The Presidential Administration's Pro-Abortion Record: A Compilation
The National Black ProLife Union, AAPLOG, and Abortion in the Black Community / Maafa 21
Confronting Abortion on Facebook
Politics Trumps Women's Health: Quebec Health Minister Exempts Abortion Facilities from New Surgical Clinic Law
Judge: SD Doctors Must Say Abortion Ends Life
Commentary: What Abortion-Minded Mothers Really Want: The Facts
Star Parker Commentary: Alaska Parents Deserve the Truth on Their Daughters' Abortion
British Mother of Disabled Newborn Child Tells Moms Don't Have an Abortion
Mayo Clinic Doctor Admits Abortions Hurt Women, Cause Premature Births
"Pro-Choice" Abortionist Interviewer Surprised by Her Reaction to Witnessing Abortion
Four Former Employees Come Forward with Accusations of Illegal, Unsafe Conditions at Carhart's Abortion Business
Documentary 'Blood Money' Seeks to Expose the Abortion Business
Most Ob/Gyns in Canada Don't Do Abortions, Survey Finds
RU 486 Death Toll Revised Upward
StopTheAbortionMandate.com Launches Video Galvanizing "Largest Pro-Life Coalition Ever Assembled"…
The Obama Administration Pro-Abortion Record: A Compilation
http://www.lifenews.com/obamaabortionrecord.html
The National Black ProLife Union, a group of African-American religious leaders, held a press conference in Washington D.C. on August 18.
Listen to 3 short video clips at http://www.criticalmention.com/vg/crc/WIN/
www.nationalblackprolifeunion.com
Note: Black unborn babies are killed at a rate THREE TIMES that of non-black unborn babies.
Maafa 21: http://www.maafa21.com/
Also for the complete AAPLOG statement, go to http://www.aaplog.org/latebreakingnews.aspx
The AAPLOG written statement for the press conference follows, in part:
Caring for each patient, by first doing no harm, has been a core precept of the medical profession since the time of Hippocrates. The Hippocratic oath distinguishes doctors and other health care professionals from social engineers; those who want to use medical care as a kind of tool to manipulate society. Any health care reform bills must not force health care professionals to violate the trust at the core of the physician-patient relationship…
We call on the Administration to amend the Health Care Reform bills to explicitly exclude funding of abortion from the national health care plans. Abortion not only kills the unborn child, but also increases the mother's risk of suicide, depression, substance abuse and other adverse mental health outcomes. The woman who aborts increases her risk of preterm birth and cerebral palsy in subsequent pregnancies. The woman undergoing RU-486 abortion has increased risks of death from infection and massive hemorrhage…
We also call on the Administration to explicitly confirm and defend the health care professional's right to refuse to participate in procedures which violate that health care professional's conscience, include procedures explicitly forbidden under the Hippocratic Oath: abortion and euthanasia.
Donna J. Harrison, M.D. President. American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, also made this oral statement on 18Aug09 at the National Black ProLife Union press conference:
The Hippocratic Oath means I won't kill you, or your grama, or your unborn child. A Hippocratic Doctor vows to protect, not destroy, human life. But, as an obgyn doctor under the proposed health care reform bill, I could lose my job for refusing to kill your unborn child. The doctor who vows not to harm you or your child is protected by three narrow laws, all of which will be wiped out under the proposed health care reform.
The American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists joins in calling on President Obama to keep his promise to protect the right of conscience of all health professionals, not just doctors, but also nurses, midwives, pharmacists, and PA's. who have vowed not to hurt you or your unborn child or any of your family. We call on the President to change the proposed health care reform bills to explicitly include real, not deceitful, conscience protections for all health professionals who work to protect, not destroy, human life.
Abortion destroys life. Abortion not only kills the unborn child, but also increases the mother's risk of suicide, depression, substance abuse and other adverse mental health outcomes. Abortion increases her risk of preterm birth and cerebral palsy in the next pregnancy. RU-486 abortion increases her risk of death from infection and massive hemorrhage. These and other health risks are well documented in the medical literature.
Abortion destroys life. And abortion in this country is targeted at Black women. One third of the abortions done in this country are done on black women, even though Black women make up about one sixth of the population. Under the current bill, tax money is used to fund abortion providers, who already expand operations disproportionately to Black Americans. This means more black children aborted. We call on President Obama to explicitly exclude any tax funding of abortions from any proposed health care reform bills.
And we call on the President to stop all current government subsidy to those organizations who in their roots and in their actions target the black community for genocide.
Health care is about life. And health care reform must be about making life better, not destroying the lives of people who someone else doesn't want.
Confronting Abortion on Facebook
AAPLOG has a facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/pages/American-Association-of-Pro-Life-OBGYNS/101069505589 .
