Young South Australian to die by assisted suicide

26-year-old Annaliese Holland will end her life within months through assisted suicide in Adelaide. Her story has been appearing in mainstream media, leading to concerns that her case is glamorising assisted suicide. An excerpt from an ABC news article and a video from news.com are provided below.

Even when a patient like Annaliese has to endure severe suffering, it is never morally justified for them to take their own life. Likewise, doctors who assists in such a case are killing their patients, rather than abiding by their oath to protect life.

It is tragic that instead of peacefully living out her final days with her friends and family, in a spirit of acceptance, Annaliese has been encouraged to take her own life.

From ABC news:

“Annaliese Holland will end her life within months through voluntary assisted dying in Adelaide. The 26-year-old has been living with Autoimmune Autonomic Ganglionopathy since she was 18….

“Deciding to access voluntary assisted dying would have seemed unusual, even for Annie, just a few years ago.

“I used to be one of those people who was actually against voluntary assisted dying,” she tells hack.

“It wasn’t until I got sick that my views on it completely changed.”

Annie says she only realised assisted dying was an option when she met Lily Thai, a 23-year-old also suffering AAG, who ended her life just months after South Australia’s voluntary assisted dying laws came into effect in 2023.”

Read the rest of the article here

Pro-abortion professor withdraws controversial appointment at Catholic uni

The radical pro-abortion Professor Susan Ostermann has turned down a controversial appointment that sparked protests all around the United States, by students and pro-life activists alike. Professor Osterman was originally appointed as head of the Liu Institute for Asia and Asian Studies at the Catholic Notre Dame University in South Bend, Indiana, but the backlash from many quarters has led to her rejecting the position.

From LifeNews

Radical pro-abortion Professor Susan Ostermann has declined the controversial appointment that has generated protests nationwide.

Ostermann has decided not to move forward as director of the Liu Institute for Asia and Asian Studies at the University of Notre Dame, Keough School Dean Mary Gallagher announced in an email.

The decision came after mounting criticism for Ostermann’s abortion advocacy.

In a statement, Ostermann said: “At present, the focus on my appointment risks overshadowing the vital work the Institute performs, which should be allowed to continue without undue distraction.”

Read the rest at LifeNews.com

More ACT babies born alive after abortion

A recent Freedom of Information request in the ACT has revealed that there is an increasing number of babies being born alive after an abortion.

by Minny Jackson

Recent information obtained through a Freedom of Information (FOI) request for data uncovered by ACT Right to Life has revealed troubling figures that deserve serious public attention and sober reflection. According to data drawn from a combined analysis of the Maternal & Perinatal Dataset Collection and the Perinatal Deaths Dataset, the number of neonatal deaths following termination of pregnancy in the Australian Capital Territory has increased steadily over the past decade.

The figures are as follows:

  • 2016-18: 19 neonatal deaths
  • 2019-21: 20 neonatal deaths
  • 2022-24: 27 neonatal deaths

These numbers, while small in absolute terms, represent a clear upward trend for the ACT. Behind every statistic is a human life that survived birth, however briefly, and then died. From a conservative and pro-life perspective, this raises profound moral, medical, and legal questions that cannot be brushed aside by euphemism or silence.

To be clear, neonatal death refers to the death of a baby after birth, typically within the first month of life. When such deaths occur following a termination of pregnancy, it means the child was born alive after an abortion. This reality alone should prompt careful scrutiny as it exposes the pitfalls of modern medicine, which is not infallible.

A society that claims to uphold compassion, dignity, and human rights must be willing to ask hard questions about how such outcomes occur and whether current laws and medical practices adequately protect the most vulnerable.

The other ethical question on the table is, why are doctors allowing this when babies born alive after a birth are classified as legal entities with the right to life?

Over the past decade, the ACT has moved towards one of the most permissive abortion regimes in the Western world. Termination has been fully decriminalised, gestational limits have been expanded, and oversight mechanisms have been reduced.

