first, because that's really the headline from this report, this idea that nurses and midwives should be performing chemical abortions.

00:08:14:22 - 00:08:16:00
Unknown
now a bit of a back story.

00:08:16:00 - 00:08:41:21
Unknown
This was something that the Albanese Labor government introduced to enable greater access to chemical abortions around the country. They liberalized the regulation around it to previously, you had to be a GP who had done extra training and certification to become registered to give out abortion pills, chemical abortion drugs, and this is called MS2 step. Or you might have heard it referred to as mifepristone and suppressed still or IU for H6.

00:08:41:23 - 00:09:05:01
Unknown
They are all the same thing to refer to chemical abortions. So, okay, that was liberalized by the Albanese government because they wanted to enable nurses and midwives to be able to use it. But in order for that to actually happen, state governments have to make that happen. So pro-abortion state governments in the act where you've got the Greens and Labor, leading that government.

00:09:05:05 - 00:09:30:19
Unknown
Steven Miles in WA, Roger. Sorry, Steven Miles in Queensland, Roger cook in WA, those pro-abortion labor governments have all turned nurses and midwives into killers by allowing them now to prescribe these chemical abortion drugs. Chris Minns now has a proposal on his desk that that should happen in New South Wales. Now, the problem with it is this nurses and midwives largely don't want to do this, which is actually the case for GP's.

00:09:30:19 - 00:09:53:04
Unknown
Less than 10% of GP's got registered to give out chemical abortion pills. They just don't want to go through that process of giving these drugs to women when they know that those drugs have a high complication rate. There's some dangers there for the woman, but it also kills the baby in utero. And I think a lot of GP's felt really uncomfortable with that.

00:09:53:04 - 00:10:14:18
Unknown
That's not the hypothesis. It's there in the evidence. Less than 10% of the 40,000 GP's nationally chose to give out chemical abortion pills. That meant that, you know, there was less money for Mr. Step. That meant that, the abortion industry was having less abortions. So they'd been lobbying to allow other actors to give out these drugs, nurses and midwives.

00:10:14:18 - 00:10:16:20
Unknown
Now, the problem with this is

00:10:16:20 - 00:10:50:04
Unknown
nurses and midwives haven't been trained to the extent that regular medical practitioners, GP's and obstetricians and gynecologists have been trained. So there's already a concern that you're getting people who have done a lot less training, are a lot less aware of the risks, and they're now giving out these drugs. The second issue is before you take a chemical abortion pill, you should have an ultrasound to make sure that the pregnancy is not ectopic, because the way these pills work is, the first pill starts the nutrient supply to the baby, so they essentially stop being fed.

00:10:50:06 - 00:11:10:13
Unknown
The second pill forces the mother's body to expel the baby. And she, she said she goes to the bathroom and delivers that baby onto the bathroom floor, which can be quite traumatic. There's a lot of blood. You often see your baby when you do that. Women aren't told this before, before dying, before they take these drugs, that they're told often.

00:11:10:13 - 00:11:30:05
Unknown
Like, Teen Vogue referred to this as like a missed period kind of pill, which which it clearly is not because it kills a human being. But anyway, you know, if you take one of these drugs and you're having an ectopic pregnancy that is life threatening, your life is in danger because your baby is in your fallopian tubes, rather than your uterus.

00:11:30:05 - 00:11:44:03
Unknown
And so expelling that baby from the fallopian tubes could literally result in it bursting. And your whole, you could lose your life like it? It's just so fundamentally dangerous and yet in this report, they completely glossed over those safety concerns.

00:11:44:05 - 00:12:05:14
Unknown
In fact, surprise, surprise, the report says there was strong support amongst respondents that section five of the act should be updated in line with the TGA changes that allow nurses and midwives to give out these drugs. So that's that's not surprising, because all of these vested interest abortion providers that are giving submissions to this report, they get more money, they get more business.

00:12:05:14 - 00:12:21:18
Unknown
If these pills are allowed to be administered by nurses and midwives. In fact, it costs Marie Stopes so much less money if they allow nurses and midwives to give out these drugs because they don't have to pay the salary of a doctor, they can just pay the salary of a nurse or a midwife, which is significantly cheaper.

00:12:21:18 - 00:12:29:20
Unknown
however, in the fine print in the report, it does say that there was consent by two stakeholders regarding the business and safety risks of these drugs.

00:12:29:22 - 00:13:04:19
Unknown
One of the stakeholders says the diagnosis and exclusion of ectopic pregnancy prior to medical abortion is absolutely vital, but it can be difficult. And if it's missed prior to medical abortion being commenced, severe, potentially fatal complications may result. We believe that the clinical management of women undergoing medical abortion is beyond the scope of practice for nurses and endorsed midwives, so there's 1 or 2 stakeholders who have said something now likely that some Vincent's hospital, that's the people who are performing abortions, who who have a concern about the safety risks of doing this.