AAPLOG presents abortion complication related information, and engages in dialogue. On the "wall" is one set, on the "discussion" page is a more complete presentation.
Quebec Health Minister Exempts Abortion Facilities from New Surgical Clinic Law. Faced with loud criticism from the Quebec College of Physicians (the College) and other groups, Quebec Health Minister Yves Bolduc announced Tuesday that Quebec's private abortion facilities would be exempted from the new legislation governing surgeries at private medical clinics.
Meanwhile, while the College has denied involvement in the regulations for abortion facilties, the Quebec abortionist who wrote them told Radio Canada that the regulations actually came from the College's own guidelines, contrary to the College's claims.
Bill 34, passed in the Quebec National Assembly in June and originally set to be implemented on September 30th, would have required abortuaries to adopt new practices for safety, including setting up operating room equipment, such as positive pressure ventilation, in the abortion room, as well as using surgical clothing, among other things. Health Minister Bolduc initially defended the regulations when news of the regulations broke, but faced with increasing criticism and calls for his resignation he has now backed down.
Numerous private abortuaries, whose abortion services are covered by the province, came out strongly against what they called "excessive" requirements. One facility announced it would cease doing abortions, while others threatened that they would have to if the regulations were not changed.
According to representatives of the Montreal Morgentaler facility, the requirements would have "dehumanized" the abortion room by making it intimidating. "They want to dehumanize the intervention room," said manager France Desilets to the Globe and Mail. "It would become a cold environment, rather than the warm environment we have now."
Despite the accusations against Bolduc that he was trying to restrict abortion access, he maintained from the beginning that he supports abortion rights and access.
"This is a sensitive issue, and the most important thing is to be flexible and to take the good decisions for the wellbeing of the population and, in this case, the women," he said. "Access to abortion has always been a major issue for us, and we always kept that in mind."
On Tuesday the College of Physicians President and C.E.O. Yves Lamontagne held a press conference at which he insisted the current standards are adequate and safe and called on Bolduc to remove abortion facilities from the bill.
Bolduc had initially indicated that the regulations had the support of the College, but the organization denied, in an August 10th press release, that it had sought to include abortion among the surgeries covered by the regulations.
It was the College's own May 2005 document, La chirurgie en milieu extrahospitalier, however, that indicated the need for greater safety measures in private abortuaries, as the abortionist who wrote the Ministry's regulations has pointed out.
Reacting to the College's denial of involvement in the new regulations for abortuaries, Jean Guimond, head of abortion services at CLSC of Faubourgs in Montreal, told Radio Canada last Friday that the regulations he wrote were, in fact, based on the directives of the College itself.
The Radio Canada report contends that the College's documents indicate that based on the sedation used in abortions and the number of abortions conducted, abortions at the private abortuaries should be done in an operating room.
Asked to respond, Lamontagne told Radio Canada that the documents needed to be interpreted properly. "We must read what is written," he said. According to the document, "it should be done in a special room or in the operating room," he added, indicating that it never says abortions must be done in an operating room.
The College's May 2005 directives divide surgeries into three categories. They place abortions up to 13 weeks in the lowest category, which they say can be done in the consultation office, unless performed frequently, in which case they require the same resources as the second category. Abortions after 13 weeks are placed in the second category, which, they say, should be done in a special room designated for the purpose or in an operating room, depending on the type and frequency of the procedure.
The directives go on, however, to spell out further requirements for surgeries in the second category, most of which are the same as the third category, which must be done in an operating room. According to the College, second and third category procedures require, for example, a positive-pressure ventilation system. These further requirements, says Radio Canada, actually end up requiring that the special surgery room become, in effect, an operating room.
Guimond told Radio Canada that the College had confirmed to him that its directives applied to abortion. "I called the College and I asked if its rules applied to abortion, because it was crucial. The response was yes."
While Guimond said he does not agree with the directive, he said, "I am not able to tell you it is not necessary if in the documents of the College, it is written that it is necessary."
"It's as if, suddenly, the College had just discovered that its rules were excessive," commented Guimond.
Indeed, a link to the May 2005 document at the bottom of the College's August 18th press release indicates that the directives are now under revision.
Phone calls to the College for explanation were not answered by press time.
Related: Quebec Premier Says Abortion Access Will Not Be Compromised
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/aug/09081308.html
[20August09, Patrick B. Craine, QUEBEC CITY, Quebec, www.LifeSiteNews.com]
Americans United For Life Welcomes South Dakota Decision Affirming a Woman’s Right to Know. This week a federal district court in South Dakota affirmed that a woman has a right to know that an abortion "terminates the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being."
