If Fatherhood begins at conception, when does life begin?

NEW! 30 Percent of UK Women Seeking Abortion Suffer Domestic Violence

NEW! Abortion Complications: http://www.aaplog.org/abortioncomplications.aspx

NEW!  Study: Abortion Has More Negative Parenting Impact Than Pregnancy Loss

NEW! Abortion Pill Kills 1 in 4 Children Aborted Early in U.S.

Researcher: Abortions Up Risk of Premature Birth in Subsequent Pregnancies

NEW!  After Tiller: Two Ex-Abortion Doctors Speak Out

Senate Committee Votes to Permanently Kill Mexico City Policy

NEW! Administration's Healthcare Reform Bound to Include "Largest Expansion of Abortion Since Roe v. Wade": NRLC's Johnson said the bills as they stand "have kind of a built-in Freedom of Choice Act"

"Roe" of Roe v. Wade Arrested for Protesting Hearing of Pro-Abortion Supreme Court Nominee

Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg: I Thought Roe Would Help Eradicate Unwanted Populations Through Abortion / Ginsburg: Roe v Wade Was for Population Control

Abortion Parties? - When Abortion Becomes a Lark

Pro-Life Group Challenges Federal Order to Sell Morning After Pill to Minor Girls

CONSCIENCE: Appeals Court Decides that WA Pharmacists Must Heed Order to Distribute Abortifacient Plan B Pill

LA Gov. Jindal Strengthens Pharmacists' Conscience Protections but Wisconsin Forces Distribution of Abortifacient Pill

No Joy on Father's Day: Abortion Hurts Young Men

Attorney General Wants Video Showing Planned Parenthood Sex Abuse/Statutory Rape Coverup / UPDATE Alabama AG Calls Undercover Video of Planned Parenthood Ignoring Statutory Rape 'Extremely Troubling', Seeks Investigation

Late-term FL Abortionist James Pendergraft Loses Appeal; Suspension Stands

Abortion Practitioner Alberto Hodari Fined $10,000 For Woman's Abortion Death

Abortion is Culprit in Problem with Low Birth Weights

Study Shows Negative Impact of Abortion on Relationships for Women, Men: One of the First to Look at Abortion's Impact on Men's Relationships and on Future Relationships

Abortion Has Greater Impact on Parenting Than Other Forms of Pregnancy Loss, New Review Finds

Proof is in: Medical Studies Document Harmful Effects of Abortion

Obama Admin Calls for Universal Access to Abortion at United Nations Meeting. At United Nations (UN)

WHO Maternal Mortality Report Presents Skews Data to Advance Abortion Agenda

Planned Parenthood - a Primary Healthcare Provider?

Abortion Laws: A Recent Development?

Resources: Research Library / Abortion and Contraception Key Tools in Black Genocide: Maafa 21...

If Fatherhood begins at conception, when does life begin?

Abortion Complications:

http://www.aaplog.org/abortioncomplications.aspx

30 Percent of UK Women Seeking Abortion Suffer Domestic Violence
 An article on the findings of new research, published in Obstetrician and Gynaecologist (TOG), the journal of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, warns that doctors in the UK should be conscious of the high rates of domestic abuse among women seeking abortions.

Researchers found that 30 percent of women having a second abortion said they were in an abusive relationship. Women having a third or subsequent abortion were over 2.5 times as likely to report a history of physical or sexual abuse by a male partner. One in three reported they had experienced a lifetime of domestic violence.

The study's lead author, Dr. Gillian Aston of the Florence Nightingale School of Nursing and Midwifery at King's College London, said, "Whereas different groups may disagree about the moral status of the foetus, there must be common ground that violence against pregnant women is intolerable. Doctors and health professionals working in a woman's health sector that provides abortion services are in a prime position to identify and provide support for women experiencing domestic violence."

Jason Waugh, editor-in-chief of TOG, commented, "Given the high prevalence of violence in pregnancy, it is important to ask women seeking both maternity and abortion services about domestic violence. Knowing about domestic violence can help to ensure that women are provided with the support and information that they need.

"These findings highlight the need for health professionals to be aware of, and sensitive to, the possibility of violence in the lives of women seeking abortion. Our society should have zero tolerance for domestic violence."

Researchers have previously revealed a link between sexual abuse of minors by older men and the use of abortion to hide their activities. In recent years, Planned Parenthood in the US has been caught repeatedly concealing cases of statutory rape, with PP workers caught in recordings telling under-age girls they can obtain abortions without parental or state intervention, despite having been impregnated by much older men.

Nevertheless, the report's authors defended legal abortion, calling on the government to further liberalise the UK's laws to make it more available to women in abusive situations. They claimed that women are "protected" by abortion from continuing with unwanted pregnancies and are enabled to escape violent relationships.

Other research by the Elliot Institute, however, also found a link between abortion and abuse and found women seeking abortions listed "lack of support [for child-bearing] from their male partners" as the biggest factor in their decision, along with encouragement to abort from husbands or "partners," demands from them for abortion, threats, and violence.

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Abortion and Domestic Violence Closely Linked Canadian Study Shows
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/mar/05032106.html
[20July09, Hilary White, London,
www.LifeSiteNews.com]

Study: Abortion Has More Negative Parenting Impact Than Pregnancy Loss
A new review of studies examining various types of prenatal loss and the effects on subsequent parenting has concluded that abortion may be "particularly damaging to the parenting process."

The article, published in Current Women's Health Reviews, looked at already published studies on miscarriage, induced abortion and adoption. The author, Priscilla Coleman of Bowling Green State University, focused on psychological reactions to these various types of loss and discussed how they might affect a mother's relationship with children born after the pregnancy loss.1

It is now known that women usually begin feeling maternal attachment in the early stages of pregnancy. The paper notes that despite the increased responsibilities and stress involved in raising children, "numerous studies have documented positive psychological characteristics associated with motherhood including increases in life satisfaction, self-esteem, empathy, restraint, flexibility and resourcefulness in coping, and assertiveness." Losing a child before or at birth, for any reason, however, "can be a profound source of suffering."

While all forms of pregnancy loss can cause emotional distress that can impact future parenting, the available research indicates that emotional responses after induced abortion are more likely to go unresolved and to persist for a longer time period.

While "society understands that women who miscarry or relinquish a child through adoption may experience sadness and grief; however, grief after socially sanctioned because abortion is not acknowledged by our culture as a human death experience," and help to deal with the experience is usually not offered.

"In many cases, women may suppress thoughts and emotions related to an abortion, because they have not been able to process and or/openly express negative emotions," Coleman wrote, adding that the lack of acknowledgement and support after abortion gives the "covert message that others would rather not hear what we have to say, and this makes it difficult to even identify our reactions to our losses."

Finding help and support after abortion is further hampered by the belief that, unlike other forms of pregnancy loss, abortion is optional and therefore women experience less distress afterwards. However, having an abortion is "sometimes quite inconsistent with the woman's true desires" (one survey found that 64 percent of American women who had abortions reported feeling pressured to abort), and many women, especially those who feel conflicted or didn't want the abortion, do feel emotional distress afterwards.

"The best evidence regarding negative effects of abortion indicates that 20-30 percent will experience serious psychological problems," Coleman wrote. "With 1.3 million U.S. abortions performed annually, a minimum of 130,000 new cases of abortion-related mental health problems appear each year."

And while abortion advocates frequently argue that abortion is better than carrying an unplanned pregnancy to term, the evidence suggests otherwise.

Studies of women with unplanned pregnancies found that women who aborted had higher risks of depression, substance abuse and anxiety, and teens who aborted an unintended pregnancy were more likely to experience negative mental health outcomes than their peers who carried to term. Further, a recent New Zealand study led by a pro-choice researcher found no evidence that abortion provided any mental health benefits to women even in cases of unplanned pregnancy.

How Abortion Can Impact Parenting

The paper described a number of ways that a previous abortion can effect a woman's relationship with her living children:

Increased depression and anxiety. Abortion has been linked to higher rates of maternal depression and anxiety before and after birth, which may effect the woman's relationship with her children. In addition, depression is a common predictor for child abuse.

Sleep disorders and disturbances. Women who have had an abortion are more likely to experience sleep disorders compared to women who carry to term, and one survey found that many women attributed the sleep disorders to a past abortion. These sleep disturbances "could render the high energy demands of parenting more complicated."

Substance abuse. Studies have found that women who had an abortion were more likely to engage in substance abuse, and also more likely to smoke or use drugs or alcohol while pregnant. Mothers who abuse drugs or alcohol are more likely to "engage in authoritarian and punitive parenting practices," and parental substance abuse increases the risk that the children will suffer abuse or neglect.

Child abuse. Abortion has been associated with lower emotional support for one's children and with a higher risk of child abuse and neglect.

Abortion has also been linked to higher rates of suicide and to a wide range of mental health disorders. Coleman was also the lead author of a study published in The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, which found that the children of women who had abortions have less supportive home environments and more behavioral problems than children of women without a history of abortion.2

While the review noted that not every woman may experience psychological problems after abortion that will carry over into their personal relationships, "some women will have carryover effects into the parenting realm." The paper pointed to a need for better screening and awareness of possible psychological problems after miscarriage, adoption and abortion, and for more research to examine the effects of abortion.

Learn more: For more information on the impact of abortion, download and share our free "Recent Research" fact sheet.

Citations

1. PK Coleman, "The Psychological Pain of Perinatal Loss and Subsequent Parenting Risks: Could Induced Abortion Be More Problematic Than Other Forms of Loss," Current Women's Health Issues 5: 88-99, 2009.

2. PK Coleman, DC Reardon, JR Cougle, “Substance use among pregnant women in the context of previous reproductive loss and desire for current pregnancy,” British Journal of Health Psychology 10: 255-268, 2005.
[6July09, by Amy Sobie. LifeNews.com Note: Amy Sobie is the editor of The Post-Abortion Review, a quarterly publication of the Elliot Institute. The organization is a widely respected leader in research and analysis of medical, mental health and other complications resulting from abortions.http://www.lifenews.com/nat5193.htm]



Abortion Pill Kills 1 in 4 Children Aborted Early in U.S.
About one out of four children aborted early in America are killed by the abortion pill rather than a surgical procedure, according to an Associated Press report.