00:13:05:00 - 00:13:25:01
Unknown
But then look at how the report authors gloss over that. They say these are these concerns were not broadly shared. And with respect to clinical safety, other respondents noted that they were not aware of any situations where expansion of eligibility of health practitioners to perform abortions within their scope of practice has led to any negative consequences. So this is literally just based on anecdote they're using.

00:13:25:05 - 00:13:43:04
Unknown
They're just they're just basically putting, pro-abortion stakeholders of which are the vast majority that have been consulted and overbearing them over the top of the 1 or 2 voices that are critical, and raising the alarm about this dangerous proposal to turn nurses and midwives into killers.

00:13:43:04 - 00:14:02:10
Unknown
In fact, if we look at the data from the South Australian Abortion Reporting Committee from the most recent year, what it says is there's actually a 6% complication rate for women who took abortion drugs. Of the 198 women that had, a complication in the most recent year, 192 of them had retained products of conception.

00:14:02:10 - 00:14:32:08
Unknown
And that's short form. What's code for saying bits of the baby were left inside. So that second pill that I told you guys about that's got the the job, the task of getting the baby out of the woman's body. But for 192 women in South Australia last year, not all of the bits came out. And so what they needed to do was then get rushed to hospital to have a surgical abortion, which is a dilation and curettage or dilation and evacuation, where they literally scrape out the contents of the woman's uterus, the bits of the baby and pregnancy tissue that were left behind.

00:14:32:10 - 00:14:40:09
Unknown
If that doesn't happen, it's potentially life threatening for women, and it can result in them dying because it can be sepsis. And they,

00:14:40:09 - 00:14:44:17
Unknown
it can literally go bad. Really, really, really fast. So

00:14:44:17 - 00:14:52:15
Unknown
in fact, a peak body of obstetricians and gynecologists came out last year when the Albanese government was removing all of the safety requirements around these pills.

00:14:52:17 - 00:14:55:15
Unknown
And they said, we're really concerned about this. And

00:14:55:15 - 00:15:06:00
Unknown
and one of the big wins from this group said that, you know, one of his patients that he dealt with had been flown in from a regional area, and he had to operate on her very quickly in order to save her life.

00:15:06:00 - 00:15:24:22
Unknown
So none of this is in the report from New South Wales Health, which seems to be a complete stitch up, trying to push this new proposal to ten nurses and midwives into killers by giving them the ability to perform these, chemical abortions. The second part of all of this, which I've just alluded to, is not just the risk of ectopic pregnancy.

00:15:24:22 - 00:15:45:12
Unknown
It's not just the risk of the complication rate, it's that you should be within two hours distance of an emergency hospital department. And yet the whole pro-abortion campaign being waged by these academics and the Sydney Morning Herald and the Guardian is that women need access to these chemical abortions. And yet they're trying to push this for women in rural and regional areas.

00:15:45:17 - 00:16:06:09
Unknown
But the health system in those areas is so woefully understaffed and inadequate that if women are just being given these chemical abortion drugs that they're taking in the safety of their own home, they are less likely to have access to good emergency care and it again, it could be, life threatening for some of these women and women have died because of chemical abortion pills.

00:16:06:09 - 00:16:18:04
Unknown
We know that from situations in Australia, but we also know that from the US where there's more publicity about these, these women who have lost their life because of these drugs that they have taken.

00:16:18:04 - 00:16:24:01
Unknown
and yet that doesn't stop the media, does it? So once this report landed, it clearly had been leaked to pro-abortion journalists.

00:16:24:01 - 00:16:45:09
Unknown
And the Sydney Morning Herald had a big story. And listen to what they said. They said free and timely abortion access is virtually non-existent across most of New South Wales. I mean, that's not independent, impartial media reporting, is it? It's a normative statement that should be an opinion piece, free and timely abortion access. So why should abortion be free?

00:16:45:11 - 00:17:05:23
Unknown
And what is the basis for saying it's virtually non-existent across most of New South Wales? This article then goes on to say only one hospital in the state, John Hunter in Newcastle, has a formally funded surgical abortion service, predominantly for women, in that they're in their first trimester. And then it says only a handful of surgeons perform surgical abortions after 15 weeks.

00:17:06:04 - 00:17:18:19
Unknown
But what the article doesn't say is the reason. The reason there's very few places, in fact, on a one place you can go for surgical abortion is because doctors don't want to do it.

00:17:18:19 - 00:17:27:23
Unknown
as I said in the second episode of my show on the fake abortion access crisis, the reason there's this crisis is because and that's crisis in inverted commas.