Dr. Charmaine Yoest, President & CEO of Americans United for Life, stated, "This is a victory for women and their right to complete and accurate medical information when considering abortion. Fully informed consent is a bedrock principle of medical care and this principle is especially applicable to abortion. As the Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized, an uninformed decision about abortion can lead to devastating consequences."
Denise Burke, AUL Vice President of Legal Affairs added, "That Planned Parenthood even challenged this law speaks volumes about their radical and se
lf-serving agenda. Clearly, they do not want women to have all the information about abortion because they know that the more women know about abortion, the more they choose life."
The case, Planned Parenthood v. Rounds, involves a challenge to a 2005 South Dakota law that supplemented the state's long-standing informed consent law. The court struck down requirements that a woman be informed that abortion increases the likelihood of suicide and that she has an "existing relationship" with the unborn child. Parties to the suit have indicated that they will appeal. Permalink: [http://www.aul.org/PR_08-21-09, DC]
Judge: SD Doctors Must Say Abortion Ends Life
A federal judge upheld part of a South Dakota law that requires women to be told abortion ends a human life, but struck down disclosures that the procedure increases the likelihood of suicide and that they have an existing relationship with the fetus.
U.S. District Judge Karen Schreier's decision Thursday ends a lawsuit that Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota filed in response to a 2005 informed consent law that required several disclosures to women seeking an abortion. [http://www.ktvu.com/news/20480910/detail.html, KTVU; 21Aug09. ALL Pro-Life Today]
Commentary: What Abortion-Minded Mothers Really Want: The Facts
By Judie Brown
A recent airing of Raymond Arroyo’s The World Over presented an opportunity for me to discuss Catholic health care ethics with the president of the Catholic Health Association, Sister Carol Keehan, DC. I received a great deal of messages via e-mail, Facebook and the U.S. Postal Service after my appearance on that program.
I am grateful for every one of them. However, one in particular moved me to think seriously about what is really at stake in our struggle to keep the aborting of a child out of any type of health care reform legislation. It helped me realize what an expectant mother seeking to abort her baby really wants and really needs.
So, rather than tell you my opinion, which would not be based on actual hands-on experience, I prefer to share this letter, written to Sister Carol by Lorraine C., who does know exactly what such a mother thinks, feels and needs:
Dear Sister Carol Keehan,
Thank you for taking a moment to read my e-mail.
I listened to your conversation last Friday evening with Raymond Arroyo and Judie Brown. There is one aspect of your argument regarding health care for pregnant women that I would like to address. It concerns an implied generalization that free prenatal care would greatly diminish abortions in our country.
I am a volunteer consultant at a crisis pregnancy center in Columbus, Ohio.
Since 2001, I have talked with hundreds of abortion-minded women concerning their pregnancy and their options.
It has been my experience that women do not choose to have an abortion because of lack of prenatal care.
In our state, we have a generous, free health insurance program (called Healthy Start/Healthy Families) for women without insurance. The guidelines for eligibility are well above the Medicaid guidelines given by the federal government. In fact, any women in our state ineligible for state insurance can receive quality prenatal care for free (or at a substantially reduced rate) because there are other programs available to these women through grant money.
My experience has been that women choose abortion because they do not want to be pregnant. This might sound overly simplified, but let me explain.
Many teens and adults are engaging in premarital sex. Most of them do not want children with that partner or at that moment in their life.
Consequently, when they do get pregnant, they seek an abortion.
Since abortion is legal and easy to acquire, it is a choice so often made.
Many women choose to abort in the first trimester because they are not showing yet.
Trust me, if all they needed were health care, we would have very few abortions in our state. (We have approximately 31,000 elective abortions each year.)
I can state at least 10 reasons that are given as to why they choose an abortion (notice that health care is not on the list):
1. Birth control failed – pill, patch, shot, condom
2. Wants to finish high school/college – baby messes up their future plans
3. No longer in a relationship with the father of the baby
4. Parents would be unsupportive – afraid of what they might think – doesn’t want
them to find out.
5. Has enough kids
6. Pregnant through an extramarital affair
7. Not ready to parent – no particular reason given
8. Does not know who the father is – casual sex (hooking up) – multiple partners
9. Pressure from someone else to abort (family, boyfriend, employer)
10. Sex is purely recreational – “I never thought I’d get pregnant!”
Women never tell us, “Gee, I wouldn’t have an abortion if I could get free health care.” They know they can get free health care.
It’s not about health care – it’s about the devaluing of human life in our culture, and most of the responsibility lies in the fact that abortions have been legal since 1973 [emphasis added]. Please do not be duped into this lie about abortion and health care. The only way to stop it is to make it illegal and teach “abstinence-only” in our homes, our churches and our schools.
Now I must say that some of the poorest of the poor do not get abortions, because they cannot pay for them (a first-trimester abortion runs about $350 in our city). So, if health care passes that includes free abortions (a.k.a. family planning services), then even these women will succumb to the culture of death.