The report concerns a Planned Parenthood study published in Thursday's New England Journal of Medicine touting the improved safety of a drug used in abortions that is now dissolved orally instead of vaginally - the latter being a technique that is more prone to causing severe and sometimes fatal infections.

The chemical abortion method consists of first distributing mifepristone, also known as RU-486, which kills the child before misoprostol is administered two days later, a drug that induces the body to expel the corpse. 

A spokeswoman with Danco Laboratories LLC, the manufacturer of Mifeprex (mifepristone), told the AP that such "medical" abortions account for about one quarter of all early abortions, and about one third of early abortions at Planned Parenthood.

The AP reports that the use of RU-486 has risen steadily since its approval in 2000, despite its availability only in clinics or doctors' offices rather than pharmacies.

Planned Parenthood researchers published a study in Thursday's New England Journal of Medicine analyzing chemical abortions at Planned Parenthood between 2005 and mid-2008, and found that the change in the misoprostol's administration reduced the risk of serious infection from about 1 in 1,000 to 0.06 in 1,000. 

The study did not address mifepristone's side effects, including abdominal pain, uterine cramping, and vaginal bleeding or spotting, which almost all patients experienced in clinical trials for an average of 9-16 days.  About 8% of the women experienced bleeding for 30 days or more. 

In 2007 the New England Journal of Medicine published a study showing that chemical abortions did not pose more of a risk for miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, preterm births, or low birth weight than surgical abortions. 

While the media reported the news as proof that the abortion pill is "safe," critics said the conclusion was misleading as the study failed to compare the rate of post-abortive complications with the rate of complications in women who had not aborted a previous child.  That would have shown that the abortion pill was merely equally as likely as surgical abortions to dramatically increase the risk of such complications, as shown by several studies.


See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Abortion Linked to Subsequent Pre-Term Births, New Research Again Confirms
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09070109.html

Abortion Pill not 'Safe' Despite Media Spin - Study Suggests Pill as Dangerous As Surgical Abortion
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/aug/07081601.html
[10July09, Kathleen Gilbert,
Washington, D.C., www.LifeSiteNews.com]

Researcher: Abortions Up Risk of Premature Birth in Subsequent Pregnancies
Having an abortion increases the risk of having a premature birth in a subsequent pregnancy -- that is the conclusion of a European researcher at a medical conference. Several previous studies have shown that abortion hurts women and future children by upping the chance of premature delivery.

Lead researcher Dr Robbert van Oppenraaij presented his findings before the collegium of scientists today at the annual European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology in Amsterdam.

He says one induced abortion raisers the risk of premature birth in a next pregnancy by 20 percent.

Two or more abortions raises the risk by 90 percent and doubles the risk of a very premature birth, at 34 weeks or less.

"It can be concluded that a history of abortion is associated with an increased risk for premature delivery and very premature delivery," he said, according to a London Mirror newspaper report.

Those numbers present a grave problem given that the repeat abortion rate in some nations, such as the United States and England -- is 40 to 50 percent or more. That means millions of women and children around the globe are at risk of premature birth because of having an abortion.

In February, another study confirmed the link between abortion and subsequent premature births when a woman is pregnant again.

Dr. Manfred Voigt led the study, published in the German medical magazine Z Geburtshilfe Neonatol.

According to the research, women who have one prior abortion boost their risk for a very premature birth in a future pregnancy by 30 percent.

Women who have had more than one prior abortion increase their risk of a very premature birth by 90 percent.

Canadian researcher Brent Rooney, who has published his own work on the abortion-premature birth link, says the common criticism from abortion advocates about studies showing post-abortion problems is a concern regarding recall bias. But the Voigt team had access to accurate abortion data from a governmental database without having to interview women about whether they had abortions.

"Deniers of the abortion-preemie risk would like to claim the women with a bad pregnancy outcome may not provide accurate information about their induced abortion history," Rooney said. "Data about women's prior induced abortion history in the 'Voigt' study was extracted from a perinatal data-base."

With the new German study, Rooney says there are now 17 statistically significant studies all confirming the abortion-very premature birth link.

Another 105 significant studies report a link between abortion and slightly premature birth or low birth weight babies.

In 2006, the National Academies of Science found that a first-trimester abortion, the most common abortion procedure, is linked to an increasing risk of premature birth.

The IOM published a report this month titled "Preterm Birth: Causes, Consequences, and Prevention."

In the report is a list of "immutable medical risk factors associated with preterm birth" and "prior first-trimester abortion" is listed third among other risk factors that increase the risk of having a subsequent premature birth.

The report has huge consequences for abortion because premature birth can lead to a host of problems, including cerebral palsy for the child and breast cancer for the mother.

The IOM reported that premature births before 37 weeks gestation represent 12.5 percent of all U.S. births, a 30% increase since 1981. Abortion became legally accessible in 1973 and the number of abortions peaked in the early 1980s as it became more ingrained in society.

The IOM said premature birth cost U.S. society $26.2 billion in 2005.  [June 29, 2009, Washington, DC www.LifeNews.com, http://www.lifenews.com/int1246.html ]




After Tiller: Two Ex-Abortion Doctors Speak Out
After Dr. George Tiller’s murder on [31May09], much has been written about late-term abortion. Among the many comments are two you might not have run across, both from former abortion doctors, Bernard Nathanson and Mary L. Davenport.

Bernard Nathanson has previously been interviewed by Julia Duin, religion writer for the Washington Times, so in the wake of Dr. Tiller’s murder, she decided to re-interview Dr. Nathanson, a former abortionist who was at the heart of the pro-choice movement in the sixties and seventies:

Soon after late-term abortion doctor George Tiller was killed, I called one of his mentors, Bernard Nathanson. The former Jewish atheist who presided over 75,000 abortions - including that of his own child - in the 1960s and 1970s left the abortion industry upon the advent of ultrasound technology.

His now-classic video “The Silent Scream” shows an unborn child recoiling from a vacuum abortion device before being sucked to its death. He was baptized a Roman Catholic in late 1996, and in an interview with me then, he said he converted because he feared going to hell.

“I have such heavy moral baggage to drag into the next world,” he explained…..

“I knew George Tiller years ago when I was on the pro-abortion side. He came to a course I was giving in the technique of abortion in New York in 1970 under the auspices of NARAL. And I did late-term abortions until I changed my opinion as of 1980.

“My switch to pro-life had nothing to do with religion,” he added. “Tiller was a church-going man, which doesn’t say a whole lot in this country, but one wonders why he never changed his mind based on the scientific evidence. That is where I changed my mind, based on fetoscopies and ultrasound studies.

“Once we had ultrasound in place, we could study the fetus and see it was a member of our community. If you don’t do that, you’re just a creature of political ideology. In 1970, there were approximately 1,100 articles on the functioning of the fetus. By 1990, there were 22,000. The data piled up swiftly and opened a window into the womb…..”

Mary L. Davenport is not so familiar a name, though she is now the president elect of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

A few days ago Dr. Davenport published on the Family Research Council’s website a discourse titled Late-Term Abortions are Never Necessary.

Among her comments:

Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, shocked the general public in 1997 when he admitted that the vast majority of partial-birth abortions were performed on healthy mothers and babies.5 Contrary to the assertion of abortion rights supporters that late-term abortion is performed for serious reasons, surveys of late abortion patients confirm that the vast majority occur because of delay in diagnosis of pregnancy.6 They are done for similar reasons as early abortions: relationship problems, young or old maternal age, education or financial concerns…..7

Peggy Jarman of the Pro-Choice Action League stated that about three-fourths of Tiller’s late-term patients were teenagers who denied to themselves or their families that they were pregnant until that fact could no longer be obscured…..8

Intentional abortion for maternal health, particularly after viability, is one of the great deceptions used to justify all abortion…..

An unfortunate reality is that the legal burden for the physician is severe if all possible risks of continuing the pregnancy are not communicated to the patient. In the U.S., multi-million dollar court judgments for “wrongful life” are allowed if the patients assert that they would have had an abortion had they known a particular problem might have ensued. It is impossible to foresee and enumerate each and every possible complication. But if abortion is recommended, even with minimal or no justification, there is no legal penalty…..

Fetal problems are the other serious rationale for considering abortion, and diagnosis of these abnormalities has multiplied with the increased use of ultrasound in pregnancy. Ultrasound studies of fetal anatomy are often done at 18-20 weeks, so abortions done as a result of these scans are late abortions. But ultrasound is imperfect and analysis of the images can result in inaccurate interpretations…..

For fatal birth defects, abortion is sometimes presented as the only option. But a better alternative is perinatal hospice. This involves continuing the pregnancy until labor begins and giving birth normally, in a setting of comfort and support until natural death occurs…..

Many couples who have had abortions for birth defects suffer from adverse long-term psychological effects and prolonged grief reactions.14 Children who learn that their mothers aborted their siblings can suffer feelings of worthlessness, guilt, distrust and rage.15

There are couples who are willing to adopt children with Down syndrome or other birth defects, but genetic counselors frequently do not give patients this information…..

Although parents choosing abortion may allege that the disabled child is better off not existing, disabled adults would contest that assertion. When surveyed in numerous studies, no differences have been found between disabled and “able-bodied” people as to their satisfaction with life…..

Perhaps the most important piece of information offered by Dr. Davenport is found in her footnote #12:

A directory of pro-life maternal-fetal medicine specialists can be found on-line. Go to: <www.prolifemfm.org>. These superbly qualified physicians are eager to help women who have been advised to undergo an abortion for medical reasons or fetal birth defects.

One of our Women for Faith & Family founders has two M.D. sons, both of whom are maternal-fetal specialists.

Some of the rest of us at W.F.F. have carried through pregnancies in which our children suffered from fatal birth defects. One of us regularly writes and speaks about Karen, a Down Syndrome daughter who died at 5 months.

No regrets.

As William Blake has written, “Joy and woe are woven fine.”

