FIND PAST HOMEPAGE TOPICS UNDER "CURRENT HEADLINES" IN THE LEFT MENU…
NEW! Abortion Business in Montgomery, AL, has Closed
NEW! 80 British IVF Babies Aborted per Year
NEW! Abortion & Poland
NEW! Planned Parenthood in MN Prevents Parents from Talking to Daughter Prior to Abortion / 11 June Update
Florida Abortionist Randall Whitney Arrested for Aggravated Battery
Pro-Life Ad Campaign Urges Black Women to Choose Adoption Over Abortion
FDA Readies Public Hearing for Ulipristal — "ellaOne" — the Next Generation Abortion Drug / AAPLOG UPDATE 12June10
Scientific Researchers Asked by Some UN Staff & Abortion Advocates to Hide the Scientific Debate over Maternal Deaths
G8 Abortion Push Weakened as Study Finds Newborn Mortality at All-Time Low
New Study Follows the Money on Billion Dollar Abortion Industry
Abortionist under Investigation for Forced Abortion Said in Past that he “Lies” to
Patients
Commentary: The Guttmacher Institute Redefines 'Violence Against Women'
Guttmacher Institute: Ob-Gyn Residents Who Intend to Provide Abortion Services
Often Do Not
Commentary: More on Why Physicians Do Not Become Abortionists
Gendercide Comes to North America
Ethicist Shatters Myth of 'Virtually No' Canadian Late-Term Abortions
Abortion Anesthetist Allegedly Infected over 40 Women with Hepatitis C
Italian Gov't of Lombardy Offers Women $5.5K to Reject Abortion
35,000 Forced Abortions Committed Daily in China: Rep Smith
Late-Term Abortion Ups Repeat Pregnancy Termination Risk…
Beacon Abortion Business in Montgomery, AL Has Closed
According to their own website, Beacon Women's Center: "Our Montgomery location has recently closed…" Beacon is owned by Summit, a chain of abortion businesses (Greensboro, NC; Bridgeport, CT; Hartford, CT; Las Vegas; Atlanta; Detroit). In May 2006, the Summit abortion business in Birmingham, AL was closed by the AL Department of Public Health [ADPH] because of serious problems at that site.
The Deficiency report of the AL Dept of Public Health for the Montgomery Beacon site is 68 pages long; a legal source at ADPH said that instead of an revocation hearing, the owners of Beacon decided to permanently close. They signed a consent decree on 8 June 2010. They will be allowed to do follow-ups until 18 June; but no more abortions will take place… At their website, they offer a "$100 travel discount to be used at Summit Medical Associates in Atlanta, GA. Atlanta is a short 2.5 hour drive from Montgomery. You will also be offered a 1-day (instead of 2-day) procedure". As one pro-life leader noted: "Obviously, the Beacon owners are not interested in the well-being of the women getting abortions, since there are abortion sites in Montgomery & Birmingham that would be closer and thus less stressful on the women. They are just interested in getting women to 'buy' an abortion within their own chain…" [10June2010, http://summitcenters.com/summit-beacon/index.htm]
Also read 11 June 10 article — http://www.lifenews.com/state5182.html
80 British IVF Babies Aborted per Year
Figures released under Britain’s Freedom of Information Act show that an average of 80 children conceived by in vitro fertilization (IVF) and other artificial means of artificial procreation, are being aborted each year in England and Wales. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), the government body that regulates artificial reproduction practices, has revealed that some of those aborted were conceived by IVF treatments funded by the country’s tax-funded medical system, the National Health Service (NHS).
Former conservative MP Ann Widdecombe said that the figures showed children are being treated like “designer goods.”
“If the law was applied properly, people wouldn't be able to get an abortion just because they changed their minds,” Widdecombe said.
The figures show that about half of the abortions are performed out for mothers aged between 18 and 34, the age at which it is easier for women to conceive and carry children to term. The figures included those children aborted for “selective reduction,” in which one or more children are killed when too many embryos have survived implantation in the womb.
Prof. Bill Ledger, a member of the HFEA, said, “I had no idea there were so many post-IVF abortions and each one is a tragedy.”
IVF and other artificial means of procreation have been in use in Britain since the technique was pioneered with the birth of Louise Brown, touted in the media as the world’s “first” “test-tube baby,” in 1978. Since then, Britain has led the world in developing the new reproductive technologies, including cloning and genetic manipulation of embryos. The technologies have grown directly out of IVF research.
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act was passed in 1990. By 1997, 1 in 80 children (1.2%) born in Britain was the result of IVF treatment. [7June2010, Hilary White, London, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jun/10060704.html
]
Abortion & Poland
We have discussed the current Administration's (and ACOG and other groups') pervasive, persistent attempts to make elective abortion the Standard of Care in this country. It is important that you and I realize that this agenda is world-wide. The fight for Life goes beyond our borders. On the world scene, there is plenty of money and political power to push the pro-abortion agenda. On our side, our tools are the Sanctity of Human Life, and the Right of Conscience, and exposing the horrible fallout– emotional, social, and physical — that abortion visits on many women.
When the United Nations Human Rights Council was created in 2006, it established a process to review countries' human rights records every 4 years. REMEMBER, THE PRO-ABORTION MANTRA IS "LEGAL ABORTION EQUALS SAFE ABORTION EQUALS REDUCED MATERNAL MORTALITY. (Both these assertions are the Pro-Abortion Gospel on a world-wide scale.)
Although in 2006 member states rejected the proposed "Universal Access to Reproductive Health" because of its sponsors' clear intent to use this proposal as a means to promote legalization of elective abortion worldwide, the bureaucrats running the UN council keep pushing that agenda.
The current pressure on POLAND is seen below, taken from: http://spuc-director.blogspot.com/2010/06/furious-polish-diplomats-are-fighting.html
"A huge attack on Poland's restrictive abortion legislation has been launched by United Nations officials at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva this week."
UN official "Mr Grover said that in 2007 the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) voiced concern in relation to Poland's obligations on women's equal rights to access health-care services,"… (read, "TO ABORTION").
"The Polish delegate Mr. Branislav Lysák told the meeting that in the last 20 years infant mortality had dropped by 71% and maternal mortality in Poland was down by 82% in the same period. These figures according to Mr. Lysák contradict the assumption that liberalization of abortion improves maternal mortality."
"Abortion access according to Mr Lysák was available on social and economic grounds in Poland between 1956 and 1993 and Polish experience proves that there is no simple correlation between liberalization of abortion and improvement of maternal health …"Mr Lysák told the meeting that there is no universal right to abortion and regulation of that issue is the exclusive competence of States as set out in various international documents such as the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD)"
[June 9, 2010, jdc, aaplog.org]
PLANNED PARENTHOOD PREVENTS PARENTS FROM TALKING TO DAUGHTER PRIOR TO ABORTION
Last evening about 4:00 p.m., a 17 year-old girl went into Planned Parenthood in St. Paul telling the sidewalk counselor that she had gone before a judge to get permission to have an abortion without her parents' knowledge (this is the "judicial bypass" within Minnesota's Parental Notification Law). A short while later, the parents of this minor girl arrived at PP already knowing that their daughter was there for an abortion. They attempted to go into PP to see their daughter only to be denied access. They called the police who, upon arrival was told by PP officials that they had a court order for this abortion. Not knowing what to do the police told the parents that there was nothing they could do for them.