00:17:27:23 - 00:17:45:15
Unknown
For those of you who are listening online, the reason this is crisis is because doctors don't want to break a baby's body apart with metal forceps and then extract a baby out in pieces. They just don't want to do that kind of work. Which is why there's only one hospital in New South Wales with that surgical option.

00:17:45:17 - 00:18:08:14
Unknown
And so the Sydney Morning Herald doesn't write that in their article, and neither does New South Wales Health when they're writing this report. And so the second recommend of the report is to say that there needs to be, some new policy guidelines and training around conscientious objection and essentially what they say in this report is that there's too many countries anxious objectors and that they're not referring on.

00:18:08:16 - 00:18:32:20
Unknown
And as a result, women aren't accessing these abortions. But what they don't say, what they don't look at is why why are there so many conscientious objectors and, and and what is the basis of their conscientious objection? Because New South Wales Health and Ryan Parks and Chris Mains and the Greens all have a normative view that abortion should be available up until, with and for any reason, it's abortion care.

00:18:32:22 - 00:18:48:04
Unknown
They don't want to ask the question about why nobody wants to do it. They just want to force everybody to do it. And so when they say the recommendation of this report is to provide more training and more guidance and more policy documents, what they mean is more pressure.

00:18:48:04 - 00:18:55:07
Unknown
they want to impose more pressure on their health workers who are already so stretched coming out of the pandemic.

00:18:55:07 - 00:19:11:22
Unknown
And we there's been so many stories, time after time again in the media about these the health worker system, the story, the health system being in crisis and what Chris means and Ryan Parks and the Greens, Amanda Cohn want to do is I want to put more pressure on nurses, midwives and doctors who don't want to perform abortions.

00:19:11:22 - 00:19:30:03
Unknown
They don't want to be involved in killing innocent human beings, and they want to put more pressure on them to do it. And that's essentially what the second recommendation in the stitch up report says. And then the third thing that this report says is that data collection is really bad. People aren't reporting the data, fully on abortion.

00:19:30:03 - 00:19:38:22
Unknown
And that should be a huge red flag for all of us that we've introduced this system of abortion up to birth, and we don't even have robust data on what's going on.

00:19:38:22 - 00:19:54:19
Unknown
And then what's really telling is in this report, you've got all these abortion providers like MSHA saying, well, actually, we just think the data requirement is too onerous and it should be removed altogether because it's preventing us from giving proper care to women because there's just too many, too many papers that we need to fill.

00:19:54:22 - 00:20:14:04
Unknown
I mean, that's insane that that would be the type of thing that they think they could say and get away with. But of course they can, because the Guardian, the smokes, they're never going to expose Marie Stopes. That's up to me on this independent channel. And so, you know, I think it's crazy that the abortion industry gets away with saying we want less scrutiny.

00:20:14:06 - 00:20:30:22
Unknown
Thankfully, the report doesn't go down that direction. They say, okay, we need, to put more effort into collecting the data. So I think that is a positive in the report that they recognized that. But all in all, this report is a joke. It's not an evidence base for anything.

00:20:30:22 - 00:20:35:06
Unknown
should not be the basis for any of the reforms that it recommends.

00:20:35:08 - 00:20:55:01
Unknown
If anything, what New South Wales health needs to do is produce another report. They need to go back to the drawing board. They should tell us the data on the number of abortions and how they've increased or decreased, and what the complication rates are. We need that data from 2019 to the present day. We then need a robust survey of health workers and how they're experiencing this system.

00:20:55:03 - 00:21:15:09
Unknown
We need some sense of how and why these abortions are occurring. And what are the driving factors for women, and can we address them through other means? We need some acknowledgment of the human rights of these children who are being killed up until birth. And we want to know the reasons why they're being killed. We want to know if eugenics, if it's because they've got some kind of disability.

00:21:15:12 - 00:21:30:11
Unknown
We want to know if it's because of their gender. There was a big concern in New South Wales in 2019 about sex selective abortions, about girls being killed just because they're girls. And so we want to know, is that happening in New South Wales? And yet there's none of that in this report.

00:21:30:11 - 00:21:45:07
Unknown
I need your help, guys. We need to urgently tell Chris means do not let this happen in New South Wales. We don't want nurses and midwives being turned into killers because of a campaign by the pro-abortion establishment. Sign my open letter to Chris Means.

00:21:45:07 - 00:21:46:14
Unknown
Share it with friends

00:21:46:14 - 00:22:05:02
Unknown
this can't happen under our watch. If it does happen, we will see more babies brutally killed. We will see women's health at risk, and we will see health workers being turned into killers when that is the last thing they want to do. Thank you for joining me today on the show, and I look forward to seeing you next time on the Doctor Joe Show.