Pro-life advocates have long warned that removing legal guardrails does not eliminate ethical responsibility – it merely transfers enormous moral power to institutions with little transparency or public accountability, and it completely does away with the foundational principle of medicine, the Hippocratic Oath’s “Do no harm”.

The rising number of neonatal deaths following termination appears to coincide with this broader legal and cultural shift that has promoted abortion and denigrated the sanctity of life.

What is particularly concerning is the lack of public discussion around neonatal outcomes following termination. These deaths are largely invisible in public reporting and rarely addressed in parliamentary debate. Yet the data exists, is collected by government agencies, and now through FOI has been brought to light in Australia’s most woke state.

If a baby is born alive following a termination, that child is no longer hypothetical or abstract. That baby is a person before the law, and therefore a patient. He or she is a human being entitled to care, dignity, and protection, under the law. Any system that allows ambiguity around this reality risks eroding the most basic ethical principles of medicine.

There are also implications for women and families. Late-term terminations and neonatal loss can carry profound psychological and emotional consequences on mothers and families. A culture that presents abortion as a simple solution while minimising its complexity does a disservice to women, particularly when outcomes are traumatic or unexpected. Compassion must extend to both mother and child.

Conservatives have long argued that the role of government is to protect life, especially where individuals cannot protect themselves. Neonatal deaths following termination sit at the intersection of law, medicine, and morality. They challenge us to consider whether current frameworks genuinely reflect community values or whether they prioritise ideological convenience over human dignity and if so, what can be done to halt the descent of society into dystopian norms?

At a minimum, these figures justify:

  • Greater transparency in reporting neonatal outcomes.
  • An independent review of late-term termination practices.
  • Clear clinical guidelines to ensure infants live born receive appropriate care.
  • Parliamentary scrutiny rather than quiet administrative handling.

The data tells a story that cannot be ignored: more babies are being born alive following terminations and then dying in the neonatal period. Any society that claims to be humane must be willing to confront that truth honestly. If humanity wishes to “progress” collectively, then it ought to inquire into the reasons why death is increasing.

The measure of our civilisation is demonstrated by how we treat those with the least power. Neonatal children born at the margins of legality and visibility are society’s most vulnerable entities. They deserve more than silence. They deserve our attention, and they deserve a voice because they are not being heard when they are left in kidney dishes to die in a society that has normalised infanticide.

The time has come for the ACT to rise up against this kind of injustice, and demand answers for those who cannot speak for themselves.


Minny Jackson is Director of Advocacy at Christian Faith and Freedom Inc and is an author and researcher. Reprinted from News Weekly with permission.

Is abortion ever the right choice?

The successful pro-life organisation, Live Action has produced a downloadable e-book aimed at educating the public about the issue of abortion. Here is what Live Action has to say about the e-book:

Listen to the Stories of the Women Who’ve Been There

There are few issues as politically charged as the debate over abortion. As our nation considers the impact of reversing Roe v. Wade and allowing states to determine their own abortion restrictions, many are asking critical questions about the difficult cases pregnant women can face.

What about pregnancy resulting from sexual assault? How about women who are in a life-threatening pregnancy? Should abortion really be illegal in these situations?

Questions like these can be hard to answer, especially in the divisive climate of social media. However, there are answers out there. Especially when we take time to listen to the stories of the women who’ve been there and the doctors who’ve cared for them.

That’s why we took incredible stories from women and their doctors and compiled them together into this exclusive free eBook, Is Abortion Ever the Right “Choice.”

In it, you will hear unforgettable stories of courageous women and dedicated medical professionals. These stories will give you a clear-eyed understanding of abortion and its impact on everyone involved.

If you’d like a copy, please click here to go to the Live Action website and follow the instructions.

Concerned about your pregnancy or hurting after an abortion? Go to our pro-life supports page to find the help you need.