The parents remained on site seeking the opportunity to see their daughter only to be threatened with arrest for trespassing by PP officials. After a very frustrating hour or so the parents left. At about 6:15 p.m. the girl came out surrounded by a PP security official, an escort and another PP employee who walked her to her car. As of this time, we do not know if she had the abortion. It is more likely that she did.
Besides the unconscionable act of seeking to kill this baby, Planned Parenthood officials clearly violated the parent-child relationship, acting in a manner that seems to be both illegal and actionable. We will continue to find out more regarding this situation and keep everyone informed as best as possible.
This is becoming a pattern for Planned Parenthood in St. Paul. In October 2005, a judge has ruled that Planned Parenthood was guilty of breaking state law for committing an abortion on a 17-year-old minor without her parents' knowledge. This time, instead of contravening the Parental Notice law as was done in 2005, PP officials used the Parental Notice law to keep the parents from seeing their own daughter.
Planned Parenthood will do anything to legal and seemingly illegal to kill unborn babies and enslave young women in a vicious cycle of abortion for years to come. And now PP is receiving hundreds of millions of dollars from the health care reform law and is building a new mega-abortuary. We need to pray and to act.
Please keep all this in prayer in the days to come as we seek to bring the light of day on the evil actions of Planned Parenthood.
[June 4, 2010 at 5:35pm, Brian Gibson, Pro-Life Action Ministries, www.plam.org]
UPDATE. I have been asked by many people for an update regarding the parents of the minor girl who were kept from their daughter by Planned Parenthood after she arrived for an abortion on June 3.
The parents have not communicated back to us as of today. We are assuming the girl had the abortion and the family must now deal with all the consequences of that abortion. We did learn that the parents are active and regular church goers. It is not surprising that they are not returning our calls in the aftermath of this terrible situation. There is a whole lot for them to work through.
Another thing to keep in mind with this incident; not too many years ago, we had a minor girl being forcibly taken inside this same abortuary by her parents. She did not want the abortion, but her parents did. In that situation, Planned Parenthood officials rallied around the parents so that the abortion would be committed. In the June 3rd incident, Planned Parenthood officials rallied against the parents so that the abortion would be committed. The commonality with these two incidences is that Planned Parenthood and will shift to fit the circumstances that will lead to the death of an unborn baby. [11June10, Brian Gibson, PLAM Executive Director, MN] [Ed.: It's all about the money, after all…]
Florida Abortionist Randall Whitney Arrested for Aggravated Battery
Long-time Volusia County abortionist Randall B. Whitney was arrested by Orlando Police inside the Orlando Women’s Center after he slapped a woman patient while preparing her for an abortion procedure.
This is not the first time Whitney has assaulted patients. He gave up his own clinic in Daytona Beach when he decided he would rather close than face scrutiny by state investigators.
But James Pendergraft’s chain of Central Florida abortion clinics, after Pendergraft himself had his license suspended, has been desperate to find abortionists to keep their business in operation, such that they are willing to knowingly put women at risk by an aggressive man who berates and belittles women.
Randall Whitney Arrest Citation
Arrest Citation
Randall Whitney Arrest Citation – Page 2
Below is a transcript of Orlando Police arresting officer J. Hughley (emphasis ours, and patient’s last name is removed):
I,officer Hughley was sitting inside the office when I heard a OWC [Orlando Woman’s Center] patient run out of one of the rooms screaming advising the doctor has slapped her. I followed the patient outside and she advised in a sworn written statement: she went into the exam room to get an abortion procedure and the doctor was trying to find a vein to give some valium. She Amanda __ advised the doctor had poked her three times trying to get the needle in the vein. She told him the needle was not in the vein and it started to burn. Amanda advised she started screaming. The doctor took the needle out and told her to shut up because she was scaring other patients. Amanda advised she got up and told the doctor she wanted to leave, so she stood up and the doctor slapped her on the left side of the face. Amanda advised that’s when she left. She also advised she did not give the doctor permission to slap her and wishes to press charges. Due to the needle or medicine Amanda’s fingers began to turn blue, so OFD (Orlando Fire Department) was notified. When I (officer Hughley) went back inside the building, the doctor (Dr Whitney) was sitting in the front office and he advised he did slap Amanda because she was being very uncooperative and he was trying to calm her down. Assistant Sonia Merced was inside the room with Dr. Whitney, but refuse to say what happened, nor did she want to write a statement. Dr Whitney refused to write a statement also. Amanda’s face was red on the left side of the face. Whitney was arrested and transported to central booking for aggravated battery.
Whitney was arrested and taken to jail and later released on bond. He retained attorney Robert James Buonauro, an attorney who has defended Abortionist James Pendergraft in the past.
Case#: 2010-CF-004271-A-O
Next Court Date: August 20, 2010 – Case Management Conference – 9:00AM
Presiding Judge: Circuit Judge John H. Adams, Sr.
[June 6, 2010, http://prolifeflorida.com/2010/06/06/abortionist-randall-whitney-arrested-for-aggravated-battery/]
Pro-Life Ad Campaign Urges Black Women to Choose Adoption Over Abortion
Fresh from their first success, a Georgia billboard campaign exposing the abortion industry’s deliberate targeting of the black community has begun phase two: informing black women that adoption, not abortion, is the answer for a crisis pregnancy.
The new billboard campaign “Black and Unwanted,” launched by Georgia Right to Life and the Radiance Foundation, is continuing to hit home with black Americans by revealing that abortion is devastating their communities and dwindling their demographic contribution to the U.S. population.
In 2008 the Georgia Division of Health reported that 18,901 abortions were performed on black women. According to the pro-life groups behind the billboard campaign, that figure makes Georgia the leading state in the U.S. for black abortions.
“We are now emphasizing that there are alternatives to abortion, such as adoption,” Catherine Davis, Director of Minority Outreach for GRTL, told LifeSiteNews.com.
Davis said that message is the second stage of their initiative to educate Georgia’s communities about the impact of abortion, especially on blacks, “calling attention to the fact that there are other options besides terminating the life of the baby.”
The campaign has placed over sixty billboards in the cities of Augusta, Macon, and Savannah. In the next few weeks, the billboards will extend to several major thoroughfares in the Metro Atlanta area.
The first phase of the campaign was designed to alert members of the black community that there were “Too Many Aborted” black babies in comparison to the rest of the U.S. population.
"According to the CDC, African Americans have abortions at three times the rate of white women and twice the rate of all other races combined," said Ryan Bomberger, creator of the billboards and co-founder of the Radiance Foundation. Bomberger himself was adopted.
Abortion advocates say that black women have higher abortion rates because they have a higher fertility rate (16.4%) when compared with the total U.S. population (14.3%) according to the latest CDC data.
However, birth percentages from the Black community tell a different story – one of demographic death.
