Feminist groups convince Mexican officials to reduce punishment for infanticide

      

Feminist groups and leaders have pressured officials in the Mexican state of Guanajuato to drastically reduce the punishment for infanticide.

For weeks, feminist organizations such as Las Libres confused the public by claiming that six women in Guanajuato, who were in prison for killing their babies, were in fact in prison for abortion.

After being dismissed by local officials and U.N. delegates, the feminists changed their strategy to seeking a reduction in punishment for women who kill their children during the first hours following birth. Such a crime, punishable in the past by 35 years in prison, will now be punishable be only three to 10 years due to a controversial reform of the state's civil code.

Ivette Laviada, president of the Pro-Yucatan Network, and Patricia Lopez Mancera, director of the Center for Women's Studies, said the efforts by feminists to pressure officials into making infanticide a right "will not resonate with other entities in the country."

They expressed their deep concern that a mother attempting to kill her newborn within the first 24 hours after birth would no longer be considered a serious crime.  Infanticide should never be considered "normal," they said.

Source: CNA
Date Published: September 9, 2010

Appeals court suspends embryonic stem cell research ban during Obama’s appeal

     

President Barack Obama's administration can fund embryonic stem-cell research while it appeals a decision banning government support for any activity using cells taken from human embryos, an appeals court said.

The US Court of Appeals in Washington today put on hold a ruling by District Judge Royce Lamberth during its review of the ban. The Justice Dept. argued that the judge's decision would cause irreparable harm to researchers, taxpayers and scientific progress.

Lifting the ban allows the government to temporarily continue funneling tens of millions of dollars to scientists seeking cures for diseases such as Parkinson's, spinal cord injuries, and genetic conditions. Embryonic stem cells can grow into any kind of tissue and may have the potential to accelerate a range of research.

"The purpose of this administrative stay is to give the court sufficient opportunity to consider the merits of the emergency motion for stay and should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits of that motion," the appeals court wrote in its decision. 

Opponents of the stem-cell funding have until Sept. 14 to file a response, and the US can submit a response on Sept. 20, the appeals court said.

Lamberth on Aug. 23 issued an order temporarily stopping the Health and Human Services Dept. and the National Institutes of Health from funding or conducting the studies. On Sept. 7, Lamberth denied a US request to reconsider his ruling.

The judge cited the still-in-force 1996 Dickey-Wicker Amendment in his ruling, saying that Congress prohibited funding any research in which a human embryo was destroyed. By implication, that included all stem-cell research, Lamberth said.

"A stay would flout the will of Congress, as this court understands what Congress has enacted in the Dickey-Wicker Amendment," Lamberth wrote on Sept. 7. "Congress remains perfectly free to amend or revise the statute. This court is not free to do so."

In March 2009, Obama reversed an executive order of former President George W. Bush to allow research on cells derived from embryos that would otherwise be disposed of after in vitro fertilization procedures.

Under the Bush order, Dickey-Wicker was interpreted to allow research on lines of stem cells that already had been created using human embryos. In his August 2001 executive order, Bush limited federal funding for such research to about 20 existing lines of embryonic cells and banned federal funding on lines created after that time.
Grants Stymied

In his Aug. 23 ruling, Lamberth said the administration was attempting to separate the derivation of the embryonic stem cells from research on them, and "the two cannot be separated."

Lamberth's order will prevent the National Institutes of Health from acting on grant applications that have been reviewed, and from considering dozens of other applications that are in the review process, the U.S. wrote in a Sept. 8 appeal. It may take as long as eight months to reinitiate the review process for grant applications, the U.S. said.

"Disruption of ongoing research will result in irreparable setbacks and, in many cases, may destroy a project altogether," attorneys for the U.S. wrote.

The case is Sherley v. Sebelius, 10-5287, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (Washington).

Contact: Jill Stanek

Source: JillStanek.com
Date Published: September 9, 2010

Assisted Suicide Advocates Don’t Like Straying From “Euthanasia Land” Script

      

The issue of euthanasia, if it is to be properly considered, must be looked at in the societal context in which doctor prescribed death would be carried out.  Indeed, issues such as  elder abuse, the failures of health care systems, the continuing problem of inadequate palliative care, the isolation of people who are seriously ill or living with disabilities, etc., could not be more relevant to the societal conversation regarding the wisdom of legalizing assisted suicide.