Tags: Bernard Nathanson, Down Syndrome, Family Research Council, George Tiller, Julia Duin, Mary L. Davenport, Pro-Choice Action League, Ron Fitzsimmons, wrongful life
[Sherry Tyree, Post-Dispatch, http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/civil-religion/abortion/2009/07/after-tiller-two-ex-abortion-doctors-speak-out/ ]

Senate Committee Votes to Permanently Kill Mexico City Policy
The Senate Appropriations Committee voted Thursday to codify President Obama's overthrow of the Mexico City Policy by approving an amendment to open U.S. funding for abortion-promoting non-governmental organizations (NGOs) worldwide.

The abortion amendment was offered by Senator Lautenberg (D-NJ) to the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations bill (S.1434) and was co-sponsored by Senators Leahy (D-VT), Mikulski (D-MD), Murray (D-WA), and Collins (R-ME).  The committee favored the amendment 17-11, allowing it to be considered by the Senate.

Instituted by Ronald Reagan in 1984, the Mexico City Policy bans taxpayer dollars from funding international groups that perform or promote abortions.  The policy has gone in and out of use depending on the political party in the White House: Bill Clinton immediately rescinded the policy by executive order, and George W. Bush reinstated it before President Obama overturned it once more.  However, the new amendment would codify President Obama's executive order and prevent future pro-life presidents from reviving the policy by executive order. 

Lautenberg's amendment states that overseas organizations "shall not be ineligible for such assistance solely onthe basis of health or medical services, including counseling and referral services ... if such services are permitted in the country in which they are being provided."

International abortion NGOs such as Planned Parenthood and Marie Stopes, who are now eligible for U.S. funds, constitute perhaps the primary force behind the spread of abortion worldwide by both providing abortion and aggressively lobbying pro-life nations to dismantle legal protection for the unborn.

The bill assigns $628.5 million for international family planning without the protections of the Mexico City policy, $50 million of which will fund the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).  Though the UNFPA claims it resists coercive population control policies, recent investigations have confirmed earlier proof pointing to the UNFPA's complicity in China's one-child policy tactics including forced abortion and sterilization.

In the House version of the bill Wednesday, pro-life legislators also met with defeat, after the Democrat-controlled Rules Committee rejected an amendment that would have explicitly restored the Mexico City Policy.

The rescinding of the Mexico City Policy was the least popular among the surveyed early actions of President Obama.  While approval ratings for his other actions hovered around 75%, only 35% approved of Obama's decision to provide U.S. foreign aid for abortion groups. 
See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
Congress Squashes Latest Attempts to Revive Mexico City Policy  
New On-the-Ground Investigations Confirm UNFPA Complicity in China's Coercive Population Policy 
[13July09, Kathleen Gilbert, D.C., www.LifeSiteNews.com]





Administration's Healthcare Reform Bound to Include "Largest Expansion of Abortion Since Roe v. Wade": NRLC's Johnson said the bills as they stand "have kind of a built-in Freedom of Choice Act."
 Unless legislators take steps to make Obama's healthcare reform package explicitly exclude abortion from "healthcare," the new government-sponsored health plan will undoubtedly provide for a vast expansion of abortion, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) and Congressman Chris Smith are warning.  A senate committee today rejected amendments proposed by the NRLC to explicitly exclude abortion from the healthcare package, leaving intact the fears of pro-life legislators that the reform package will unfetter U.S. abortions in a way similar to the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA).

The trouble lies in the unqualified 'essential benefits package' the bill will promote: experts say legal precedent in America is clear that such a broad term can be used to include abortion.  And because public and private plans will be required to meet the minimum benefit mandate, say pro-lifers, the draft bill will eventually require virtually every American to pay into a plan that covers abortion, as well as a vast expansion of the availability of abortion.
 
"The two central 'health care reform' bills currently moving in Congress - the Kennedy bill and the House Democratic leadership bill - each contain provisions that would, if enacted, represent the greatest expansion of abortion since the Supreme Court handed down its Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion in 1973," said NRLC Federal Legislation Director Douglas Johnson in a press release Friday. 

"These bills contain multiple provisions that would result in federally mandated insurance coverage of abortion on demand, massive federal subsidies for abortion, mandated creation of many new abortion clinics, and nullification of at least some state limitations on abortion."

Johnson explained to LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) today that the bulldozing of pro-life protections flows from what he calls the "abortion mandate" embedded in the bill.

"We know from a great deal of experience and many court decisions that [an 'essential benefits package'] will include elective abortion unless Congress explicitly says otherwise," said Johnson.

"Once abortion is defined - as it would be - an 'essential benefit,' then other things flow from that," he continued.  "The law requires that every health network show that it has adequate access to these mandated services. ... So you would have federal bureaucracy refusing to certify health plans unless they show they have local access to abortion. There would have to be the establishment of many more abortion providers across the country to meet this mandate."

Even that, said Johnson, would not change America's abortion landscape enough to fit the scope of the bill. 

Asked whether he foresaw the elimination of state abortion regulations such as waiting periods under the reform package, Johnson replied, "that would certainly be targeted as an obstacle to what's now under this bill ... a federally guaranteed service.  It's in conflict with the purpose of the federal law."

Asked about the bill's similarity in effect to FOCA - legislation that would make abortion a "right" not subject to any government regulation - Johnson said the bills as they stand "have kind of a built-in Freedom of Choice Act."

"There may still be some particular situations or laws that touch on abortion outside the context of healthcare delivery so that I don't say they exactly duplicate each other," he said, "but the major purpose of the FOCA to strike down [abortion regulations such as] the parental notification, the waiting period - these kind of things would be, quite likely, nullified under this healthcare legislation. 

"But the general principle is quite clear in the bill: that once the feds have said this is a service you have a right to, no state could stand in the way of it."

Johnson said the bills as they stand "have kind of a built-in Freedom of Choice Act." said that amendments the NRLC proposed to fight the implicit abortion expansion were rejected by the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee this afternoon.

On Thursday Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), co-chairman of the House Pro-Life Caucus, issued a letter to members of Congress containing a selection of quotes from the pro-abortion lobby discussing healthcare reform as a tool for the expansion of abortion in America.

One quote from Obama himself, prior to his election, described "reproductive care" including abortion as the "heart" of his idea of healthcare reform.

"Well, look, in my mind reproductive care is essential care, basic care so it is at the center, the heart of the plan that I propose," Obama told a Planned Parenthood Action Fund Event in July 2007 during a Q&A session. 

Obama also indicated that he expected all insurers to be forced to cover abortion, saying: "Insurers are going to have to abide by the same rules in terms of providing comprehensive care, including reproductive care ... that's going to be absolutely vital."

Smith also reprinted quotes from the National Abortion Federation, the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and RH Reality Check similarly supporting the healthcare package as including "reproductive health."

"If the proposed plan moves forward without an explicit exclusion that ensures that abortion is excluded from any government mandated or government subsidized benefits, health care reform will be a death sentence for thousands of unborn children," wrote Smith.

See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
Pro-Life Democrats Unite to Protect Unborn Children in Healthcare Restructuring 
Abortion Proponents See Red after Senator Proposes "Office of Unborn Children's Health" in Healthcare Bill 
Keep Abortion Out of Health Care Reform Says Head of USCCB Committee 
[13July09, Kathleen Gilbert, D.C., www.LifeSiteNews.com]




"Roe" of Roe v. Wade Arrested for Protesting Hearing of Pro-Abortion Supreme Court Nominee
Norma McCorvey, the "Roe" of Roe v. Wade who now is a leading opponent of abortion, was arrested for disrupting the hearing of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor today along with several other pro-life protesters.

Sgt. Kimberly Schneider of the Capitol Police said McCorvey and one other protester were charged with unlawful conduct for disrupting Congress, making a total of four arrests related to abortion protests during the hearing, reports the Washington Post.

McCorvey had at first stayed outside the Hart Senate Office building with a small group of pro-life activists protesting Sotomayor's confirmation.  She then gained admittance to the building as one among the crowd of citizens regularly admitted in brief intervals to listen in on the hearing. 

"You're wrong Sotomayor, you're wrong about abortion," McCorvey declared to the Supreme Court hopeful before being quickly escorted out.

While Sotomayor has had little direct contact with the abortion debate, her pro-abortion beliefs have been established by interviews with senators on Capitol Hill in addition to a long list of extreme pro-abortion legal briefs authored under her purview.

The hearing was interrupted several times by other pro-life protesters.  Shortly before the proceedings commenced, the Washington Times reports one man shouted:  "What about the rights of the unborn?"  A second protester, who repeatedly shouted "Abortion is murder," was escorted out by police about an hour later.  

McCorvey, whose Supreme Court victory in 1973 unleashed legalized abortion in America, became an active opponent of the procedure following a conversion experience in 1994.  Her 2005 petition to the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade was rejected.
[13July09, Kathleen Gilbert, D.C., www.LifeSiteNews.com]

Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg: I Thought Roe Would Help Eradicate Unwanted Populations Through Abortion.  U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg seems to have made a stunning admission in favor of cleansing America of unwanted populations by aborting them. In an interview with the New York Times, the judge said that Medicaid should cover abortions, and that she had originally expected that Roe v. Wade would facilitate such coverage in order to control the population of groups "that we don't want to have too many of."  

The statement was made in the context of a discussion about the fact that abortions are not covered by Medicaid, and therefore are less available to poor women. "Reproductive choice has to be straightened out," said Ginsburg, lamenting the fact that only women "of means" can easily access abortion.

"Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of," Ginsburg told Emily Bazelon of the New York Times. 

"So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion.  Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn't really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong."

Harris v. McRae is a 1980 court decision that upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.

Justice Ginsburg's remarks appear to align her expectations for abortion with those of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, and other prominent members of the 20th century's eugenics movement. Sanger and her eugenicist peers advocated the systematic use of contraception, sterilization, and abortion to reduce the numbers of poor, black, immigrant and disabled populations.

Ironically, the New York Times interview began as an exploration of Ginsburg's thoughts on Supreme Court hopeful Sonia Sotomayor as she prepares for her confirmation hearings this month.  Coverage of Sotomayor frequently emphasizes her success story as an underprivileged minority from the Bronx who rose to prominence at Princeton and Yale Law. 