According to the CDC, non-Hispanic Black women accounted for just 6.8% of the total national births in 2007. Their fertility rate and birth percentages actually declined from 2006, when they accounted for 6.9% of births and had a fertility rate of 16.5.
In contrast, non-White Hispanics, who constitute 15.4% of the U.S. population, accounted for 25% of the nation’s births, increasing from 24.3% in 2006.
An astonishing fact, Davis told LSN, is that black Americans are largely unaware of how abortion has disproportionately affected them. Nine times out of ten, she said, the average black person “would not think of abortion as ‘a black issue.’ Most would characterize it as a ‘white issue.’”
When asked why, Davis explained that the overwhelmingly white face of the pro-life movement has partly contributed to this impression.
“The faces that you see praying in front of an abortion clinic, the faces that you see doing ‘operation rescue,’ and all the other things that we do to try to save the lives of babies are white faces,” she said. “Very rarely do you see black people standing in front of an abortion clinic, or even talking about abortion, it’s very hush-hush in the black community.”
However, the other side of the coin is that black women by and large do not discuss the experience of abortion – and with very few exceptions, black pastors do not talk about abortion or its spiritual ramifications. But the billboards from Radiance Foundation and GRTL have begun a long overdue conversation about the issue: the billboards continue to gain steam as mainstream outlets and talk radio shows pick up the story.
Davis said that many people in the black community have reached out via emails, blogs, twitter, and by contacting Radiance Foundation and GRTL directly. Some thank the pro-life organizations for finally opening their eyes, and others say they now feel free to share their secret experience of abortion.
Davis recalled one young black woman, who stood out as an example of the campaign’s positive impact.
“In her circle of friends, every single one of them had had abortions, but they had never spoken of it openly until those billboards went up,” said Davis. “Now they have the freedom to talk about it.”
“The impact has been tremendous,” she concluded. “And as I said, we are seeing people respond in a way that very clearly demonstrates to us that we’re having a positive impact and not a negative impact that the pro-abortion movement wants the larger community to believe.”
To find out more about the Radiance Foundation/ GRTL campaign, click here: http://www.toomanyaborted.com/
Related:
Cutting Edge Media Campaign Links Abortion to Racism
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/feb/10021502.
html
Abortion Is Devastating the African American Community… Is Anyone Noticing?
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/mar/10030202.html
[3June 2010, Peter J. Smith, Atlanta, Georgia,
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jun/10060309.html ]
FDA Readies Public Hearing for Ulipristal — "ellaOne" — the Next Generation Abortion Drug
While the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA) readies a June public hearing for a new drug billed as an advanced form of "emergency contraception," pro-life advocates are warning that ulipristal acetate is in fact the "next generation" of the abortion drug RU-486. Ulipristal acetate functions similarly to RU-486, which has been related to a number of maternal deaths both in the U.S. and abroad.
Americans United for Life filed testimony with the FDA's Advisory Committee for Reproductive Health Drugs, urging the federal drug oversight agency not to approve ulipristal acetate for sale in the U.S. or make it available over-the-counter.
"The FDA and abortion proponents are misrepresenting Ulipristal as an 'emergency contraception' drug — it's simply the next generation of RU-486," said Dr. Charmaine Yoest, President and CEO of Americans United for Life. "The American people need to know that Ulipristal is a dangerous drug that will place women's lives in danger."
The FDA advisory committee will hold a public hearing on ulipristal as the first step of the approval process. The drug, which would be marketed under the names "ella" or "ellaOne," could be taken by a woman five days after sexual intercourse.
However, a letter sent by AUL to the FDA argues that the drug does not function like other "emergency contraception" such as Plan-B, which is taken within 72 hours of intercourse. Rather, ulipristal is a much more potent abortifacient, chemically similar to the abortion drug mifepristone, the first step in the two part regimen for RU-486.
Emergency contraception works by releasing massive amounts of progesterone into a woman's body, thereby suppressing ovulation, inhibiting sperm migration and reducing sperm capacity for fertilization. The drug can act as an abortifacient if the progesterone changes the lining of the womb, preventing a newly conceived embryo from implanting.
Ulipristal is far more effective abortifacient, being a progestin-blocker, or "selective progesterone receptor modulator (SPRM)," which turns off the progesterone receptors in the body crucial not only for the beginning of pregnancy, but its successful continuance.
The AUL letter written by William L. Saunders, Senior Vice President of Legal Affairs, states that "[i]n addition to suppressing ovulation, [ulipristal], prevents the implantation of the embryo in the womb, but it directly interferes with the development of a human embryo, by blocking the genes that synthesize proteins necessary for maintaining its survival."
AUL said that the drug's chemical similarity to mifepristone, another SPRM, is reason enough for the FDA to prevent its importation into the United States.
Mifepristone has had thousands of "adverse event reports" related to its use since the FDA approved it for sale in 2000, including 13 confirmed deaths, 9 of which were reported in the U.S. AUL pointed out that by May 2006, when the FDA began reporting cases of women suffering from adverse effects of RU-486, 1070 events were recorded including "six deaths, nine life-threatening incidents, 232 hospitalizations, 116 blood transfusions, and 88 cases of infection."
A number of the victims were women with no reported prior health risk factors. AUL explained that medical literature had found that the chemical composition of mifepristone "can prevent the proper functioning of the immune system and cause fatal shock."
"Ulipristal is subject to similar risks, and unsupervised, over-the-counter access would put countless women's lives in danger," wrote Saunders.
He added that with over-the-counter availability "there will be no physician oversight or assurance of proper administration," and that the RU-486 regimen has been repeatedly abused by abortion providers in complete disregard for FDA guidelines and women's health. (See related coverage here and here)
Ulipristal was studied by the European Medicines Agency's Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP), who admitted they lacked any concrete information as to what the effects of the drug would be on women who do get pregnant. In 29 cases of women who became pregnant while testing ulipristal, 16 chose to have an induced abortion, six miscarried, another six said they were going to carry their babies to term and one was not followed up. However, five of the six were still underway with no other information offered regarding the status of their pregnancies.
CHMP also reported that they have no data as to whether the drug has any carcinogenic effects.
Read the AUL testimony provided to the FDA — http://www.aul.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/ulipristal-statement.pdf
Read the CHMP report on ulipristal acetate — http://www.ema.europa.eu/humandocs/PDFs/EPAR/ellaone/H-1027-en6.pdf
Read related coverage by LifeSiteNews.com:
What Happened to 'Next Thursday'?
Pro-life blogger concerned after RU-486 abortion Tweeter goes silent
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/mar/10031208.html
Oregon Planned Parenthood Offers RU-486 Abortion in 'Privacy of Their Home'
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/feb/10022513.html
Planned Parenthood Implicated in RU-486 Deaths of Four Women
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jun/08061907.html
Two More Women Die After Medical Abortion with Abortion Pill RU-486, FDA Warns
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/mar/06031702.html
Leading Researcher Proves RU-486 Causes Septic Shock Deaths
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/jul/05072802.html
[2June2010, Peter J. Smith, D.C., http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jun/10060211.html ]
EllaOne: AAPLOG UPDATE 12 June 2010
Ella-one is the newest emergency contraceptive agent, now commercially available in Europe. Ellaone is first cousin to Mifepristone (RU 486), the "medical abortion" drug that kills the baby by blocking placental function. Ellaone has the same action. The generic name is Ulipristal, and on June 17, the FDA will hold a hearing regarding accepting this drug as a new "emergency contraceptive" in the U.S.A.