If you have any independent studies (not by Planned Parenthood) that corroborate your claim, please send them to me, so that I can read them.
If abortion were illegal, then the choice to abort would change to the choice of an adoption and occasionally to parenting. In our current climate, abortion is an “easy” option for now (or so they think!) because “no one will know that I was ever pregnant.”
If it were just as “simple” as giving them free health care, there would be no use for crisis pregnancy centers. I would happily give up my position here if it were all true, but I know better. I encourage you to visit a crisis center in your state and talk one-on-one with the consultants for more in-depth conversation.
There it is, from an expert. This woman has given us a window into the world of the expectant mother who does not wish to be the mother of a living child. I would hasten to add that most of these mothers do not consider themselves to be the mother of a preborn child, but prefer to think of themselves as a woman with a problem requiring a quick solution. I also believe that this counselor is correct to point out that if abortion is covered in any health care “reform” plan, abortion numbers will go through the roof. So why hasn’t this been made clear?
First and foremost, pro-life America is making the case, and we are not going to shut up. And it is my opinion that, after all these weeks of debate, perhaps the truth is sinking in. Perhaps Americans are finally beginning to think beyond the Obamacare marketing phrases, gobbledygook and false promises making their way through town-hall meetings and other such venues.
On this subject – the facts about abortion-minded mothers – it is my sincere hope that people across this nation will spread the words of this wise pro-life pregnancy counselor, and help their ministers, priests, bishops and others see that Obamacare is going to increase the killing of the preborn, not ameliorate the situation.
President Obama says abortion is “heart-wrenching,” and yet he advocates it.
We say abortion is murder and it’s time for America to listen.
Please help us spread this word.
[Judie Brown is president of American Life League and a member of the Pontifical Academy for Life; 21Aug09. ALL Pro-Life Today]
Star Parker: Alaska Parents Deserve the Truth on Their Daughters' Abortion
by Star Parker (National Black Pro-Life Union)
Currently 35 states have laws that require either parental consent or notification in order for a teenage girl to receive an abortion. Alaska passed one in 1997.
However, after ten years on the books, in 2007 the Alaska Supreme Court, arguing that sharing this information with parents violated the privacy of their teenage daughters, found the law unconstitutional. So now a 13 year old can get an abortion without the knowledge of her parents.
A large percentage of these abortions are paid for with state Medicaid funds, but no one seems to think that parents' privacy is being violated using their tax funds to pay for these.
Research shows the remedial benefits of parental involvement when a pregnant teenager considers abortion.
And research shows the profound psychological damage caused by teenage abortion.
But, perhaps we should be wondering who we are today that we need to gather data to address an issue as intuitively obvious as whether a teenage girl may abort her child without her parents knowing.
Of course there are exceptional considerations, like abusive parents. But the Alaska initiative deals with this, as did a similar initiative in California, which was defeated last November.
No, this is not about being reasonable. It is about ideology. And what we have are opposing worldviews that cannot be reconciled. It's about choosing one or the other.
One view is secular, materialistic, and sees only individuals and the rights they claim.
The other view is about truths that precede individuals, and social realities of which individuals are a part, like family.
This contrast and conflict could not have been more clearly laid out than in an exchange at a congressional hearing last April between pro-life New Jersey congressman Chris Smith and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Smith was questioning current Administration policies to promote abortion internationally. As part of his questioning, he waxed philosophic and asked Mrs. Clinton about her recent acceptance of Planned Parenthood's Margaret Sanger award. Sanger founded Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion provider.
He pointed out to Mrs. Clinton that Sanger was a eugenicist and racist who said "The most merciful thing a family does for one of its infant members is to kill it."
The Secretary of State listened stoically and then replied: "We have a fundamental disagreement …We happen to think that family planning is an important part of women's health, and reproductive health includes access to abortion."
A century and a half ago, a fundamental conflict in values in our nation came to a head. In one view, black African slaves were not human, so the question of slavery was about political, not moral, reality. The other view saw the slaves as human and slavery as a moral outrage. The conflict fomented at the nation's grass roots until it exploded in the national arena.
The parental involvement ballot initiative in Alaska is about Americans again grappling at our grass roots with crucial basic questions that divide us that must be resolved.
Are we a people that see the unborn, family, and individuals as all part of the fundamental fabric of life? Or are we a materialistic, secular nation of individuals making political claims on each other?
[Star Parker is the founder and president of the Coalition on Urban Renewal and Education, CURE, and is a leading pro-life advocate within the African-American community; August 28, 2009
http://www.lifenews.com/state4386.html ]
British Mother of Disabled Newborn Child Tells Moms Don't Have an Abortion
The mother of a little girl born with Down’s syndrome says despite her initial heartbreak she opposes screening for the condition because it may encourage abortion.