Euthanasia in Tasmania

The Euthanasia legalisation is a form of killing which has traditionally been prohibited by the great world religions. It is now becoming increasingly routine and validated by contemporary cultural doctrine.

by Wayne Williams

From a traditional standpoint, killing oneself is still killing a human being and is forbidden as such. Nor is it only self-killing, for in the legislation, there is the provision for the doctor to kill the patient if the patient cannot do it alone. As for the medical profession itself, euthanasia negates the well-known affirmation of the traditional Hippocratic oath, “First do no harm”.

The doctor cannot annihilate if he is truly to heal.

Euthanasia, moreover, damages the doctor-patient relationship. Once the doctor is “licensed to kill”, the patients’ trust in the authenticity of a doctor’s professional commitment to their well-being will almost certainly be undermined.

The contagion of euthanasia is a slippery slope. Once legalised for the terminally ill at the end of life, its practice grows not only quantitatively but spreads qualitatively to new categories: children, the mentally infirm and afflicted and to those who are not even ill but old and tired of life.

The Tasmanian legislation poorly protects the vulnerable. There should be an independent review mechanism that increases the prospects of an unwilling participant being identified and protected before it is too late.

What should be recognised is the important relationship between the patient and their GP. Any preliminary discussion on the topic of assisted suicide must be created and included in the medical records of the person’s GP practice.

Where a coordinating doctor carries out the first assessment of the patient’s eligibility for physician-assisted suicide, part of which the doctor is satisfied that the patient has made their decision voluntarily and had not been coerced or pressured into making it, the coordinating doctor must then provide a copy of the assessment to the patient’s GP. In addition, a subsequent assessment should be made by an independent doctor (independent of the coordinating doctor) and provided to the patient’s own GP. Each assessing doctor would be required to make enquires of professionals who have recently provided health or social care to the patient and such other enquires as the assessing doctor considers appropriate.

The last provision to be included will almost certainly require that the two doctors consult the patient’s own GP to intervene in circumstances which may appear questionable to the patient’s own GP. In Tasmania, there is no requirement that the person’s own GP participate in the eligibility process.

In Tasmania, members of the patient’s family may invite a practitioner who may never have set eyes on the patient before to become the coordinating doctor and who will be responsible for deciding whether the patient has been subjected to any form of coercion or undue influence by his or her family. Unlike the patient’s own GP, the introduced coordinating doctor will have no previous opportunity to know the illnesses, personality, hopes, expectations and fears of the patient; nor will that doctor have any knowledge or insight of the family dynamics at play.

Under Tasmanian Voluntary Assisted Dying (VAD) laws, once two doctors have carried out a positive assessment, all that is required to be done in general terms is for the relevant forms to be filled in and submitted. There is no other legal obstacle to the consumption of life-ending drugs.

A further consideration would be the appointment of a special Commissioner, a judge who has the power to appoint persons to be members of a Review Panel. The Commissioner, having received the patient’s declaration and the two doctors’ assessment, would refer the patient’s case to the Panel for determination of the patient’s eligibility to process to the final stage: the ingestion of life ending drugs.

 The Panel’s function should include satisfying itself that the patient has made his or her request voluntarily and not under pressure or coercion. The Panel must have the power to make enquiries of any person whom it believes has relevant knowledge or experience about the circumstances of the patient. The Panel would be statutorily obliged to hear from and may question both the coordinating doctor and the independent doctor.

Tasmanian legislation requires more rigorous standards and must adopt a more cautious and prudent approach to ensure that a person who wishes to pursue physician-assisted suicide is doing so in a truly voluntary way.

The Tasmanian safeguards are more cosmetic than real; there is no effective oversight of the conduct of family members and complicit medical practitioners because Australian practice is private and self- regulating and assumes that all VAD Practitioners are beyond reproach. It is necessary to have checks and balances in the Tasmanian legislation so often the trend is in the other direction, to relax the safeguards even further.