This drug is clearly an abortifacient agent. Ulipristal acetate prevents progesterone from occupying its receptor, thus the gene transcription normally turned on by progesterone is blocked, and the proteins necessary to begin and maintain pregnancy are not synthesized."
Remember that ACOG defines pregnancy as starting with implantation. Ulipristal blocks implantation. So, although it kills an embryonic human baby, by their definition it would not abort a pregnancy.. You sort that one out.
Ulipristal acts as EC up to five days after fertilization. Implantation takes place 5 to 6 days after fertilization—at which point the progesterone blocker is in place, and implantation will be blocked or compromised.
AAPLOG has given testimony to the FDA objecting to approving Ulipristal for the U.S. market. We urge
you to read our testimony at: http://www.aaplog.org/?page_id=808
AAPLOG has concluded from publicly available information that ulipristal acetate is
an abortifacient of the same type as mifepristone ("RU-486") and that its approval as an emergency contraceptive raises serious health and ethical issues. Furthermore, ulipristal's potential effects on women who used the drug off-label and upon ongoing pregnancies are essentially unexamined and untested.
Ulipristal's ability to destroy established pregnancies, as well as prevent implantation, makes it an embryocidal drug. If FDA were to approve NDA 22-274 without making clear to the public that ulipristal has a substantial abortifacient capability – that action would violate the public trust granted FDA by Congress. Ulipristal's abortifacient mechanisms require that any approval occur with significant distribution restrictions and heightened notice to potential users.
Now you have met Ella One. We predict you will be dealing with its fallout in the future. Look for the FDA decision after the June 17 hearing.
[AAPLOG email, 12June2010]
Researchers Asked to Hide Scientific Debate over Maternal Deaths
[Comment from Friday Fax: We report exclusively that UN staff and abortion activists have asked researchers to hide the scientific debate over maternal mortality numbers. Lots of money hangs in the balance. All of this occurred at a Washington DC conference that convened last week to prepare for the Women Deliver Conference which starts next week.]
At a meeting on maternal and child health research in Washington last week, United Nations (UN) staff and abortion advocates told scientists they should “harmonize” their findings or discuss them “in a locked room” so that the press could not report maternal death numbers that conflicted with the ones they use to lobby policy makers and major international donors.
Ann Starrs, co-founder and president of the abortion advocacy organization Family Care International (FCI), told a roomful of scientists to “lock all the academics in a black box and have them come out with a consensus set of numbers” or “at least hide that there is disagreement” and “infighting.”
FCI is the founder of Women Deliver, which is hosting a massive [pro-abortion] UN-backed reproductive rights fundraising conference in Washington next week.
The comments were made at a symposium hosted by the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) and the British medical journal, The Lancet.
The journal recently published an IHME study, which refuted the UN-sanctioned but highly controversial figure of 500,000 annual maternal deaths, finding the number to have declined to 342,900 including 60,000 deaths from HIV/AIDS.
Abortion advocates and some UN staff have been using the higher figure for two decades to promote a version of maternal and child health policy that includes abortion.
Tessa Wardlow, Chief of Statistics and Monitoring at UNICEF, shared Starrs’ concerns, saying that there is a “system in place for harmonizing estimates for child mortality and I would invite the IHME to participate in that process and contribute to the methodological dialogue.”
Dr. Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, pushed back saying researchers should not come to a “consensus” or “harmonize” but rather have a “scientific summary view of what the totality of available evidence should be.”
Horton argued that this should not be centered at the UN, but housed “independently within the scientific community.”
Horton responded to Starr’s objection by saying, “Unless we subject numbers to that peer-review process, I think we are accepting second-class data, and that applies wherever the numbers come from.”
When he published the IHME study, Horton told the press that he withstood significant pressure from activists not to release it until after major global funding conferences concluded this year, such as the G8 summit, UN General Assembly, and next week’s Women Deliver conference.
Highlighting the tension in the room between the researchers’ desire for openness and activists call for secrecy, Horton said, “For God’s sake, your country, the United States, was founded on the press! One of the best documents in the history of humankind is the Federalist Papers; if it wasn’t for the press, we wouldn’t have a United States! So learn to love the press.”
The confrontation between the maternal health advocates and researchers may be behind the decision by Women Deliver conference organizers to re-write their schedule to include Dr. Horton in the agenda for next week’s conference.
[3June2010, Friday Fax, Volume 13, Number 25, Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D. Co-authored by Catherine Foster, NEW YORK, http://www.c-fam.org/publications/id.1641/pub_detail.asp]
G8 Abortion Push Weakened as Study Finds Newborn Mortality at All-Time Low
A new report released yesterday demonstrates that worldwide mortality for children under age 5 has dropped at a rate faster than expected and shows that child mortality is falling in every region of the world – a 35% reduction since 1990. The same prestigious institute that reported a significant drop in maternal mortality last month, the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington, today reported great progress in saving the lives of young children around the world.
The Parliamentary Network for Critical Issues (PNCI) believes that the study will help lawmakers globally advance life-affirming health policies as they work to achieve Millennium Development Goal 4 which calls for a two-thirds reduction in mortality in children under 5 years of age by 2015.
According to PNCI Director, Marie Smith, "This study is welcome news to all those who labor to save the lives of children, born and unborn, around the world. It clearly documents that more newborns are surviving, including in developing countries. The overall number of children under five receiving critical health care to treat and prevent disease and illness shows the importance of access to life-affirming health care to achieve MDG 4."
"The push to integrate efforts to reduce child and newborn mortality and the reduction of maternal mortality with the full gamut of so-called reproductive health services, including abortion, has been set back once again by reliable data and facts. This is critically important as world leaders prepare to meet at G-8 Summit in Canada and debate ways to improve maternal and child health.
"Canadian Prime Minister Harper should be heartened by this study which supports his bold stand against inclusion of abortion in a new global initiative on maternal and child health. The data from countries which protect unborn children from the violence of abortion clearly shows significant progress in reducing child mortality through practices which save lives."
The study published in Lancet, Neonatal, postneonatal, childhood, and under-5 mortality for 187 countries, 1970-2010: a systematic analysis of progress towar
ds Millennium Development Goal 4, shows worldwide mortality dropping from 11.9 million deaths in 1990 to 7.7 million deaths in 2010 and includes all regions of the world.
Smith adds, "This study shows a decline in child mortality within sub-Saharan Africa including in Angola, Botswana, Cameroon, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Swaziland, and The Gambia. Many of these countries have been facing international pressure to legalize abortion."