Heidi C was diagnosed with Down’s soon after she was born. Her mother Liz, who already had two healthy sons, says she initially felt “nothing” for her new baby. However, when Heidi became seriously ill at just a few weeks old Liz and her husband Steve found that their feelings changed completely. “Suddenly we wanted Heidi to survive more than anything”, Liz recalls in an interview with the Mirror newspaper.
Scientists are currently working on a new blood test for Down’s syndrome that carries a lower risk of causing miscarriage than the one currently available. Liz decided not to have a Down’s syndrome test when she was pregnant with Heidi, and says despite the “trauma” of discovering Heidi’s condition she still opposes testing and believes it can encourage abortion. “We all hope to have a perfect baby, but a life is a life,” Liz says. “Just think, if your child was struck down with meningitis and left disabled or brain damaged you wouldn't end their life – you'd love and care for them." [16Aug09, London, England, LifeNews.com)
Mayo Clinic Doctor Admits Abortions Hurt Women, Cause Premature Births.
A physician who works for the prestigious Mayo Clinic has written a new factsheet that admits abortions harm women. Roger W. Harms, M.D., a Mayo Clinic obstetrician and medical editor-in-chief, also says abortions can cause women problems with subsequent pregnancies.
The Mayo Clinic posted Dr. Harms' new factsheet, with the title "Does it affect subsequent pregnancies?" on August 6. Harm says there are definitely cases when physicians see "an abortion cause problems in a subsequent pregnancy." "During a surgical abortion, the fetus is removed from the uterus — often with a vacuum device, a syringe or a spoon-shaped instrument with a sharp edge (cure
tte) — as an outpatient surgical procedure," Harms explains.
In some cases, "a surgical abortion may weaken the cervix or cause scarring on the inside of the uterus." "If such damage occurs, surgery may be needed to correct the problems before a woman can conceive again or carry a subsequent pregnancy to term," he said.
Canadian researcher Brent Rooney says the information is important for women who are considering abortions because a weak cervix can lead to premature birth in subsequent pregnancies and that can lead to problems for future unborn children, such as cerebral palsy.
"The more prematurely a baby is born, the higher his cerebral palsy risk," Rooney tells LifeNews.com today. "Those born before 32 weeks' gestation have 55 times the cerebral palsy risk as full-term (at least 37 weeks' gestation) newborns."
"When the 'gate' (i.e. cervix) to a woman's womb is weak (i.e. 'incompetent cervix'), it will open too early during the pregnancy leading to a preterm birth," he explained. "Thus, when [Harms] admits that surgical abortions can weaken a women's cervix, [he] implicitly conceded that surgical abortions boost the risk of a 'preemie' having cerebral palsy."
Although such a risk is rare, Rooney says it is important given that one in every 410 children born in the United States are later diagnosed with the condition.
In 2007, Rooney teamed up with Dr. Byron Calhoun and Dr. Elizabeth Shadigian and, in a study, estimated that, in 2002, there were 1,096 newborns under 32 weeks' gestation whose cerebral palsy was caused by their mother's prior induced abortions. [1]
Rooney says Harms' acknowledgement of the abortion-premature birth risk is not new and that it and its effects have been known for decades.
"Is the abortion-preemie risk recently discovered? Hardly, since it was first reported in a 1963," he said. "In 2006 and 2007 the very prestigious Institute of Medicine in a massive textbook listed 'First trimester induced abortion' as an 'Immutable Medical Risk Factor Associated with Preterm Birth."
Numerous studies have shown the abortion-premature birth link.
Most recently, Dr Robbert van Oppenraaij presented his findings before the collegium of scientists in June at the annual European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology in Amsterdam.
He says one induced abortion raises 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.
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.
1 Calhoun BC, Shadigian E, Rooney B. Cost Consequences of Induced Abortion as an Attributable Risk for Preterm Birth and Informed Consent. J Reprod Med 2007;52(10):929-937
(21 August 09, LifeNews.com, Rochester, MN, http://www.lifenews.com/nat5381.html)
"Pro-Choice" Abortionist Interviewer Surprised by Her Reaction to Witnessing Abortion
"There was a discomfort I hadn't expected," she says, "in my emotional reaction to watching abortions."
By Patrick B. Craine
August 15, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Newsweek's Sarah Kliff added her voice to the media campaign softening the image of late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart on Saturday with her report 'The Abortion Evangelist', but says she did not anticipate and has difficulty explaining her emotional reaction to witnessing Carhart actually take the life of an unborn child.