What should be strongly resisted is pressure from pro-VAD proponent lobby groups to remove the ability of Catholic, other Christian and Jewish entities to refuse to countenance VAD in their hospitals and aged care facilities. VAD proponents want the federal law changed so that an eligibility assessment can be conducted by telephone or Zoom. Hopefully, the Tasmanian legislation will not go down that path.

How a medical practitioner could safely conclude by a telephone call or a Zoom meeting that there is no evidence or suspicion of pressure from family members upon that patient is a dangerous form of lunacy, particularly where the patient’s own GP need not be involved.

Notre Dame bioethicist Margaret Somerville stated that “democracies do not necessarily produce ethical laws”.

Democratic Sweden overturned the social censure of incest when, in the 1960s, it legalised marriage between siblings from one parent.

The Human Life Protection Society is strongly opposed to euthanasia on traditional religious grounds that a human being is not the author of life nor its absolute owner and that it is a gift entrusted by the Creator so that it may find its fulfilled purpose in the service of the Creator and other human beings.

Suicide violates the inherent value of life and the fabric of civil society. Will the inherent value of life and our obligations to others persuade when the current secular culture does not accept or feel that these trump euthanasia’s offer of an exit from pain and its teaching of the primacy of one’s own wellbeing?

The Euthanasia legalisation is a form of killing which has traditionally been prohibited by the great world religions. It is now becoming increasingly routine and validated by contemporary cultural doctrine.

Written by: Wayne Williams

2025 Conference talks

Our 2025 Conference was a great success and we were blessed with some highly experienced and articulate speakers. On this page, you can find links to the videos of those conference talks, which were recorded on the day.

Click on the links below to access the conference talks:

Conference talks: Having No Choice

by Anne Sherston

Many people can’t put into words what they are feeling after an abortion, and sometimes, that might never even happen. I can explain, however, that there is a way to do this, and that is through spiritual healing…. If I hadn’t experienced my own healing, I would not have been able to do that either…. so now I am in a position to share my story with you.

conference talks
Anne as a young girl

I had an abortion in 1975, when I was only 16 years of age. This was not my choice…. and there is no need in telling you who that person was who made that choice for me, because it doesn’t change anything, and I have forgiven that person a long time ago…. Also, it doesn’t change what I went through for years later, in fact for more than 29 years later…. During that time, I went through many emotions, anger, hatred, loneliness, and even being suicidal…

Close to suicide

The scariest time of all was when I was 18 years old and only been married a few months. I was coming home from work on a train in Sydney. Keep in mind that trains didn’t have automatic doors back then. If any of you remember those trains, they were called the red rattlers…

I was standing at the open doors of the carriage with my toes just over the edge, contemplating to step out…. I remember that day as if it was yesterday…. Hindsight is a marvellous thing….

I remember a presence behind me. I didn’t look around, however, that presence was telling me to step back and that he was ready to catch me, he was there for me. Now so many years later I know that was God…. God was with me at that moment and made sure I didn’t go any further. That was back in 1977 (48 years ago and 2 years after the abortion).

conference talks
A ‘red rattler’

It took me another 25 years after that to reach out for help. I started seeing a psychologist, who helped me so much, however, still didn’t quite hit the spot. I was still searching for something. There was still something missing. That is, till I reached out to two very long-time friends who were part of the Rachel’s Vineyard retreat team in Sydney. I realized then that I hadn’t cried about this for those 29 years till I spoke to those friends, one being a priest.

Some people might think it would be easy to pick up the phone and ask for help, however, it takes a lot of courage to take that first step, to make that phone call. I’m not just talking about myself, but for all women and men that have had an abortion experience in their lives. Really, that applies to anyone who has had a traumatic event in their lives.

After those two phone calls, I agreed to attend that retreat in Sydney on the first weekend of October 2004. That weekend was totally life changing. I met Christ exactly in the place where I was, which was a place of brokenness. Attending one of these retreats, becomes life changing. Again, I don’t only speak for myself here, but for others that have shared their experiences of attending those retreats with me.