The lead author of the study and Assistant Professor of Global Health at IHME Julie Knoll Rajaratnam stated, "Previous estimates had shown child deaths falling slowly and neonatal deaths nearly at a standstill. We were able to double the amount of data and improve the accuracy of our estimates to find that children are doing better today than at any time in recent history, especially in the first month of life."
This new data demonstrates that 31 developing countries are on pace to meet Millennium Development Goal 4 by 2015 including Brazil, Mexico, Malaysia, and Egypt–all of which have laws restricting access to abortion. The study was funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
PNCI believes this new data will assist elected officials devise policies that build on proven methods that save and protect the lives of all children, born and unborn. [May 26, 2010, www.LifeSiteNews.com, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/may/10052603.html
New Study Follows the Money on Billion Dollar Abortion Industry
Vicki Evans, a Respect Life Coordinator in San Francisco, has just published a 72 page study focused on the commercial markets created by legalized abortion. The study is her thesis for the licentiate in bioethics that Evans just earned from a university in Rome.
According to this story, the study shows that:"Abortion in the United States has become a $1 billion-a-year industry quietly fostered over 40 years by a climate that is allowing related, morally suspect commercial offshoots to develop in pharmaceuticals, cosmetics and life sciences, a new study alleges."
Among the highlights of her findings:
– There were 1,787 abortion providers in the United States in 2005.
– Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s abortion market share grew from 12% in 1997 to nearly 25% in 2008.
– “PPFA presents a comprehensive case study on how business evolves to capitalize on changes in the law and the prevailing culture": During the 1990 through 2008 election cycles, the abortion industry made political contributions of $15.76 million. Of this amount, $12.61 million, or 80%, went to abortion-supportive Democrats running for office.
– The predominant industries engaged in fetal tissue research are part of the emerging life-science industry: the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and biologics sectors. Commercial use of fetal tissue has historically revolved around the production of childhood vaccines but is now expanding into vaccines to treat flu, HIV and more.
– The cosmetics industry, particularly the anti-aging market segment, is a beneficiary of the growth of abortion. From miracle creams and emulsions developed using fetal-cell technologies, to face lifts and cosmetic procedures injecting aborted fetal tissue to promote youth and vitality, this business sector has an “enormous and increasing demand” for fetal cells and organs."
– A fetal parts industry could not have developed without a legal and protected abortion structure. Millions of fetuses that are by-products of abortion cannot technically be bought and sold, but a market does exist.
Published: 5/11/10 03:27 PM – By Terrence McKeegan, J.D.
Abortionist under Investigation for Forced Abortion Said in Past He “Lies” to Patients
A Michigan abortionist is under renewed scrutiny over comments he made over two years ago, in which he said that doctors have a license to “lie” to their patients.
The comments were made by Dr. Abraham Alberto Hodari to medical students at Wayne University. Hodari currently is facing a lawsuit for allegedly forcing a woman to submit to an abortion after she had changed her mind, killing the unborn baby that she had decided she wanted.
“My wife says we doctors have a license to lie, and it’s true, it’s absolutely true. Sometimes you need to lie to a patient about things that they want to do or no,” Hodari told a gathering at Wayne State University on November 9, 2007.
He said it was not so much the case today, saying that the reason is that women “are more educated, between CNN and the internet, the patients are more educated about what we do.”
He then added, “I have great satisfaction about what I do, and I never feel bad or worried about doing abortions.”
Hodari’s remarks have only added more ammunition to the lawsuit pending against him in Genessee County Circuit Court.
NBC25 reported on the comments and asked for an explanation from the abortionist. Hodari claimed that he was only referring to situations where the woman’s life would be in danger, and said that a doctor must “never” tell a patient “you’re going to die.”
“And in that respect, yes, we lie,” insisted Hodari.
However, the context of Hodari’s remarks, in which he mentioned how proud he was to be an abortionist, had nothing to do with telling women that they were dying.
Caitlin Bruce is one ex-client of Hodari, who claims he did exactly to her what he told the Wayne medical students: lied to her, and forced her to abort a baby she wanted. Bruce that Hodari and his assistant forcibly held her down to the operating table and "ripped the life out of me that day."
Bruce’s alleged forced abortion happened at Hodari’s Flint abortion center, the Feminine Health Care Clinic.
Tom R. Pabst, Bruce’s attorney, told NBC25 that Hodari violated Bruce’s right to back out of a medical procedure and the video will serve as evidence against him.
"Whether it's a sexual advance or a medical procedure, if she says, ‘No, stop,’ that's the end of it," Pabst told the local news station.
"What he’s saying is that he knows what’s better for your body than you do, and he’s going to go ahead and do what he thinks is best for a woman’s body, not the woman. To me he’s got it flipped."
Bruce's story aligns with testimonies from other women who have described similar horror stories of coerced abortions at Hodari's hands. A report by Operation Rescue shows Hodari has a record of 49 documented lawsuits over a span of decades.
Hodari's practice has also been implicated in the deaths of at least four women from abortion-related complications. In June 2009, the Disciplinary Subcommittee of Michigan's Board of Medicine fined Hodari $10,000 for negligence in connection with the botched abortion death of Regina Johnson.
Numerous complaints have been filed against the abortionist for improper disposal of human remains and abortion records found in Hodari's dumpster. Hodari received a sentence of six months' probation on one such count in February.
In November, Hodari put his abortion clinics on the market along with his collection of expensive classic cars and hastily filed for divorce fr
om his wife of 29 years. Local activists told Operation Rescue that it appeared that he was attempting to liquidate his assets so he could flee the country, possibly to his former home in Argentina.
Related:
Abortionist Hodari Officially Under Investigation for Forced Abortions
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/feb/10020106.html
Alleged Forced Abortion Victim Says Abortionist "Ripped the Life" Out of Her
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/nov/09112412.html
Forced Abortion, Rape Victim Comes Forward After Abortionist Given Slap on the Wrist
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/feb/09021102.html
[May 25, 2010, P. J. Smith, Detroit, MI, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/may/10052508.html ]
Commentary: The Guttmacher Institute Redefines 'Violence Against Women'
by Brian Clowes
The Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI) is at it again.
For those not familiar with AGI, it is a $30-million-a-year research group based in Washington, D.C., and New York City. Named for Alan Guttmacher, former president of Planned Parenthood, the mission of the organization is to "advance sexual and reproductive health" around the world. This makes sense, since it was founded in 1968 as the research arm of the largest chain of abortion mills in the United States, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), which currently carries out more than 300,000 abortions annually.
In other words, a person who believes in AGI's impartiality on abortion will be the kind of person who believes in the Tobacco Institute's impartiality about the harmful effects of cigarettes. However, without the slightest admission of conflict of interest, AGI churns out dozens of reports every year supporting unlimited access to abortion.
Its most recent effort — "Male Reproductive Control of Women Who Have Experienced Intimate Partner Violence in the United States" — attempts to demonstrate that "male reproductive control — which takes place when a woman's partner imposes his reproductive intentions on her through intimidation, threats or actual violence — occurs among women who have experienced intimate partner violence."