Kliff spent 4 days visiting Carhart's Nebraska abortuary, interviewing him, speaking with the mothers who were seeking abortions, and watching him at work. Painting him as a martyr for the cause, she describes Carhart's plight as one of the few remaining abortionists left in the country willing to abort late in pregnancy, and his commitment to that cause despite his fears of being killed by vigilante anti-abortionists, as was his friend George Tiller.
In a companion piece to the story, however, Kliff admits that while she is an experienced reporter on abortion-related issues, she was surprised by her emotional reaction to witnessing an abortion for the first time.
Travelling to Nebraska, Kliff says, she was not sure if she even wanted to watch an abortion. "I confess I was hesitant to step into Carhart's operating room," she says. Knowing that she would most likely see a first-term abortion, rather than late-term, and knowing all that was involved, "I still felt uneasy," she says.
She attributes her reluctance to abortion's controversial nature. "I was nervous, I think, to watch something so controversial. … I didn't know how I'd react."
She began by interviewing patients and going through the preparatory procedures with them, but says that "When their names were called, and I'd spent all morning with these women, it felt unnatural to stop short of the operating room."
Entering a room with a glass window giving her a view into both of Carhart's abortion rooms, she watched as Carhart worked to "empty the contents of the uterus" of several women.
While to her the first-term abortions "looked like an extended, more invasive version of a standard ob-gyn exam," "there was a discomfort I hadn't expected," she says, "my emotional reaction to watching abortions."
She describes several examples that made her react: a married couple in their mid-30s; a single mother with a 10-year-old daughter, who began to cry when they discussed abortion; and a 23-year-old who was 16 weeks pregnant.
Upon her return from Nebraska, Kliff was surprised by the reactions of her pro-abortion friends. "Friends who supported legal abortion bristled slightly when I told them where I'd been and what I'd watched," she says. "Acquaintances at a party looked a bit regretful to have asked about my most recent assignment."
Finally, she says, she continues to struggle with her reaction. "I had (and still have) difficulty understanding my own reaction," she says, "both relieved to have watched a minimally invasive surgery and distressed by the emotionality of the process. Abortion involves weighty choices that, depending on how you view it, involve a life, or the potential for life."
Operation Rescue (OR) announced today that Nebraska is launching an investigation into Carhart's abortion business. OR says that the safety and legality of Carhart's abortion business are questionable. The abortionist has botched numerous abortions in the past, leading to emergency trips to the hospital and the death of one woman due to a third-trimester abortion.
See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
Nebraska Launches Investigation Into Carhart's Abortion Business
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/aug/09081802.html
Four Former Employees Come Forward with Accusations of Illegal, Unsafe Co
nditions at Carhart's Abortion Business
Four former employees of late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart have come forward to tell of unsafe and illegal practices at LeRoy Carhart's Bellevue, Nebraska, abortion clinic.
Members of Operation Rescue and Rescue the Heartland were contacted directly by three of the women. A fourth woman is working directly with a pro-life attorney to tell her knowledge of illegal and unsafe conditions at Carhart's clinic.
The women have made allegations that unlicensed staff illegally performed medical duties that they were not trained for or legally qualified to do, such as starting IVs, dispensing medication, and even assisting with surgeries.
There were also allegations of general unclean conditions, including dried blood on surgical instruments. In addition, the women told of missing narcotics, illicit drug use by employees, and illegal post-viability abortions.
The women worked for Carhart at various times, yet they all made similar, if not identical allegations when interviewed.
One former employee told of incidents where Carhart falsified the gestational age of viable babies in order to circumvent the law.
This account matches information uncovered by Operation Rescue during an undercover investigation at the now-closed Women's Health Care Services in Wichita, Kansas, where Carhart once worked. The worker caught falsifying gestational ages in Kansas now works for Carhart at his Bellevue, Nebraska, abortion clinic. (Read full report.)
The women also chose to contact the Omaha World-Herald to blow the whistle on Carhart. An article detailing their allegations ran this morning.
The women have given sworn statements about illegal and unsafe activity at Carhart's abortion clinic, which will be turned over to the Attorney General's office and the Nebraska Department of Health, which is investigating Carhart. The women have agreed to cooperate with the investigation.
"We commend these brave women for coming forward to tell of unsafe and illegal conditions that exist at Carhart's abortion mill," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. "Their courage will help protect women whose health and safety currently at risk."
Operation Rescue is not releasing the identity of the women out of concern of reprisals against them from Carhart, but the authorities investigating Carhart will have access to that information.
"Rescue the Heartland, Nebraskans United for Life, and Operation Rescue are working together to insure that the information and experiences of these women are heard by the appropriate authorities," said Newman.
"These allegations are serious and demand immediate action on the part of the authorities in the interest of public safety. We pray that Carhart's abortion career, which has cost untold thousands of innocent lives and led to the exploitation of thousands of women, will be brought to a speedy and peaceful end through legal channels."