Ginsburg also defended a controversial statement repeated by Sotomayor in several speeches, where she stated she "would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

"I thought it was ridiculous for them to make a big deal out of that," said Ginsburg.  "Think of how many times you've said something that you didn't get out quite right, and you would edit your statement if you could. I'm sure she meant no more than what I mean when I say: Yes, women bring a different life experience to the table. ... That I'm a woman, that's part of it, that I'm Jewish, that's part of it, that I grew up in Brooklyn, N.Y., and I went to summer camp in the Adirondacks, all these things are part of me."

The judge also praised the advent of earlier abortions with the wider distribution of the morning-after pill, saying "I think the side that wants to take the choice away from women and give it to the state, they're fighting a losing battle. Time is on the side of change."

When the Supreme Court upheld the partial-birth abortion ban in 2007, Ginsburg wrote a scathing dissent, saying the court's reasoning "reflects ancient notions about women's place in the family and under the Constitution - ideas that have long since been discredited."


See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Secretary Clinton "In Awe" of Racist Eugenicist Margaret Sanger
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/apr/09040306.html

Undercover Investigation Reveals Planned Parenthood's Racism
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/feb/08022802.html

New Book Exposes Eugenics Mandate in Reproductive Rights Agenda
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jul/08071007.html

Roe v Wade Lawyer: Use Abortion "to eliminate the barely educated, unhealthy and poor"
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/may/06051504.html

The Inherent Racism of Population Control
http://www.lifesite.net/waronfamily/Population_Control/Inherentracism.pdf
[9July09,  Kathleen Gilbert, D.C., www.LifeSiteNews.com]


Ginsburg: Roe v Wade Was for Population Control

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says she thought the Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion was intended to aid population control among lower-income Americans.

In an interview with Emily Bazelon of The New York Times, Ginsburg — who joined the Court in 1993 — was asked, "If you were a lawyer again, what would you want to accomplish as a future feminist legal agenda?"

Ginsburg responded: "Reproductive choice has to be straightened out. There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore. That just seems to me so obvious. The states that had changed their abortion laws before Roe [to make abortion legal] are not going to change back.

"So we have a policy that affects only poor women, and it can never be otherwise, and I don’t know why this hasn’t been said more often."

Bazelon asked if Ginsburg was referring to the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women.

"Yes. The ruling about that surprised me."

The ruling she cited was Harris v. McRae — in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.

"Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of, so that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion," Ginsburg said.

"Some people felt [that] would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn’t really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong."
[12July09, Newsmax.com]

Abortion Parties? - When Abortion Becomes a Lark
Despite the fact that throughout the West abortions continue to take place by the tens of thousands, abortion is still generally portrayed as a grave issue, not to be taken lightly, a difficult decision.  Hilary Clinton, one of the world's foremost advocates of abortion, herself has described abortion as a "sad, even tragic choice to many, many women."

For some, however, it seems that abortion is just another reason to throw a party.

In a recent article published on AlterNet, 'My First Abortion Party', writer Byard Duncan relates his experience of attending a party thrown by his friend 'Maggie' so as to raise funds to pay for her abortion.

Duncan describes walking into the party, being "bludgeoned with a blast of hot air, followed by the tangy stink of dance floor revelry."

"Someone had taken a red bed sheet and hung it below a light fixture to resemble a giant womb," he says.  "Every so often, a dancer's head or arm or dreadlock would brush against one of its smooth folds, creating a rippling effect."

A self-described "ardent pro-choicer," Duncan nonetheless says he felt uncomfortable with the whole affair.  "When I got the invite to a friend's abortion party, I thought it was a way to help her through a difficult decision," he says.  "I was right and wrong."

The party, ironically, was 'family-friendly,' he says.  After arriving, Duncan "struck up a conversation with Andrew (name changed), the three-year-old son of one of the partygoers."

Uncomfortable by the presence of a young child, he acknowledges the contradiction of a young child participating in the celebration of the murder of another young child.  "Even though I thought the presence of a young child at an abortion party was a little bizarre," he says, "nobody else seemed to acknowledge (or care about) this contradiction."

His friend 'Maggie,' the pregnant host of the party, did not enjoy the party either, he says, but her reason apparently had nothing to do with the fact of her having an abortion, but because she was being poorly treated by friends for involving her boyfriend in the decision.

"Maggie, too, looked less than excited," he says.  "She told me she couldn't help but feel as though her pregnancy had been 'hijacked' by women who felt like her inclusion of a man in the decision was weak or wrong."

Despite the difficulties, however, the party was, in the end, a roaring success.  "By the end of the night," Duncan says, "the donation bowl was overflowing with contributions from Maggie's friends."

More shocking, perhaps, than this fundraising party, however, is the 'Middle School Abortion Party' discovered by LifeSiteNews being advertised online.

The ad for this theme party - a birthday party for two men in their mid-20s - states: "no, we will not be performing abortions, but we will be dressing up like nerds, bullies, and pregnant pre-teens! Yay!"

The ad showcases the title of the party inside a coat hanger, and includes pictures of examples of people to dress up as.  Among the suggestions are a "pregnant pre-teen," an "angry priest," accompanied by a picture of Pope Benedict XVI, and a "deformed neonate," with a picture of an unborn child.

Indicating the activities for the night, the ad states: "Spin the Bottle!  Truth or Dare!  Pin the Tail on the Stillborn Fetus!"
Related:   My First Abortion Party
http://www.alternet.org/sex/141140/my_first_abortion_party/

Middle School Abortion Party ad
http://www.disastersquad.com/index.php?extra=middleschoolabortionparty
[9July09, Patrick B. Craine, www.LifeSiteNews.com]


Pro-Life Group Challenges Federal Order to Sell Morning After Pill to Minor Girls
A pro-life legal group has filed the papers necessary for a pro-life organization to challenge a federal court order that required the Food and Drug Administration to allow the Plan B drug to be sold to minor girls. The Alliance Defense fund filed the papers to intervene in the case.

The group is acting on behalf of Concerned Women for America, the Christian Medical and Dental Association, and Christian Pharmacists Fellowship International.

The pro-life organizations contend that the order disregards parental rights and the safety of teenage girls.

Matt Bowman, a top attorney with ADF, talked with LifeNews.com about the challenge.

“The life and health of women, especially minors, is more important than the political agenda of pro-abortion activist groups," he said. "Minors are least of all in a position to make an informed decision about the life or death of a child, or even about their own safety. It is a lie that over-the-counter sales of this drug increase safety for women, including minors."

“The organizations that are seeking to intervene in this lawsuit represent thousands of medical personnel that will not only be affected by the court’s order but believe strongly that it will result in both parents and doctors being left out of the loop in a child’s care," Bowman explained.

"The order allows minors to bypass being seen by a doctor who can check for sexually transmitted diseases and other potentially serious medical conditions,” Bowman told LifeNews.com. “Our motion argues that the case should be dismissed because, under the law, the plaintiffs have not established sufficient reason that they can even ask for an order like this.”

In 2005, the pro-abortion Center for Reproductive Rights sued the Food and Drug Administration to force it to make the Plan B drug available over the counter.

The FDA agreed to make it available without a prescription to women 18 years of age or older. Unsatisfied, the CRR continued its lawsuit to force the FDA to make the drug available over the counter to girls aged 17.

In March, U.S. District Judge Edward R. Korman ordered the FDA to make the drug available to women as young as 17 within 30 days and to consider reversing its entire decision on selling the morning after pill to minors.

After the ruling, Wendy Wright, the president of Concerned Women for America, said the age restrictions need more enforcement, not less.

She also worries that a parent, older sibling or other relative or older friends could purchase the morning after pill for young teens, avoiding the requirement that they visit a doctor first before using the drug.

Wright said selling the morning after pill over the counter will make it easier for men who abuse young women to cover up their crimes.

"Any adult male who is having sex with a minor could walk into a pharmacy, buy the drug, and coax the girl into taking the pill," she said.

Wright also said that Planned Parenthood and abortion advocates were given certain restrictions by the FDA on the dangerous abortion drug RU 486, but that those haven't been followed.

"Those restrictions have never been followed, women have died, yet no one has been punished nor the drug approval pulled,” said Wright.

Coincidentally, last week, the FDA approved the first generic version of the Plan B drug. The new generic of the so-called emergency contraceptive, which can cause abortions in limited circumstances, will be available in a 0.75 mg dosage.

The motion to intervene in Tummino v. Hamburg was filed Thursday with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

The morning after pill has been hailed by abortion advocates as a method of reducing abortions, but stats in the United States and elsewhere prove otherwise.

Related web sites:
Alliance Defense Fund - http://www.adfmedia.org
 [June 29, 2009, Washington, DC www.LifeNews.com, http://www.lifenews.com/nat5175.html ]




CONSCIENCE
Appeals Court: WA Pharmacists Must Heed Order to Distribute Abortifacient Plan B Pill
A three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals today ruled that Washington pharmacists will likely have to obey a 2007 regulation forcing them to distribute the abortifacient morning-after pill, known as Plan B.

The regulation had been temporarily blocked by a Washington judge in 2007 when pharmacists who refused to distribute the pill launched a suit against the state.  Today's decision overturned that of U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton, who agreed with the complainants that there was reason to believe the rules violated the pharmacists' right to the freedom of conscience.

The Board of Pharmacy and the State regulations require pharmacy owners to provide the pill, and require individuals to distribute or refer elsewhere for the drug regardless of personal conviction.

While primarily billed as contraception, Plan B is also widely advertised as an early abortifacient that works by preventing new human life from receiving nourishment from the uterine lining.  Olympia's Family-owned Ralph's Thriftway and two pharmacists employed elsewhere fought the rules out of a conscientious refusal to participate in the abortions.

The regulations were pushed through by Governor Christine Gregoire after the state reportedly received complaints from individuals who had been denied the drug by conscientious pharmacists.  When the Board of Pharmacy was considering the regulations in early 2006, Gregoire threatened to remove any board member supportive of pharmacists' conscientious objection to certain prescriptions.

Four months after the rules took effect, Judge Leighton temporarily blocked them after agreeing that the rules likely violated the complainants' First Amendment rights.

"On the issue of free exercise of religion alone, the evidence before the court convinces it that the plaintiffs ... have demonstrated both a likelihood of success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury," Leighton wrote.