The report tries to show that women who have experienced intimate partner violence consistently have poor sexual and reproductive health (SRH). SRH is generally defined as access to contraception, sterilization, and abortion without impediment. "Intimate partners" are guilty of "reproductive control" when they impede women's access to SRH in any way, shape, or form.
You can probably see where all of this is leading.
The report claims that a man is guilty of unwarranted "reproductive control" if he is "not giving the woman money to buy contraception or obtain an abortion." "Coercion" includes "if a man wanted a woman to get pregnant."
By AGI definitions, then, a man can only avoid being labeled a "reproductive controller" if he never expresses any opinion whatsoever as to whether he wants a child and lets the woman make all of the decisions without his input — in other words, the radical feminist's ideal man. Of course, this "ideal man" must also keep his mouth shut when paying for all of her reproductive decisions without question, whether it be footing the bill for an abortion (even if he is pro-life) or paying for however many children the woman wants to bear.
Naturally, AGI does not mention any cases where a woman might be found guilty of "reproductive control." What if she gets an abortion over the man's objections? What if she sleeps with a man, lies about being on the birth control pill, and then has a child that she demands child support for?
As always, the pro-choice mindset is blind to inequality committed against men.
This follows from the strange idea that men and women are entirely separate and autonomous entities, able to make important decisions without the slightest concern for whatever consequences may befall the other partner or the relationship itself.
As the AGI report says, "We posit that it is ideal for women to have reproductive autonomy which we use to mean a woman's ability to make independent decisions about her reproduction."
To its credit, the AGI report states that "reproductive control" also includes "perpetuating violence against [a woman] in order to cause a miscarriage or kill the fetus." The report mentions this type of violence several times, but the overwhelming emphasis of the study consists of condemning men who want to impede women from having abortions. Ann Moore, senior research associate at AGI and lead author of the study, even says, "We believe that reproductive control is, itself, a form of intimate partner violence, and one worthy of public health attention."
Got that? If you are a man who has any opinions at all about your wife's (or girlfriend's) reproductive life, you are a "reproductive controller" and therefore guilty of domestic violence.
This is a theme pro-abortionists have been pushing hard over the last decade.
I have done years of research on abortion-related violence and have encountered hundreds of cases where men committed violence against women in connection with their decisions to have or not have abortions.
Based on all available research between 1973 to the present, there is exactly one case where a woman was murdered for having an abortion, and more than one hundred documented cases where a woman was murdered or beaten so badly she miscarried for refusing an abortion.
These atrocities are documented at www.abortionviolence.com
All such instances, however, are ignored by AGI in its supposedly thorough report. They have a story to tell, after all, and men hurting women who refuse to have abortions doesn't fit their narrative. AGI researchers are very good at drawing subtle connections between trends that have little or nothing to do with each other, while at the same time ignoring strong connections that undermine the "pro-choice" philosophy or the drive for population control.
The AGI study relies heavily on several analyses of violence against women conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO), an agency of the United Nations. Interestingly, not one of these WHO studies mentions forced abortions or any other kind of violence against women who do not want to abort. This may be related to the fact that the United Nations Population Fund, one of WHO's sister agencies, pioneered, helped implement, and actively supports the Chinese forced-abortion program.
Perhaps AGI can explain why it is "violence" to force a woman to have an abortion in the United States, but it is not "violence" to force millions of Chinese women to have abortions, often in the last trimester.
Part of the Guttmacher Institute's stated mission is to "encourage enlightened public debate." If it is serious about this goal, it should at least attempt to examine all sides of the issue.
[5/06/10, Brian Clowes is the director of r
esearch and training for Human Life International. He has written nine books and over 90 scholarly and popular articles and has been active in the pro-life movement for more than two decades.]
Guttmacher Institute: Ob-Gyn Residents Who Intend to Provide Abortion Services Often Do Not
Opposition to abortion within the health care community—rather than fear of public harassment —is a major factor preventing new physicians from becoming abortion providers, according to “Obstacles to the Integration of Abortion into Obstetrics and Gynecology Practice,” by Lori Freedman et al., of the University of California, San Francisco.
The authors conducted in-depth interviews with 30 obstetrician-gynecologists who had graduated 5–10 years earlier from residency programs that included abortion training. They found that although 18 had planned to offer elective abortions after their residency, only three were actually doing so.
The majority reported that they were unable to provide abortions because of the formal and informal policies restricting abortion provision imposed by their private group practices, employers and hospitals… Respondents indicated that the strain abortion provision might put on their relationships with superiors and coworkers was also a deterrent.
The findings, the authors assert, run counter to the prevailing assumption that physicians avoid abortion provision out of fear of violence or harassment.
The authors observe that new physicians often lack the professional support and autonomy necessary to perform abortions, but that training programs may be able to help prepare them to continue providing abortions as they make the transition from residency programs to practice…
The article is currently available online and will appear in the September 2010 issue of Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health.
[25May 2010, Guttmacher Institute, http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2010/05/25/index.html ]
Commentary: More on Why Physicians Do Not Become Abortionists
by Dave Andrusko
Thanks to each and every one of you whose responses signal that you were as fascinated as I was by the counter-intuitive study coming out in the Guttmacher Institute's Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health. Let me immediately clarify.
The results were exactly what we would have expected: the primary reasons would-be abortionists remain healers is not fear of harassment but disapproval from institutions and colleagues. That this came from the shop that was formerly Planned Parenthood's think-tank–well, that came as a shock.
I mentioned yesterday that I would comment further as soon as we got something besides a press release and a synopsis of the study conducted by Lori Freedman, Uta Landy, Philip Darney, and Jody Steinauer. I didn't realize that we could secure the full article–which will be in the journal in September–by paying online ahead of time.
You probably remember the general picture from Tuesday's TN&V. In 2006 in-depth interviews were conducted "with 30 obstetrician-gynecologists who had graduated 5–10 years earlier from residency programs that included abortion training."
They found that "Eighteen physicians had wanted to offer elective abortions after residency, but only three were doing so at the time of the interview."
What new is added by reading the full report? Motivation is clearer for Obstacles to the Integration of Abortion Into Obstetrics and Gynecology Practice.
A study had appeared in 2008 in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. The major finding is that "only half of residents who intend to continue provide abortion after residency ultimately do." Being passionately pro-abortion these authors wanted to know what were "some of the obstacles"?
Fear of harassment is far down the ladder explaining why abortion has not been "integrated into medical practice." The real explanation is resistance by colleagues and institutions.
Most would-be abortionists "desire to avoid conflict," we read, which is "highly pervasive, but unsurprising, given the persistent controversy that profoundly affects physician behavior and patient care surrounding abortion." Put another way, the authors tell us, "Ultimately, the stigma of abortion and ideological disagreement are at the root of the policy restrictions and collegial strain surrounding abortion."
Okay, what do these pro-abortionists see as the remedy? Have residency programs figure out "what kinds of information and resources might help them to continue performing abortion if they so wish."
How about some help in "instruction on skills need for contract negotiation or on leadership skills related to conflict management and change of practice"? What else might be "beneficial," according to the authors? "Linking new physicians with colleagues and community members who support abortion provision."