[BELLEVUE, NE, August 28, 2009, www.LifeSiteNews.com]
Documentary 'Blood Money' Seeks to Expose the Abortion Business
A group of filmmakers have recently filmed a documentary that aims to expose the terrible reality of abortion, focusing on the financial aspect of the multimillion dollar abortion industry. The film, entitled "Blood Money," includes numerous interviews with leaders of the pro-life movement, in which they lay out the facts about the abortion industry and the effects that abortions have on women.
www.bloodmoneyfilm.com
A group of filmmakers have recently filmed a documentary that aims to expose the terrible reality of abortion, focusing on the financial aspect of the multimillion dollar abortion industry.
The film, entitled "Blood Money," includes numerous interviews with leaders of the pro-life movement, in which they lay out the facts about the abortion industry and the effects that abortions have on women.
The film covers a variety of issues, including "Roe V. Wade, Planned Parenthood, the scientific fact that life begins at conception, and how abortion affects women who have had one" the director of the film, David K. Kyle, told LSN in an interview today.
The original title of the film had been "The American Holocaust." However, as filming progressed, the filmmakers found that the business aspect of abortion kept coming to the forefront.
"As I traveled around the country last September doing all these interviews with various pro-life leaders and women who had had abortions, the money part just kept coming up."
Kyle said that the idea for the movie first came four years ago when he and his partner, John Zipp, the producer of the film, were working for Steve and Michael Peroutka, pro-life activists in Maryland, and realized that the issue of abortion is not significantly addressed by the media.
"During election time it is brought up, but it's really not talked about. You hear the word abortion, people know what it is, but they don't go in depth on the subject like they do other issues."
The movie, which is currently in post-production and will hopefully be complete by the end of September, hopes to get people talking about the issue of abortion. Kyle says, "It's one of those issues that even the pro-choice side really doesn't want to talk about."
Kyle says they hope the movie will inform people about the business aspect of abortion and the effect that abortion has on women.
"People are making millions upon millions of dollars off the murdering of innocent babies," he said.
"Abortion has consequences to it. It's sold as a quick fix when you're in trouble. You can go and have an abortion and the problem goes away. Well, we know from countless women that the problem does not go away. Women have long term consequences that they are going to have to deal with for years and years."
The movie also aims to encourage pro-life people to work towards an end to abortion.
"This is all about getting the truth out there to save babies. We want to motivate people to do something, even people in the pro-life community. We have thousands of people out there who are pro-life but who really don't take an active part in it. We want to motivate them to do something."
Out of everything in the movie, the interviews with women who have had abortions are the most poignant for Kyle.
"The women talking about their abortion experiences were the most difficult to get through when doing the interviews. I've sat with this footage countless times going through it and it still affects me."
Kyle says that his interview with Carol Everette was especially powerful for him. Everette, who used to run abortion mills in Dallas, has since become a noted pro-life speaker and advocate of unborn children's rights.
In the preview for the movie released Friday on Youtube, Everette says, "We would give them [young girls] a low-dose birth control pill they would get pregnant on or a defective condom. Our goal was 3-5 abortions for every girl between the ages of thirteen and eighteen."
"Blood Money" still does not yet have a distributor, but Kyle is hopeful that through the support of pro-life advocates the film will gain the attention of one. In order for this to happen, though, he says that people need to register at the website or watch t
he preview on youtube to show their support.
"We know 250,000 to 300,000 people come to D.C. every January for the pro-life march, and it should be pretty easy to get those kinds of numbers looking at the website or the youtube video. If we can generate those kinds of numbers we think it will help us tremendously to get a distributor."
To support the documentary "Blood Money," please either watch the youtube trailer… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYaTywSDmls&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fhome.php&feature=player_embedded
OR register at the website: www.bloodmoneyfilm.com
[25August09, Matt Anderson, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/aug/09082506.html; ALL Pro-Life Today, 26Aug09]
Most Ob/Gyns in Canada Don't Do Abortions, Survey Finds
A survey of Canada's obstetricians and gynaecologists has found that more than half do not perform abortions, and more than half of these doctors do not do them due to their personal beliefs, reports the Medical Post. Though inconclusive, the survey's results are "encouraging," said one pro-life leader.
Dr. Caroline Laroche of Saint-Luc Hospital in Montreal conducted the survey by e-mail and presented her findings at the 65th annual meeting of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOCG) held in Halifax last June.
Dr. Laroche e-mailed her survey to the 562 members of the SOCG e-mail list, and received 170 completed surveys, equalling a 30% return rate – a good return, according to the Medical Post.