In reversing the ruling today, the 9th Circuit Court stated it had concluded "that the district court incorrectly applied a heightened level of scrutiny to a neutral law of general applicability," and called the injunction "overbroad."

"We hold that the district court abused its discretion in applying an erroneous legal standard of review, failing to properly consider the balance of hardships and the public interest," wrote Justice Kim Wardlaw in the court's published opinion.

The court also ordered the district court to revisit the case and "apply the rational basis level of scrutiny" in deciding whether the pharmacists are likely to succeed in their bid against the rules. 

While the court's decision did not include an assessment of the regulations themselves, the ruling virtually guarantees that they will be upheld, attorney Matthew McReynolds of the Pacific Justice Institute told the San Francisco Chronicle.

"It clearly was targeted at the few pharmacies in the state that had moral convictions about these types of medication," he said. "This gives the green light to states like California to impose harsher regulations."

Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) had filed an amicus brief in this case, urging the Ninth Circuit to protect pharmacists' rights of conscience.

"Today's ruling immediately endangers conscientious pharmacists in Washington State and also strikes a blow at medical professionals throughout the West Coast," commented PJI President Brad Dacus.

"The Ninth Circuit's reinstatement of these anti-conscience regulations, despite strong evidence that they targeted people of faith, renders the Free Exercise Clause meaningless."

In April, Illinois pharmacists fired for refusing to distribute the abortifacient pill won a victory when a judge temporarily barred the Governor and other state officials from enforcing a 2005 executive order forcing pharmacists to dispense the drug.


See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Pharmacists Sue Washington State for Forcing Them to Sell Morning After Pill
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/jul/07072701.html

Illinois Judges Upholds Pharmacists' Conscience Rights
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/apr/09040604.html

ACLJ to Defend Two Pharmacists Fired for Refusing to Provide Abortifacients
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/dec/05122202.html
[9July09, Kathleen Gilbert, San Francisco, CA, www.LifeSiteNews.com]

LA Gov. Jindal Strengthens Pharmacists' Conscience Protections but Wisconsin Forces Distribution of Abortifacient Pill
 Louisiana's Republican Governor Bobby Jindal last week signed a bill expanding legal conscience protection beyond abortion to include dispensing the morning-after pill, participating in embryonic stem-cell research, cloning, euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide.

House Bill 517, sponsored by Democratic State Rep. Bernard LeBas, includes a specific provision against forcing professionals to distribute "abortifacient drugs," referring to the abortion-inducing "Plan B" or morning-after pill.  It does not extend to other forms of birth control.  

Planned Parenthood and the ACLU unsuccessfully lobbied against the measure.

Wisconsin pharmacy owners who object to providing the morning-after pill have met with a more hostile administration, however, as Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle earlier this month signed a law requiring pharmacies to stock the drug.  

The "duty to dispense" provision in the state budget was one of a number of birth control-promoting riders slipped into the bill after public hearings on the legislation had concluded.  While individual pharmacy workers are not required to dispense the drug, pharmacy owners are required to stock and dispense the pill and other contraceptives "without delay."  

Pharmacies that fail to comply immediately with a customer's request for the drug are subject to a fine of $2500 per violation.

"You can't trample the Constitution on your way to a perceived public health end," attorney Matt Sande of Pro-Life Wisconsin told LifeSiteNews.com.  "And that's precisely what they're doing."

"The pro-life medical profession has to stand up to these blatant attacks on their constitutional rights," said Sande.  "Otherwise, it's just going to keep coming."

Another budget bill rider mandates that all health insurance plans in Wisconsin that cover prescription drugs also include birth control.
See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
Wisconsin Judge Wants Punishment for Catholic Pharmacist
Wisconsin Files Complaint Against Pharmacist For Refusing Abortifacient Prescription  
[14July09, Kathleen Gilbert, Baton Rouge, LA, www.LifeSiteNews.com]

NO JOY ON FATHER'S DAY: ABORTION HURTS YOUNG MEN
By Erik Whittington
 
When talking about post-abortion experiences, one hears a lot about women hurting from abortion. At pro-life events, women usually make up the majority of those holding “I Regret My Abortion”  signs. Occasionally, a middle-aged man testifies as to how abortion affected him and holds an “I Regret Lost Fatherhood” sign.
 
Rarely, however, do you hear from young men about how abortion has affected them. Statistically, 56 percent of women having abortions are in their twenties and 17 percent are teenagers, so it follows that roughly the same percentage (73 percent) of men involved in abortion are under 30 years old. Why don’t we hear their stories?
 
This year, at Ichthus Festival, (a music event held June 10-13 in Wilmar, Kentucky), when two young men told me their stories, I got a very close look at this mostly unrecognized pain.
 
The first young man told me that his now-ex-girlfriend informed him that she was pregnant and getting an abortion. He pleaded with her to not kill their child. He told her he would take care of the child. He called lawyers, judges, politicians—anyone who would listen and might be able to help. All of them told him the same thing: You are a man and thus have no say in this matter. She went through with the abortion, and he was devastated! He told me, through tears, that he still has nightmares about his child being aborted.
 
The next day, another young man told me a similar story. His girlfriend had already made up her mind to abort when she first told him she was pregnant. He, too, had no say. He also cried as he told me about his nightmares and the year of depression, alcohol and drug abuse he endured after the abortion.  I was given the opportunity to record this young man’s testimony in audio form, which we featured in a recent Rock for Life Netcast. Young men are generally less prone to showing their emotions, especially to a complete stranger. Nonetheless, these two couldn’t hold back their sorrow over their lost fatherhood.  I was able to listen to both men and counsel for their continued recovery.
 
The trauma both young men have experienced has fired them up about joining the pro-life movement. One of them asked about starting a Rock for Life chapter in his community. The other told me that as a college freshman, he started a campus pro-life club and would now like to associate it with Rock for Life. ...they [are working] through their abortion experience and giving of themselves at the same time.
 
Keeping in mind that we recently celebrated Father's Day, if you wonder why so many men seem disinterested in caring for their children … consider this: Maybe it’s because they have absolutely no voice in a life-or-death decision when those same kids are in the womb.
 
Don’t let the abortion advocates fool you! Abortion is not just "a women’s issue." Abortion deeply wounds men too—young and old. For more information on post-abortion healing for men, check out American Life League's Celebrate Life article "Men and abortion: Reclaiming lost fatherhood" (January–February 2009 -- http://www.clmagazine.org/backissues/2009JF_nowak.pdf ).
 
[Erik Whittington is director of Rock for Life, American Life League’s youth outreach, which educates, actives and equips young people to put an end to the culture of death. For more information, visit www.RockforLife.org ;
ALL Pro-Life Today | 29 June 2009]
 

Attorney General Wants Video Showing Planned Parenthood Sex Abuse/Statutory Rape Coverup
Alabama Attorney General Troy king wants a copy of the full video footage activist Lila Rose took showing Planned Parenthood stuff covering up a potential case of sexual abuse. The video also shows the abortion business telling her how she could violate the state's parental consent law.

The video has a Planned Parenthood staffer admitting "we bend the rules" when it comes to following state sexual abuse reporting laws.

"If that tape is an accurate depiction of what’s happening, that’s very troubling," King said on Wednesday, according to the Gadsen Times.

Rose, a UCLA student who is the head of the pro-life group Live Action, has taken videos of Planned Parenthood centers in Arizona and Indiana where staff engaged in the same sexual abuse coverup.

Officials in those states also wanted the full footage for investigations, and King does as well.

"In response to viewing the video, I've asked the chief of the investigative division to make contact with ‘Live Action’ to seek an authentic unaltered version of the tape," King told the newspaper. "We have knowledge that the law may have been broken and I think we're compelled at that point to see if it has or not."

"At this point all we can say is if that video is true and accurate and correct, it’s extremely troubling from a legal and moral point of view," King said.

King affirmed that state law requires abortion centers like Planned Parenthood to report suspected cases of sexual abuse.

Barbara Buchanan, CEO of Planned Parenthood of Alabama Inc., told the paper she was not aware of King pursuing a case against the abortion business.

Her group, as LifeNews.com reported Wednesday, released a statement claiming it obeys with state law and protects the health and welfare of minor girls.

Rose also talked with the Times and said she has been in contact with King's office.

"It’s definitely been our policy, our student group Live Action, to send full footage to appropriate local authorities," Rose said.  [July 2, 2009, Montgomery, AL, www.LifeNews.com)  

UPDATE Alabama Attorney General Calls Undercover Video of Planned Parenthood Ignoring Statutory Rape 'Extremely Troubling', Seeks Investigation

Alabama Attorney General Troy King has called a new undercover video released last week showing Planned Parenthood of Alabama apparently breaking state mandatory reporting laws for sexual abuse "extremely troubling" and requested the full recordings. The student-led nonprofit responsible for the recordings, Live Action, immediately sent the full footage, which the Attorney General's office received yesterday.

The video shows a Planned Parenthood staffer, identified as "Tanisha," telling a purportedly 14-year-old girl with a 31-year-old "boyfriend" that Planned Parenthood "does sometimes bend the rules a little bit" when it comes to reporting statutory rape to state authorities. Despite strong parental consent laws in Alabama, "Tanisha" also explains that a person with the "same last name" as the 14-year-old would suffice as a guardian or parent to sign off for the minor's abortion. In an interview last week, King said, "If that tape is an accurate depiction of what's happening, that's very troubling," and "if that video is true and accurate and correct, it's extremely troubling from a legal and moral point of view."

The Jefferson County Sheriff's Office has also expressed concern about the contents of the video and warned of potential repercussions for Planned Parenthood. Lt. Randy Christian said: "Anyone who sees that should be disturbed by it, and I hope they're disturbed by it. For a 31 year old to have sex with a 14 year old, that is rape in the second degree. I think they are not only morally obligated to report it - the law requires them to report it, and there could be some serious consequences otherwise."

Lila Rose, president of Live Action and the UCLA student who went undercover posing as the 14-year-old in the video, called for a thorough state investigation of Planned Parenthood: "Attorney General King should use this evidence to subpoena records and witness testimony from Planned Parenthood of Alabama and the state Department of Human Resources."