The most nefarious "solution" is for residency programs to "adopt values clarification curricula." What would this accomplish? "[T]hey would help physicians develop tolerance for practice diversity, as well as a nuanced understanding of distinctions between personal beliefs and professional obligations."
They add wistfully, "Use of values clarification curricula could slowly change the culture of obstetrics and gynecological practice."
Thank you, no. Shelving ones personal religious and ethical objections to the slaughter of unborn children is not a "professional obligation," but an abandonment of what makes medicine a honorable and noble calling.
[26May 2010, NRL News Today, Dave Andrusko, http://www.nrlc.org/NewsToday/NoAbortionists.html
SEE ALSO: http://www.nrlc.org/News_and_Views/May10/nv052510.html ; Dr. Watson, 29May2010]
Gendercide Comes to North America
The National Catholic Register recently reported on the Economist’s gendercide article. The Register points out that the killing of baby girls is not limited to Asian countries, but has come to Canada and the United States.
Most populations can naturally expect a balance of slightly more boys born than girls, a range of about “103 to 105 baby boys for every 100 baby girls,” according to known demographer Nicholas Eberstadt.
In Canada, some communities with large Asian populations are showing 116 to 109 baby boys born for every 100 girls. In the United States similar numbers are seen among Korean, Chinese and Indian immigrants.
The Register goes on to discuss some of the dilemmas that doctors are facing today. Published: 5/10/10 10:00 PM – By Hannah Russo
Filed Under : Abortion
Ethicist Shatters Myth of 'Virtually No' Canadian Late-Term Abortions
After surveying available statistics on Canadian abortions, a prominent ethicist at McGill University has taken apart the myth that few late-term abortions are committed in the country.
Margaret Somerville, the Samuel Gale Professor of Law, and the Founding Director of the Faculty of Law's Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law at McGill stated in an a
rticle in the Montreal Gazette that there are two abortion myths in Canada: "one is that there is a general consensus on the issue (of abortion) and the other is that late-term abortions are rare. Both are wrong."
Somerville quotes Margaret Wente, who wrote recently in the Globe and Mail that "there are virtually no late-term abortions" in Canada. The Canadian Medical Association considers a child viable after 20 weeks gestation.
After she suspected that the facts about "an issue as ethically fraught as abortion" might be intentionally made difficult to obtain, Somerville found that "not only do we not have them, but they are intentionally not gathered or, if some are or might be available, access to them is denied."
Somerville says that, when she contacted Statistics Canada to inquire about late-term abortion numbers, she was told that "they were instructed for political reasons not to collect statistics on the gestational age at which abortion occurs," but also that "hospitals must report the number of abortions and about 45 per cent had continued to report gestational age."
From such unsolicited reports, she writes, "it's known that at least 400 post-viability abortions take place in Canada each year and the actual number is most probably more than twice that."
Furthermore, Somerville found that the organization recorded some late-term abortions in a category that includes infanticide: "Statistics Canada's records on causes of death in the perinatal period (defined as after 22-weeks gestation) list a category 'Termination of pregnancy, fetus and newborn,' which shows a total of 241 deaths for the years 2000 to 2005, inclusive, the latest numbers available," she notes.
Somerville recounts that she had been professionally consulted on two late-term abortions, one at 34 weeks and another at 32 weeks, both of which were carried out. In the latter case, she said, the child's married parents "did not want to have a 'defective child' – the baby had a cleft palate (a relatively minor physical deformity that can be largely corrected with surgery)."
Considering the blocking of abortion information, Somerville mentions the case of two British Columbia hospitals, Vancouver General and Kelowna General, that have blocked a freedom-of-information inquiry initiated by local pro-life activists in the province.
British Columbia's Freedom of Information Act was amended in 2001 to deny access to information about abortion – but the pro-lifers argue that the release of the information is in the public interest and should not be suppressed.
“If abortion statistics are going to be hidden in British Columbia, they will be hidden everywhere,” said John Hof, head of Campaign Life Coalition (CLC) BC, one of the petitioners. “What better way to win an argument – 'Oh, how can you prove that? There's no counting of those numbers.'”
Somerville argues that such obstructions raise ethical issues. "Such blocking is not neutral, but a strategy to help to maintain the status quo of the complete void regarding abortion law," she explains.
"The unavailability of this information makes the pro-choice lobby's claims that late-term abortion is rare and that there is a consensus on abortion in Canada, much less likely to be challenged, and, therefore, bolsters its case that we do not need any law on abortion."
Somerville concludes that, though politicians and pro-abortion advocates are "terrified of an abortion debate," they should respond to Quebec Cardinal Marc Ouellet's recent demand for a national debate on abortion…
[2June2010, T.M. Baklinski, MONTREAL, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jun/10060202.html ]
Abortion Anesthetist Allegedly Infected over 40 Women with Hep C
At least 44 women have now been infected by Hepatitis C after attending Croydon Day Surgery, Victoria's only late-term abortion clinic, in north-eastern Melbourne.
Half of these cases can be definitively traced to the same strain infecting Dr. James Latham Peters, an anesthetist at the clinic. Dr. Peters is under investigation by the Victoria Police and the Medical Practitioners Board of Victoria; some say he may have deliberately infected the women.
"The more cases that we find, it becomes more and more difficult to explain this by accidental means," said Dr. John Carnie, Victoria's chief health officer.
In April LifeSiteNews.com reported that 12 women were infected with Hepatitis C following treatment by Dr. Peters between June 2008 and December 2009. The state Department of Health had noticed a cluster of three Hepatitis C-infected women who had attended the clinic and found the others after further investigation.
The Health Department has since advised more than 1100 women treated at the clinic in 2008 and 2009 to be tested for Hepatitis C. According to The Age, Dr. Carnie says that up to 3600 patients, going as far back as 2006, may need to be tested.
''As we go back further to 2007 and earlier, if we don't get any positives then we could be sure that the risk was confined to 2008 and 2009," he said.
Hepatitis C is generally spread via blood, although it can also be sexually transmitted. It can cause cirrhosis or liver cancer. Although accidental needle stick injuries sometimes cause it to spread, Dr. Carnie has said it is hard to imagine that such injuries could explain the present outbreak.
"Needle stick injuries are one method of possible transmission," he said. "It is difficult to identify how this could happen with more than, say, one or two patients."
In 1996, Dr. James Latham Peters pled guilty to 20 charges related to providing a two-year supply of painkillers to his wife, Julia Peters, was also found guilty of 41 charges. Sources indicate that Croydon Day Surgery was aware of Dr. Peters' problems with the abuse of intravenous drugs.
Additionally, the Herald Sun reported, that just this year Dr. Peters was sentenced for possession of child pornography.
The Ministry of Health in New Zealand is also searching for 55 New Zealand women who were clients of Croydon Day Surgery between January 2006 and December 2009 to see if they are infected.
Croydon Day Surgery is part of Planned Parenthood of Australia Group.
Paula Shelton of Slater and Gordon law firm has said 30 women with Hepatitis C are considering mounting a class action suit against Dr. Peters. She said that the women were devastated by the discovery of their infection.