Spiritual healing is paramount

Until I went to that retreat, my life felt as if I was in quicksand. For nearly 3 decades, I was sinking in this quicksand and trying everything to get out. Then I attended the Rachel’s Vineyard retreat. The retreat took us deeper and deeper into a state of meditation and prayer. I was able to tap into my 16 year-old self and knowing I was doing this for her.

conference talks

By doing the work that weekend, I started the journey of coming out of that quicksand. Each step I took, Jesus was there with me, He was there for me every step of the way. This experience was what I was missing and what I longed for. Come the Sunday morning of the retreat, my heart was ready to accept God’s mercy. Having been in that place, I knew that Jesus and my baby had forgiven me. I was able to breathe again……

Something I have learnt since that retreat, is that we need to take care of ourselves and our inner child. This is so important, because otherwise that inner child will never find that healing, he or she deserves. I am no expert; however, I do keep trying…. And that is something we all need to keep working at.

After a few months being back home, I got highly motivated and started the retreat in Tasmania and eventually took it to NZ, Singapore, Penang Malaysia, Perth and Brisbane. I ran this retreat for nearly 14 years before it was time for me to give it up. In that time, my team and I came across many women and men with so many experiences and reasons for them going ahead with the abortion…. Something for all of us to keep in mind, is that not all decisions to have an abortion, come from a place of freedom…

Coercion, lack of choice

For sure, some women choose quite easily to have an abortion, and even use it as a form of contraception; however, it’s not always the case. Some people are put in a situation as I was, and are forced into that procedure. Even some men don’t even get a say, maybe because the woman didn’t tell him she was pregnant until after the abortion had taken place, or she might say, “My Body, My Choice”.

There there was one couple that came to one of our retreats after having three healthy children, they were pregnant with their fourth healthy child, until their doctor convincingly told them, that since the husband had diabetes, he would never live long enough to watch his baby baby grow up.

Can you even begin to imagine what that would have been like for those parents!! How sad and traumatic is that…. As far as I know that man is still alive…. We so often feel that we can’t question our doctor, but we can! Don’t let anyone tell you differently.

A different example of a doctor’s approach, is when our youngest daughter, and her husband were planning to start a family of their own. The time came when she did the home pregnancy test and it showed up ‘positive’. Her next step was to confirm this with a GP. Once the pregnancy was confirmed, the doctor, just came right out and asked her “What do you want to do about it?”

Thankfully there was no question for my daughter or our son in-law. This is something they wanted; they planned for. There was no reason for this GP to question it. Of course, she never went to him again. We now have a gorgeous 11yr old grandson.

People that are sometimes put in a place where they have to choose, would be at their lowest. They would be scared on so many levels and most of them would feel that they have no choice and sadly they go through with the abortion…. Thankfully, we now know there is another choice and that is to go through with the pregnancy…. There is so much help out there now, compared to when I was 16 years old. {See our website for pregnancy support around Australia.}

Unless you walk a mile

So, while we continue with our day, please remember, not everyone chooses abortion from a place of freedom. We can’t stand in judgement; however, we can continue to hope and pray that they will change their minds. Also, that our governments, State and Federal will actually realise what they have approved and what they are paying for with our tax payers’ money.

We also need to keep advocating for these unborn babies and for the women and men that find themselves in a situation where they have to choose. We also need to keep praying and raising awareness for those who choose abortion freely.

There is a saying I use, and that is: “Unless you have walked a mile in my shoes, you truly don’t know what I have gone through….” Let us be generous with our thoughts while we continue our mission in saving the unborn and saving lives at all stages of life.

{NOTE: although Anne’s abortion took place many years ago, there is plenty of evidence to show that abortion coercion remains common. See recent articles herehere and here.}


by Anne Sherston. Anne is the President of the Human life Protection Society, based in Tasmania. Anne ran Rachel’s Vineyard retreats for 14 years, and joined the HLPS in 2023. Please see the links at the top of this page for other conference talks.

For information about post-abortion healing, please see the Rachel’s Vineyard website