Rose notes that in 2006, three Alabama abortion clinics were placed on probation after an investigation found them operating outside state regulations. King said of the current allegations, "We have knowledge that the law may have been broken and I think we're compelled at that point to see if it has or not."

"Attorney General King is absolutely correct," says Rose. "How many other rapes has this single clinic covered up? When mandatory reporters at Planned Parenthood can 'bend the rules a little bit' in service of their abortion-first mentality and put vulnerable young girls at risk, someone needs to stand up and put a stop to it."

(To view the undercover video and for more information, go to www.LiveAction.org)
[7July09, Montgomery, AL, Contact: Lila Rose, Live Action, 408-497-3982, ; http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/1576210882.html]



Late-term FL Abortionist James Pendergraft loses appeal; suspension stands
Today Orlando, FL, late-term abortionist James Pendergraft lost his appeal in the 5th District Court of Appeal, and the suspension of his license by the FL Board of Medicine stands.

According to a court document filed today, "Dr. Pendergraft violated sections 456.072(1)(k) and 458.331(1)(g) when he performed a third trimester abortion in his clinic, which is not a hospital."...

Next, Pendergraft "violated section 390.0111(1)(a)... which prohibits third trimester abortions unless two physicians certify in writing to the fact that, to a reasonable degree of medical probability, the termination of the pregnancy is necessary to save the life or preserve the health of the pregnant woman."

Third, Pendergraft violated "section 390.0111(1)(b)... because he did not certify in writing "to the medical necessity for legitimate emergency medical procedures for termination of pregnancy in the third trimester, and another physician is not available for
consultation."

Finally, "the [Administrative Law Judge] found that there was clear and convincing evidence that Dr. Pendergraft committed medical malpractice."

There are no details on the news yet. Unknown is whether any or all of Pendergraft's 5 clinics will have to close during his suspension. Also unknown is whether criminal charges will be filed.

Baby Rowan, the subject of the movie 22 Weeks, was aborted alive in 2005 at one of Pendergraft's businesses. Workers refused his mother's pleas for help.

Pendergraft's license was suspended in 2006 for the same reason.

In 2001, Pendergraft was convicted of extortion and spent 46 months in prison.
[July 2, 2009, http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2009/07/breaking_news_l_1.html#more ]

UPDATE: Court Upholds Suspension of Florida Late-Term Abortion Practitioner's License
A Florida appeals court has upheld the suspension of the license of late-term abortion practitioner James Pendergraft. He was fined $10,000 and has his licensed revoked for one year over an illegal late-term abortion he did in 2005. The Florida Board of Medicine handed down the decision in December 2007.

The board also placed Pendergraft's license on a three year probationary period following the suspension.

Pendergraft runs five abortion facilities and his abortion centers in Ocala, Tampa and Fort Lauderdale were shut down for a brief time during an investigation into alleged illegal activities. The illegal abortions occurred at the Orlando centers in 2004 and 2005, but the Florida Board of Medicine threw out the charges related to the 2004 abortion.

Pendergraft appealed the decision and, in an opinion filed yesterday, the Florida District Court of Appeals rejected all of Pendergraft's arguments and stated that they "found no reversible error" in the Board's suspension order.

The court ruled that Pendergraft violated state law when he did late-term abortions at his center that state law requires done at a hospital in case they are botched and a woman required immediate emergency medical attention. [4July09, Orlando, FL www.LifeNews.com] 

Abortion Practitioner Alberto Hodari Fined $10,000 For Woman's Abortion Death
 Abortion practitioner Alberto Hodari, based in the suburbs of Detroit, Michigan, has been fined $10,000 by a state board in connection with a woman's botched abortion death. One of Hodari's staff did an abortion on Regina Johnson and, afterwards, suffered respiratory and cardiac arrest.

Staff at Hodari's abortion center allegedly failed to help her or call for an ambulance and she was deprived of oxygen for an extended time. She died a short time later at Hodari's Womencare clinic in Lathrup Village.

Johnson's death is one of several women to have died over the years under Hodari's care.

The September 17, 2003 abortion saw Milton Nathanson, then employed by Hodari, do an abortion on Johnson. She died the next day from "anoxic encephalopahy due to cardiac arrest" resulting from the abortion, according to official reports.

In addition to Hodari and Nathanson, anesthesiologist Barry Thompson and the abortion clinic's nurse, Cathy Litchig were also implicated in Johnson's death.

The Michigan Attorney General imposed the fine on Hodari on march 4, 2009, but information about it only recently became public.

Monica Migliorino Miller, director of Citizens for a Pro-Life Society, informed LifeNews.com of the fine and talked with the pro-life news service about it.

She said that "$10,0000 seems such a small penalty to pay for the death of a human being. To Hodari this is pocket money."

"Let's not forget that Regina Johnson is not the first woman to die as a consequence of an abortion performed at Hodari's clinics, and yet this is all the penalty he receives," she said. "We look forward to the day when Hodari's abortion centers are shut down and when the oppression of the unborn finally comes to an end."

"Let's also not forget that in addition to Regina's death--we must also mark the death of her innocent baby. Two human beings were killed--not just one," Miller added.

The complaint against Hodari found him guilty of "negligence," "incompetence" and lacking in "good moral character." Hodari paid the fine without contesting the Attorney General's "allegations of fact and law."

This finding of the Attorney General's office comes just one year after members of Citizens for a Pro-life Society discovered the remains of aborted babies in Womencare clinic trash dumpsters as well as bio-hazard waste and hundreds of patient records.

Hodari was investigated by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality and received a warning from that office.

He was also prosecuted by the Oakland County District Attorney's Office for violating Michigan statutes regarding the improper disposition of patient records. Hodari pled “no contest “ to the first of 12 counts and is currently on probation in that case.

A complaint filed by Miller's group with the Michigan Bureau of Health Professions regarding the patient records issue is currently under review by the Attorney General.

At least two other women have also died from failed abortions at Hodari's abortion centers and many more have been injured.

Tamia Russell was only 15 years old in January of 2004 when her 26 year old boyfriend paid Hodari $2,000 in cash to abort her baby at over 26 weeks gestation. She died less than 24 hours after obtaining an abortion at Womancare of Southfield/Lathrup Village.

Her guardian was unaware she was pregnant, and had no knowledge of the abortion - until it was too late.

Chivon Williams received a suction abortion by Hodari at an unknown clinic. An hour and forty minutes later, she was discharged even though she was complaining of pain in her stomach and chest. Soon after she arrived at her home, she "became unresponsive." At 5:17, on the same day as the abortion, she was pronounced dead.
[3July09,  Ertelt, DC, www.LifeNews.com, http://www.lifenews.com/state4281.html]

Abortion is Culprit in Problem with Low Birth Weights
It's very good news that pregnant women in the Lansing area are smoking less and getting better prenatal care ("Fewer area teens having children," June 30). But why then has the rate of low weight births actually increased in Clinton and Ingham counties in the last 10 years?
Advertisement

There is another factor contributing to low birth weight and premature births in these and all counties in Michigan - previous abortions. The abortion/premature birth link is the hidden reason why Michigan just can't seem to reduce incidences of low birth weight and premature birth.

A major European study released just this week in Amsterdam confirms that one previous abortion increases by 20 percent the risk of a future premature birth, with premature birth defined as birth at less than 37 weeks gestation.

More than one prior abortion?

The risk increases by 90 percent!

In addition, more than one prior abortion doubles the likelihood of a premature birth at 34 weeks gestation or less. At that stage of prematurity, the child is much more likely to suffer from cerebral palsy, mental retardation, epilepsy or autism.

The Amsterdam study is not unique; over 100 studies confirm the abortion/premature birth link.

In 2004, another European study co-authored by a French obstetrics/gynecology professor reported that women with one prior abortion had a 34 percent greater risk of a future very premature birth. Two or more abortions increased that risk significantly.

Yet here in Michigan, when smoking goes down, teen pregnancy goes down, the number of women without prenatal care goes down, and premature births still go up, we all shake our heads, bewildered.

Let's clear up the confusion: The culprit is abortion.

Michigan residents had 24,006 abortions in 2007. For 52 percent of the women, it was their first abortion. Their risk of having a premature baby in the future has increased by 20 percent to 35 percent, depending on how premature birth is defined.

For 48 percent of those women, it was their second abortion, or more. Their risk of having a premature baby has doubled.

It's high time we face the fact that abortion does carry significant, long-term health consequences - and financial consequences.

An October 2007 article in the Journal of Reproductive Medicine addressed the cost of abortion in terms of subsequent very premature births, defined as births at less than 32 weeks gestation. Dr. Byron Calhoun and co-authors reported that induced abortion increased the rate of births at 24 to 32 weeks gestation by 31.5 percent.

That amounted to 22,917 very premature births each year attributed to prior abortions.

The authors estimated that prior abortions result in 1,096 cases of cerebral palsy each year in very premature babies, and a yearly increase of neonatal hospital costs in excess of $1.2 billion.

The fiscal considerations are important.

But they are overshadowed by concern for babies born prematurely in our state.

All of us have a responsibility to take a hard look at the abortion/premature birth link.

Our children's health depends on it.

[July 3, 2009 • Lansing State Journal, Schweppe:
http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/article/20090703/OPINION02/907030318/1087/OPINION02

Study Shows Negative Impact of Abortion on Relationships for Women, Men: One of the First to Look at Abortion's Impact on Men's Relationships and on Future Relationships

A new study published in the peer-reviewed journal Public Health has found that abortion can impact relationships for both women and men.

The study, headed by Priscilla Coleman of Bowling Green State University, is one of the first to examine the impact of abortion on men's relationships, as previous studies have mostly looked at abortion's impact on women.

It is also the first study that looked at how having an abortion with a previous partner can impact subsequent relationships.

"No studies to date have compared the relative psychological or relational impact of a history of one or more abortions prior to the current relationship with an abortion occurring in the context of the current partnership," the authors wrote, noting that previous studies have found that some women may "carry the pain of a difficult abortion experience for years."

"If negative emotions associated with an abortion are not acknowledged or resolved, dysfunctional coping can carry over into relationships," causing additional problems, they added.
 