"'You know, when you put your trust in someone going into surgery you don't expect this kind of thing to happen," said Shelton.
The class action might also target Croydon Day Surgery and the Medical Practitioners Board.
"My concern about the board is that they were aware of potential problems with this particular doctor," Shelton said. "I believe there was some testing over a period of time and then he's just been let go and practised completely unrestricted."
Paula Shelton added that there might very well be more infections. "It would not surprise me if we ended up with, you know, 100 infections from this incident."
Women who attended Croydon Day Surgery from 2006 to 2009 should contact Victoria's Hepatitis C information line at 1300 365 677.
See related stories at LifeSiteNews.com:
Abortion Clinic Anesthetist Accused of Infecting 12 Women with H
epatitis C
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/apr/10041205.html
[2June2010, James Tillman, MELBOURNE, Australia, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jun/10060212.html ]
Lombardy in Italy Offers Women $5.5K to Reject Abortion
Women in Italy's northern region of Lombardy who are considering abortion out of financial fears, will be offered monetary assistance of up to €4500 (US $5500) per year, Roberto Formigoni, president of the regional government announced last month. The Lombardy regional government has offered pregnant women in financial difficulties €250 for 18 months after the birth of their child.
"No woman will abort in Lombardy because of economic difficulties," Formigoni said during the regional elections in March.
The Italian birth rate is at an all-time low, with 1.32 children born per woman, far from the rate of 2.1 needed to maintain a stable population. Italy ranks 206th of 223 countries in fertility rates and is expecting dramatic reductions in population over the next decades.
The compensation project, said Lomardy's family commissioner Julius Boscagli, is timely now that economic and social instability is pushing more women into abortions.
Formigoni, founder with Rocco Buttiglione of the socially conservative United Christian Democrats party, has been accused by feminists of using the abortion issue as a conservative propaganda effort. But Boscagli responded, saying, "Our measure was born of experience and the results obtained from those who work in the field for decades closely with women's problems."
"This is not demagoguery," Boscagli said. "And it is interesting to note that those who make the law 194 [Italy's abortion law] a flag of progress always forget the first two articles of the law". These state that regions must take "necessary steps to ensure that abortion is not used for limiting births" and that women receive maternity assistance after difficult births.
"What we are doing in Lombardy with the primary objective to minimize the tragedy of abortion," he said. [2June2010, Hilary White, MILAN, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jun/10060205.html ]
35,000 Forced Abortions Committed Daily in China: Rep Smith
About 35,000 abortions are committed daily on women who are victimized by the country's coercive one-child policy, said Congressman Chris Smith Tuesday.
Smith spoke at a lunch discussion entitled “No Choice Allowed: China’s Hollow Celebration of International Children’s Day” on June 1.
The leading pro-life congressman was joined by four other panelists, including T. Kumar, Asia Director for Amnesty International, in a lunch-hour meeting that addressed the grave systemic consequences of China’s one-child policy and the efforts various organizations are initiating to speak out for women and children’s rights in China.
One such group is the All Girls Allowed Initiative of the Jenzabar Foundation, cofounded by panelist Chai Ling, a leader of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, who thanked Smith for his well-known work in defense of women’s rights and global justice.
“We are honored to have Congressman Smith add his voice to our initiative for freedom and justice for these brutally abused women and children,” said Chai Ling.
Smith is a staunch advocate for human life and freedom in the U.S. and around the world, and his legislative initiatives have been instrumental in protecting women in cases of human-trafficking, rape, sexual assault, and domestic violence.
In his capacity as Commissioner of the Congressional Executive Commission on China, Smith has presided over more than 20 Congressional hearings on the issue of human rights, forced abortion and women’s rights in China in his 28 years of service in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Panelist Reggie Littlejohn, president of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, a nonprofit anti-sex slavery group, told the gathering that "over 400 million children are not living in China because of the one-child policy. That's more than the population of the United States."
"Many people in America know about the one-child policy but don't know it leads to forced abortions," Littlejohn said, and related from personal contact with victims how women are taken against their will to hospitals and subjected to abortions.
The lunch panel discussion, attended by about 70 people, was hosted by the Jenzabar Foundation, the ChinaAid Association, and Women’s Rights Without Frontiers.
In an interview after the discussion, Rep. Smith said that a focus on education and literacy would give people in China the opportunity to decide to have fewer children without government coercion.
"But (population control) never has to be through killing a child," Smith said, as reported by the Washington Times.
[3June 2010, T. M. Baklinski, DC, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jun/10060302.html ]
Late-Term Abortion Ups Repeat Pregnancy Termination Risk
Women who have an abortion in the second trimester of pregnancy are more likely than women who terminate their pregnancies earlier to have repeat abortions, new research shows.
And women who initially have a late abortion are also substantially more likely to have a second late abortion, Dr. Oskari Heikinheimo of Helsinki University Hospital in Finland and colleagues found. They also found that being younger than 20 sharply increased a woman's risk of having repeat abortions, and of having repeat late abortions.
The further along a woman is in her pregnancy the more risky it is to terminate the pregnancy, the researchers note in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology.
"Several studies have shown that the later the abortion is performed, the greater the risk of complications is," Heikinheimo explained in an email to Reuters Health. "The most common complications are bleeding and infection."
Abortion is still very common around the world even though birth control options have improved in recent years. Late termination of pregnancy — meaning abortion at 13 weeks gestation or later — represents 5 to 10 percent of all abortions, the researchers note, while from 30 to 47 percent of women who have an abortion will have another later on.
To better understand factors associated with repeat abortion, as well as risk factors for having an abortion after the first trimester, Heikinheimo and colleagues looked at 41,750 Finnish women who had an abortion between 2000 and 2005 — 1,900 of whom terminated their pregnancies in the second trimester.
Compared with women who had first trimester abortions, those who had second-trimester abortions were 40 percent more likely to have had a second abortion by the end of 2006, the researchers found, while they were nearly four times as likely to have a second late abortion, and five times as likely to have an abortion after 16 weeks' gestation.
And women younger than 20 years old were seven times as likely as older women to have repeat abortions, and more than 12 times as likely to have a second abortion during their second trimester of pregnancy.
Lack of access to abortions was unlikely to be a factor in whether or not women had late abortions, the researchers note, given that
by Finnish law there must be "no unnecessary delays" in performing abortion once a woman decides to apply for one; also, almost all of the abortions in the study were done in public hospitals.
"Late abortion might also be a 'marker' for difficulty in a young woman's ability to manage her own life," Heikinheimo told Reuters Health. "So these women need special care, such as easy access to reproductive services and provision of free of charge contraception."
The best strategy to helping at-risk women avoid having repeat abortions, he added, would include counseling and making free, long-acting reversible methods of contraception easily available.
"Sexually active and highly fertile young people need high quality services and effective contraception," he added. "The services must be provided so that they are easy to access and reach."
SOURCE: http://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378 [page not found; link incorrect](10)00291-7/abstract
American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology (AJOG), online May 4, 2010.
[2June 2010, Anne Harding, New York, Reuters Health, http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65169Q20100602