But euthanasia activists don't want to have that conversation. Instead, they wish to talk about their agenda as if we all live in what I call Euthanasia Land; a place where birds sing happy songs, every patient receives optimal care, every family is loving, every patient is fully autonomous and none are really depressed, and the idea of "abuses" can be banished by "guidelines," notions as ridiculous as the moon being made of green cheese.

I bring this up because hearings are being held in Montreal about whether Quebec and/or Canada should legalize euthanasia.  Apparently, witnesses are not keeping to the Euthanasia Land script, and the "death with dignity" advocates are not amused.  From the story:

Quebec's public hearings into assisted suicide continued in Montreal Wednesday, with an appearance by the president of the Right to Die With Dignity Association, among others. Hélène Bolduc told the all-party panel of MNAs leading the hearing that the debate is being sidetracked by calls for better palliative care, more hospital beds and better pain management.

Sidetracked?  Good grief. Nothing could be more germane.  And she betrays an antipathy toward proper hospice and end of life care I have noticed before among some euthanasia advocates:

"I don't want to be against palliative care," Bolduc said. "But I have to say: there is a limit. It's not because I don't believe in this type of care, but palliative care shouldn't be practised with dogged determination." She likened the palliative care community to the church, with doctors acting as "apostles of redemption." Bolduc said she's seen palliative care units in which health professionals try to delay an individual's death as long as possible for the sake of the family, who want to see the patient resigned and serene. But they're not serene, Bolduc said; they're simply drugged to ease the pain.

This is nonsense. Hospices don't try to extend patient lives, but aim at permitting a peaceful natural death.  And if the point is to prevent suffering, being unconscious at the end accomplishes that goal.

In the end, alleviating suffering isn't the point.  What is really going on is the energetic pursuit of a nihilistic, pro suicide ideology:

The commission also heard from Sara Raphals, 89, a retired school teacher and cancer survivor. Raphals told the panel that there is little dignity in the way the elderly are treated and that suicide should be a basic human right.

That's the real issue that the euthanasia movement raises. If suicide is a basic human right–rights apply to everyone, right?–then anybody and everybody be able to go to a clinic to be killed with drug overdoses.  This is the debate we should be having because it is the intellectually honest discussion.  The false premise of Euthanasia Land is just a diversion to take our eyes off the actual long term agenda.

Contact: Wesley J. Smith

Source: Secondhand Smoke
Date Published: September 9, 2010

Abortionist corrupts others, investigation grows

      

The investigation of abortionist Stephen Chase Brigham has expanded and now includes at least two other abortionists.
 
The probe, which began in Maryland, now involves four states and two more abortionists -- George Shepard, Jr. of Delaware, and Nicola I. Riley of Utah.

"The medical board in Maryland suspended the medical licenses of two out-of-state abortionists who had been helping abortionist Brigham operate illegally inside the state of Maryland," Cheryl Sullinger, spokesperson for Operation Rescue, tells of the latest development.

She says the recent suspensions stem from a botched abortion in which a woman nearly lost her life. Instead of calling an ambulance, Brigham put the semiconscious, bleeding woman into the back of a rented Chevrolet Malibu and drove her to a nearby emergency room.

The state issued a cease-and-desist order to him on August 25, ordering him to stop performing abortions because he is not licensed in Maryland. Meanwhile, he owns 15 abortion clinics in four states and is licensed in New Jersey.

"In that state, he would start late-term abortions, which were illegal in New Jersey," Sullinger reports. "Then he would caravan the women over to Maryland, where he would fly in an abortionist from Utah to actually finish the process."

Police recently raided Brigham's clinics in Elkton, Maryland, and found the remains of 35 late-term babies. Operation Rescue is calling for a criminal investigation of Brigham and full accountability under the law.

Contact: Charlie Butts

Source: OneNewsNow
Date Published: September 9, 2010

Black Leaders Call for Pro-Life Economic Recovery

      

Dr. Alveda King, Director of African American Outreach for Priests or Life and Founder of King for America, today called on the President and Congress to bear in mind civil rights and the life issue when trying to fix the economy.