The study data was drawn from the Chicago Health and Social Life Survey, which is designed to study sexual behavior among adults in the U.S. Respondents were from the Chicago area and include an ethnically and socially diverse women and men. It included both married and unmarried respondents who had been involved in an abortion either in their current relationship or with a previous partner.

For both women and men, abortion was associated with problems in the current relationship, whether the abortion had taken place with one's current partner or a previous partner.

Compared to those who had no history of abortion, those who underwent an abortion with a current partner were more likely to report domestic violence and to feel that their lives would be better if the relationship ended. Having an abortion with a previous partner was more likely to lead to arguments about children in the current relationship for both men and women.

On the other hand, the study also found differences in women's and men's responses to abortion.

Compared to those with no history of abortion, women who had an abortion with their current partner reported that the couple was more likely to argue about: money (75 percent more likely), children (116 percent more likely), the woman's relatives (80 percent more likely) or her partner's relatives (99 percent more likely), while men were 96 percent more likely to report arguing about jealousy, 195 percent more likely to argue about children and 385 percent more likely to argue about drugs.

Women having an abortion in a current or previous relationship were more likely to suffer from various forms of sexual dysfunction afterwards, while men tended to have difficulty with jealousy or conflicts over drug use.

Previous studies have shown that women tend to feel anxious or disinterested in sex after pregnancy loss and the authors speculated that the same factors could apply after abortion.

The authors also suggested that men's problems with jealousy and drug use after an abortion may also be related to differences in coping with bereavement. Studies of other forms of pregnancy loss have found that men's grief tends to be less easily resolved, possibly due to the fact that they often receive little support, thereby leading men to feel less secure and to “self-medicate” by turning to drugs.

The authors noted that the inclusion of men in the data collection was one of the study's strengths, but called for more long-term studies to compare problems in relationships both before and after abortion.

They pointed out that discovering how abortion effects relationships and helping women and men resolve those problems before entering into a new relationship is an important goal for those who work with couples.

“By recognizing the valence of unresolved pain associated with a past abortion, pastoral, mental health, and marriage and family therapists will be better able to help couples to prevent problems from overwhelming their intimate partnerships,” the authors wrote.

~~~
Source:
P.K. Coleman, V.M. Rue, C.T. Coyle, "Induced abortion and intimate relationship quality in the Chicago Health and Social Life Survey," Public Health (2009), doi:10,1016/j.puhe.2009.01.005.

http://www.theunchoice.com/pdf/FactSheets/RecentResearch.pdf

For information on men and abortion, including articles and links to web sites, support and resources for men, visit www.theunchoice.com/men.htm.

Abortion Has Greater Impact on Parenting Than Other Forms of Pregnancy Loss, New Review Finds

A new review of studies examining various types of prenatal loss and the effects on subsequent parenting has concluded that abortion may be "particularly damaging to the parenting process."

The article, published in Current Women's Health Reviews, looked at already published studies on miscarriage, induced abortion and adoption. The author, Priscilla Coleman of Bowling Green State University, focused on psychological reactions to these various types of loss and discussed how they might affect a mother's relationship with children born after the pregnancy loss.1

It is now known that women usually begin feeling maternal attachment in the early stages of pregnancy. The paper notes that despite the increased responsibilities and stress involved in raising children, "numerous studies have documented positive psychological characteristics associated with motherhood including increases in life satisfaction, self-esteem, empathy, restraint, flexibility and resourcefulness in coping, and assertiveness." Losing a child before or at birth, for any reason, however, "can be a profound source of suffering."  

While all forms of pregnancy loss can cause emotional distress that can impact future parenting, the available research indicates that emotional responses after induced abortion are more likely to go unresolved and to persist for a longer time period.    

While "society understands that women who miscarry or relinquish a child through adoption may experience sadness and grief; however, grief after socially sanctioned because abortion is not acknowledged by our culture as a human death experience," and help to deal with the experience is usually not offered.

"In many cases, women may suppress thoughts and emotions related to an abortion, because they have not been able to process and or/openly express negative emotions," Coleman wrote, adding that the lack of acknowledgement and support after abortion gives the "covert message that others would rather not hear what we have to say, and this makes it difficult to even identify our reactions to our losses."

Finding help and support after abortion is further hampered by the belief that, unlike other forms of pregnancy loss, abortion is optional and therefore women experience less distress afterwards. However, having an abortion is "sometimes quite inconsistent with the woman's true desires" (one survey found that 64 percent of American women [ http://www.theunchoice.com/News/RueStudy.htm ] who had abortions reported feeling pressured to abort), and many women, especially those who feel conflicted or didn't want the abortion, do feel emotional distress afterwards.

"The best evidence regarding negative effects of abortion indicates that 20-30 percent will experience serious psychological problems," Coleman wrote. "With 1.3 million U.S. abortions performed annually, a minimum of 130,000 new cases of abortion-related mental health problems appear each year."

And while abortion advocates frequently argue that abortion is better than carrying an unplanned pregnancy to term, the evidence suggests otherwise.

Studies of women with unplanned pregnancies found that women who aborted had higher risks of depression, substance abuse and anxiety, and teens who aborted an unintended pregnancy were more likely to experience negative mental health outcomes than their peers who carried to term. Further, a recent New Zealand study led by a pro-choice researcher found no evidence that abortion provided any mental health benefits to women even in cases of unplanned pregnancy [11Dec2008, http://www.theunchoice.com/News/AbortionNoMentalHealthBenefitsStudy.htm ].

 How Abortion Can Impact Parenting

The paper described a number of ways that a previous abortion can effect a woman's relationship with her living children:

Increased depression and anxiety. Abortion has been linked to higher rates of maternal depression and anxiety before and after birth, which may effect the woman's relationship with her children. In addition, depression is a common predictor for child abuse.

Sleep disorders and disturbances. Women who have had an abortion are more likely to experience sleep disorders compared to women who carry to term, and one survey found that many women attributed the sleep disorders to a past abortion. These sleep disturbances "could render the high energy demands of parenting more complicated."

Substance abuse. Studies have found that women who had an abortion were more likely to engage in substance abuse, and also more likely to smoke or use drugs or alcohol while pregnant. Mothers who abuse drugs or alcohol are more likely to "engage in authoritarian and punitive parenting practices," and parental substance abuse increases the risk that the children will suffer abuse or neglect.

Child abuse. Abortion has been associated with lower emotional support for one's children and with a higher risk of child abuse and neglect.

Abortion has also been linked to higher rates of suicide and to a wide range of mental health disorders [ http://www.theunchoice.com/pdf/FactSheets/RecentResearch.pdf ].

Coleman was also the lead author of a study published in The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, which found that the children of women who had abortions have less supportive home environments and more behavioral problems than children of women without a history of abortion.2

While the review noted that not every woman may experience psychological problems after abortion that will carry over into their personal relationships, "some women will have carryover effects into the parenting realm."

The paper pointed to a need for better screening and awareness of possible psychological problems after miscarriage, adoption and abortion, and for more research to examine the effects of abortion.

~~~
Learn more: For more information on  the impact of abortion, download and share our free "Recent Research" fact sheet, http://www.theunchoice.com/pdf/FactSheets/RecentResearch.pdf .

Citations
1. PK Coleman, "The Psychological Pain of Perinatal Loss and Subsequent Parenting Risks: Could Induced Abortion Be More Problematic Than Other Forms of Loss," Current Women's Health Issues 5: 88-99, 2009.

2. PK Coleman, DC Reardon, JR Cougle, “Substance use among pregnant women in the context of previous reproductive loss and desire for current pregnancy,” British Journal of Health Psychology 10: 255-268, 2005.
[Current Women's Health Reviews, 2009; 2July09, Elliot Institute]
 

Proof is in: Medical Studies Document Harmful Effects of Abortion
When the United States Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade, it relied upon sketchy information that abortion is somehow safer than carrying a child to term. 

Over the last 36 years, researchers have proven time and time again that abortion is harmful to women—both psychologically and physically. 

This link provides an extensive sample list of studies summarizing findings demonstrating that abortion—not childbirth—is harmful to women:
http://dl.aul.org/appendix/the-proof-is-in-medical-studies-document-the-harmful-effects-of-abortion
[Americans United for Life, "Defending Life 2009"]

Abortions Double Premature Tot Risk: Dangers for Multiple Terminations
Women who have had an abortion or miscarriage are more likely to give birth to a premature baby, researchers have found.
 
A single termination raised the risk by 20%. Two or more increased the chances by 90%.
 
And women who have had more than one abortion double their risk of having a "very" premature baby - classed as being born before 34 weeks.
 
Lead researcher Dr Robbert van Oppenraaij said: "It can be concluded that a history of abortion is associated with an increased risk for premature delivery and very premature delivery."
 
He added more research was needed as the findings showed only an association between abortions and pre-term delivery and not necessarily a direct link.
 
The study also looked at miscarriages, finding that having more than one almost doubled the likelihood of congen-ital malformations in the baby. It also nearly doubled the risk of pre-term rupture of the membrane that surrounds the baby in the womb. This is known to raise the chances of an early birth.
 
The findings are to be presented today at the annual European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology in Amsterdam.
 
It is thought they will help doctors see which women need greater care.
 
Consultant gynaecologist Tony Rutherford, chairman of the British Fertility Society, said yesterday: "If we can identify patients at risk of delivering early, that could improve outcome."
 
One in five UK pregnancies ends in a miscarriage. Last year 64,715 women had repeat abortions, up more than a fifth in a decade, official figures show.
 
Forty-six women in the UK have terminated eight or more pregnancies.
 
46 ..WOMEN WHO HAD A TERMINATION LAST YEAR HAVE HAD EIGHT OR MORE ABORTIONS
 
20% ..HIGHER RISK OF GIVING BIRTH PREMATURELY AFTER A SINGLE ABORTION
[ 29June09,   http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/06/29/abortions-double-premature-tot-risk-115875-21480051/ By Emily Cook 29/06/2009; [ALL Pro-Life Today | 29 June 2009]]
 

 


Obama Admin Calls for Universal Access to Abortion at United Nations Meeting. At United Nations (UN) headquarters this week, the Obama administration continued its push for ever increasing access to legal abortion around the world. The Obama team has introduced language that has thrown a high level negotiation into a roil.