Of the respondents, 60.6% said that they do not conduct abortions. Respondents could indicate more than one reason why they did not do abortions. The largest reason cited was personal beliefs, with 50.5% of those who do not perform abortions indicating so, meaning that over one third of total respondents do not conduct abortions due to personal beliefs. Nearly a third, 33.7%, said their reason was that others in their hospital or practice did them, and 23.8% said it was because of their community's opinion.
"Quebec has the most widely available abortion services," said Dr. Laroche. "Doctors working in the Prairies are less likely to provide abortions."
The survey would seem to indicate a movement away from abortion among obstetricians and gynaecologists. According to Dr. Laroche, the last such survey was conducted in 1991 by the SOCG, who found then that 51% of ob/gyns did abortions. Based on the limited nature of her survey, Dr. Laroche was not sure if her results necessarily indicate there are fewer doctors doing abortions, but, according to the Medical Post, she did say that, from her pro-abortion point of view, the results were "troubling."
She suggested that there may be fewer abortionists today because fewer doctors have witnessed severe injuries or deaths caused by back-alley abortions, which, she says, encouraged doctors in the past.
"Training can have an impact on decisions to provide abortions," she said.
Campaign Life Coalition's Jeff Gunnarson called Dr. Laroche's results "good news," saying that "it's both encouraging and interesting that they are claiming it's their … personal beliefs, that they're bringing that into it."
"You often hear the rhetoric," he said, "that … as a doctor, you can't bring your personal beliefs between you and the patient, … and so that's encouraging and interesting."
Responding to Laroche's position that the results are troubling, Gunnarson said, "Well, I think we've always known that, on a personal level, if you could talk to people one-on-one, that you'll find, as you do with most of the Canadian public, that they trend toward being pro-life. And this small sample I think confirms that, while at the same time it tends to be … perceived, at least, that those in the medical profession are trending the opposite way, … towards being pro-abortion."
"I think if we have a third of the ob/gyns saying that they would prefer not to do abortions because of personal beliefs," he said, "then, I have to believe that most Canadians are probably of the same view. Therefore, why isn't there discussion about this in Parliament?"
"It now seems that we have a professional association that does abortions or that could do abortions, and yet a third of them are saying, 'Ah, you know what, I wouldn't do them'" added Gunnarson. "I think that really helps our momentum.
[19August09, Patrick B. Craine, HALIFAX, Nova Scotia, www.LifeSiteNews.com]
Health Care Bills Could Result in 300-600K More Abortions, Scrap Pro-Life Laws
by Maria Vitale
So-called health care reform could become the worst thing to happen to abortion rates since Roe v. Wade. When you hear the phrase “health care reform,” you might think of cutting costs, eliminating arcane rules, and ensuring coverage for the hard-to-insure. Raising abortion rates would not seem to be a logical part of the equation.
Yet, consider this quote from one of the primary experts in abortion law, National Right to Life Legislative Director Douglas Johnson: “The Kennedy bill would result in the greatest expansion of abortion since Roe v. Wade.” That’s because the Senate proposal would result in federally mandates coverage of abortion in nearly all health plans. The feds would also mandate recruitment of abortionists by local health networks—a scary thought. Abortion would be federally funded on a gargantuan scale. We know from experience that taxpayer funding of abortion results in more abortions. It’s been estimated that the health care reform plans now on the table could increase abortions by 300,000 to 600,000 a year because of federal subsidies for abortion. [18August09, www.LifeNews.com]
RU 486 DEATH TOLL REVISED UPWARD
Due to lack of accurate reporting, the number of known deaths caused by the morning-after pill, RU 486, is probably very conservative.
But new numbers submitted by the European maker of the drug to the Italian Ministry of Health more than double the previous estimate to 29 globally. The abortion drug has just been approved for sale across Italy for the first time.
[http://www.lifenews.com/int1282.html; Abstinence Clearinghouse, posted 18Aug09]
StopTheAbortionMandate.com Launches Video Galvanizing "Largest Pro-Life Coalition Ever Assembled"
The pro-life leaders nationwide who joined forces this summer to create the massive Stop the Abortion Mandate Coalition have launched a new video summoning pro-life citizens across America to ask legislators to stop the vast expansion of abortion embedded in President Obama's health care legislation.
The video features pro-life luminaries Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, Charmaine Yoest of Americans United for Life, Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life, David Bereit of 40 Days for Life, Jim Daly of Focus on the Family, and Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America, among many others.
"All of the ground gained by the pro-life movement is in danger of being lost," warns the video.
Viewers are directed to the website StopTheAbortionMandate.com, whicih provides a plethora of information designed to help individuals contact their representatives with clear arguments and other helpful tips.
In July, the coalition sponsored a hugely successful webcast on the mandate that attracted over 36,000 listeners.
Click here for more information on the Sto
p the Abortion Mandate Coalition.
[20Aug09, Kathleen Gilbert, DC, www.LifeSiteNews.com]