The U.S. proposal calls for “universal access” to “sexual and reproductive health services including universal access to family planning.”

The document under consideration will culminate in the 2009 Annual Ministerial Review, which convenes next week in Geneva.

The sticking point for many delegations and what has driven apart the usual solid European bloc is the use of the word “services” in the context of “reproductive health.”

Way back in 2001 during negotiations related to the ten year review of the Child Convention, a Canadian delegate blurted out “of course everyone knows ‘services’ means abortion.” Ever since, the word “services” has been a topic of hot debate.

So controversial is the topic of “services” in the context of “reproductive health” that the usually impenetrable negotiating bloc of the 27 member European Union has imploded with Malta, Poland and Ireland splitting from their allies and joining the Holy See in opposing the measure.

In addition to the word "services," delegates are also concerned with attempts to link “sexual and reproductive health” to “universal access,” something the UN has never agreed to and what would amount to a major gain for pro-abortion forces.

There have been numerous attempts at the UN to insert language on "universal access to sexual and reproductive health services."

In 2005 at the Commission on Population and Development, the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) joined with pro-abortion lobby groups to call for "universal access to sexual and reproductive health services and programs." They were defeated in large part by the Bush-appointed US delegates who insisted that none of the terms related to reproductive health be interpreted to include abortion.

In recent weeks, the new US administration has interpreted "reproductive health" to include abortion.

In April, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told a U.S. House subcommittee, “We [the Obama administration] happen to think that family planning is an important part of women’s health and reproductive health includes access to abortion that I believe should be safe, legal and rare.”

In this statement, Clinton also contradicted the agreement reached at the Cairo Conference which said that abortion can never be used as a part of family planning. This was a document that Clinton helped to negotiate.

Apart from the U.S., other delegations including Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, France, Estonia and the United Kingdom are pushing for the language.

The G-77 developing nations' bloc is still holding its own negotiations to determine whether or not they will have a common position on the paragraph.

Negotiations are scheduled to continue this week and the draft declaration will be adopted by high level government ministers at the end of next week's meeting in Geneva. [2July2009, Samantha Singson, LifeNews.com Note: Singson writes for the C-Fam and Human Rights Institute. This article originally appeared in the pro-life group's Friday Fax publication. New York, NY www.LifeNews.com/CFAM]

WHO Maternal Mortality Report Presents Skews Data to Advance Abortion Agenda
 In its recently released annual report on the state of global health, the World Health Organization (WHO) presents statistics that misleadingly appear to place maternal mortality on par with other global killers like malaria and HIV/ AIDS.

This new approach contradicts other WHO reports where maternal mortality does not even make the top ten of global killers, ranking somewhere lower than car accident fatalities.

The confusion first arises in the second table of the new report, which provides data about mortality due to maternal causes, HIV/AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis, cardiovascular diseases, cancer, and injuries. All of these causes of death, except maternal mortality, are among the top ten causes of death globally; yet maternal mortality is shown in the same statistics table, as if it were comparable to the others.

Even more confusing to the casual reader is that the statistics in the table for maternal mortality actually appear to be a greater cause of death than the others.

The table shows that maternal mortality has a “mortality rate” of 400 while coronary heart disease, considered the number one killer in the world, has a mortality rate of 301. While the WHO itself says maternal mortality kills 536,000 per year and coronary heart disease kills 7.2 million, this seeming parity is achieved by showing maternal mortality numbers as a function of total live births while the others are shown as a function of total population – a mixing of apples and oranges.

Critics charge that the report is part of the ongoing campaign by United Nations (UN) agencies and the WHO of exaggerating the actual incidence of maternal mortality for the purposes of promoting abortion.

A 2005 WHO Bulletin admitted that relatively very few countries provide reliable and complete data on mortality or cause of death. In fact, of the 46 African countries, which supposedly account for about 50% of maternal deaths, only one country had complete data available.

Even so, WHO routinely asserts that about half a million women die every year from “maternal causes” in developing nations, regardless of the fact that the data available from developing nations on this subject is unreliable, with “high uncertainty margins.” The UN Population Division, the official UN statistics office, refuses to use the 500,000 number precisely because it is not verifiable.

The United Nations and its agencies consistently propose abortion and contraception, under the euphemism of “family planning,” as the best way to solve the overstated problem of maternal mortality.

The 1999 joint statement issued by the World Bank, UNFPA, UNICEF, and WHO reiterated the importance of reducing maternal mortality through “three key areas for action:” “empowering women to make choices in their reproductive lives,” improvement of “access to and quality of maternal health services,” and “ensured access to voluntary family planning information and services.”

The UN-sponsored “Women Deliver” conference in 2007 also advocated what Dr. Susan Yoshihara has termed the “abortion first” mentality to improving maternal health. This downplays proven methods of reducing maternal mortality associated child bearing, namely increasing access to skilled birth attendants and emergency obstetric care. [July 2, 2009; E. Walsh; LifeNews.com Note: Elizabeth Walsh writes for the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute. This article originally appeared in the pro-life group's Friday Fax publication.
New York, NY www.LifeNews.com/CFAM]

Planned Parenthood - a Primary Healthcare Provider?
Planned ParenthoodPlanned Parenthood is facing criticism for alleged false advertising.
The organization has been running ads in Washington, DC, claiming that 90 percent of its services are preventive and primary care, just like going to a doctor's office. Jim Sedlak of American Life League disagrees. With Obama's healthcare program, Sedlak contends Planned Parenthood is just trying to position itself to be in the mainstream of healthcare.
 
"The problem is that according to its last annual report, Planned Parenthood...primary care patients account for only seven-tenths of one percent of its total number of customers," he says.
 
Sedlak was asked if Planned Parenthood's recent report was designed to get more government money.
 
Jim Sedlak 1"Absolutely! They're trying to set the stage so that they get recognized as an entry point into the healthcare system, and that people don't have to go to another primary care physician, and they can get referenced to Planned Parenthood, that they can just walk in the door at Planned Parenthood and that will result in millions of more dollars to Planned Parenthood," he points out.
 
According to Sedlak, abortion accounts for about one-third of Planned Parenthood's income -- and government-funded abortion is likely to be a part of the Obama healthcare plan. [3July09, Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow; http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=588040]

Abortion Laws: A Recent Development?
Myth: Abortion laws were of rather recent origin, and were adopted to protect women from dangerous surgery, not to protect unborn children.

Reality: Throughout almost all stages of history in nations influenced by Christianity, and in other nations as well, abortion has been strongly condemned by the religious and political leadership of these nations.

In early American history, states usually did not pass criminal statutes; rather, they relied upon the body of common law that our Founding Fathers brought to us from England. [http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=1358, The American View; ALL Pro-Life Today, 22June09]

Resources: Learn More, Share More

Visit TheUnChoice.com for information and user-friendly resources to help raise awareness about widespread unwanted abortions and related injustices and harm.

Visit AbortionRisks.org, a collaborative information portal where researchers, healing ministries and others can contribute news, information and insights. Includes the Thomas W. Strahan Memorial Library, the world's most comprehensive library on post-abortion research.

'Maafa 21: Black Genocide in 21st Century America'
Maafa 21 (the word "Maafa" is derived from a Kiswahili word and means "African Holocaust" or "Holocaust of Enslavement") is a well-researched and informative film that shows the connection between slavery/racism, the American eugenics movement — of which Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger was an influential figure — Nazi Germany, and legalized abortion. [RenewAmerica, http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/abbott/090618; ALL Pro-Life Today, 18 June 2009)

http://lifedynamics.com/Abortion_Information/Pro-life_Product/maafa.cfm#

Abortion and Contraception Key Tools in Black Genocide: Maafa 21

By Hilary White

Planned Parenthood and similar groups have been using abortion and artificial contraception to control and reduce the African-American population of the US in a slow but deliberate and planned "genocide" that has been ongoing for 150 years, a new documentary claims.

The recently released documentary, "Maafa 21," produced by Life Dynamics Incorporated, the Texas-based pro-life investigative group, traces the history of the contraception and abortion industry from its origins in the racist eugenics movement of the early 20th century that un-apologetically targeted the black population and other groups it regarded as inferior.

Planned Parenthood was targeted by Civil Rights movement activists in the 1960s and '70s for its involvement in a "black genocide" that had its origins in the early days of the eugenics movement in the 19th century. The film points out that since 1973, legalised abortion has been specifically aimed at the African-American population and has killed more than "cancer, diabetes, heart disease and gang violence combined."

"Every week, more blacks die in American abortion clinics than were killed in the entire Vietnam War. And the largest chain of abortion clinics in the United States is operated by Planned Parenthood."  

It quotes Frederick Osborn, a founding member of the American Eugenics Society, who said in 1973, "Birth control and abortion are turning out to be the great eugenic advances of our time."

Pastor Stephen Broden, of the Fair Park Bible Fellowship, says in the film that the first "anti-abortion groups" were started by civil rights activists who spoke out against the use of birth control and abortion to eliminate the black race "long before the contemporary pro-life groups of today existed." Support for the abortion movement among African-Americans, he said, came about in response to "powerful influential African-Americans" who were "willing to sell out the community" and who looked the other way to "advance their own personal political agendas."

The release of the film comes at the same time as it has been revealed that racist eugenics ideas had been shared by the late President Richard Nixon, who endorsed abortion for "mixed race" babies. Dr. Alveda King, Pastoral Associate of Priests for Life and niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said that Nixon's comment is "one more reminder that abortion and racism are inextricably linked."

"Since its inception, the abortion movement has been eliminating people that it considers undesirable - people of colour or those with low income."
 

To watch the trailers:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeusbhevqao  Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oV5eznv6ro  Part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ds_VQMoD5MI   Part 3

http://lifedynamics.com/Abortion_Information/Pro-life_Product/maafa.cfm#

Read the LifeSiteNews.com paper,

"The Inherent Racism of Population Control" (Adobe Reader required)

http://www.lifesitenews.com/waronfamily/Population_Control/Inherentracism.pdf 

[June 25, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com]