"Any meaningful economic recovery act undertaken by Congress must strive for a pro-life economic recovery," said Dr. King. "We are calling for sensible and reasonable acts that will support life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for every American. These acts would include procreative reproductive health/choice efforts."

"Films like Maafa21 and Blood Money provide significant research that support our urgent plea to our governing officials," said Alveda.

"For decades many of our officials have governed as though there are not moral consequences to their economic policies. That day is done," said Catherine Davis of the "Toomanyaborted.com" Campaign.

"In this dismal economy, with seemingly endless unemployment, loss of homes, hope and American dreams, we are seeing millions and millions of our tax dollars going to fund organizations whose main purpose is to kill America's children," said Day Gardner, president of the National Black Pro-Life Union. "We urge an immediate end to all abortion funding with taxpayer money. Let's use our hard earned tax dollars to renew the spirit of our nation by helping American's live -- not die!" concluded Gardner. 

Pastor Dean Nelson of the Network of Politically Active Christians added, "lawmakers who focus on the economy must ensure that their actions encourage the birth and not the termination of the next generation who will have to pay for all the debt we are now incurring."

Dr. King concluded: "In his book GOOD RETURNS: MAKING MONEY BY MORALLY RESPONSIBLE INVESTING, George Schwartz encourages us to put our money where our values are. This means we won't invest in companies who fund abortions or euthanasia or the destruction of families. How can we be forced to invest our taxes into government funded abortion? How can the dream survive if we murder our children?

"We are one human race, and we do not live by bread alone, and definitely not by aborting our children. For me this all translates not into the old model of 'guns or butter,' but now is defined in the 21st century by this question: Do we invest in abortions or diapers?"

Contact: Day Gardner

Source: National Black Pro-Life Union
Date Published: September 9, 2010

Eugenics: The Real Reason for Legalized Abortion

      
For almost 40 years, we've been told that the legalization of abortion was about "reproductive freedom" and "women's rights" and "choice."  Now, an explosive new documentary is exposing this rhetoric as nothing more than marketing hype designed to conceal a nasty hidden agenda.  
 
With a mountain of documentation, Maafa 21, is proving to audiences all across America that the real motivation behind the legalization of abortion was eugenics and racial genocide.  In just over two hours, the documentary shows that the legalization of abortion was part of a campaign that had been created, promoted, and financed by a small cartel of ultra-wealthy elitists.  
 
Most frightening of all, Maafa 21 shows that this effort continues today with massive financial and political backing from a new generation of ultra-wealthy elitists.
 
Viewers are also stunned to learn that it was the American eugenics movement that gave rise to the Nazi effort to create "racial purity" and that this effort was in large measure funded with dollars from American corporations.  They also learn that the first anti-abortion organizations in America were radical civil-rights groups of the 1960s whose leaders had seen that eugenics and black genocide were the driving forces behind the call for legalized abortion.  
 
Some people are also surprised to learn about the numerous links among America's number one abortion provider, Planned Parenthood, its founder Margaret Sanger, and the American eugenics movement.  They learn that Sanger gave a speech to a chapter of the Ku Klux Klan and was then invited back to speak to 12 "similar groups," as she wrote in her autobiography.
 
They learn that Planned Parenthood was an integral part of the sterilization boards that operated in more than 30 states.  They learn that Sanger once tried to merge Planned Parenthood with the American Eugenics Society.            
 
The revelations go on and on and each one is fully documented.
 
The reality is that Maafa 21 is a primer on power, corruption and betrayal.  Ironically, within days after the first edition of Maafa 21 was released, U.S Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was being interviewed by a reporter for The New York Times and made the following statement when asked about Roe vs. Wade – the decision that legalized abortion: "Frankly, I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of."
 
Here is the most radical abortion proponent that's ever been on the Supreme Court openly conceding that the arguments made in Maafa 21 are absolutely accurate.  She is admitting that the legalization of abortion was not about women's rights or reproductive freedom; it was about eliminating certain groups of people.  In other words, it was about eugenics.
 
More than 20,000 copies of Maafa 21 have already been distributed on DVD, and it is being shown in theaters, churches, college campuses and conventions across the country.  It has even been shown twice in the Congressional Visitors Center in Washington, DC.  Audience reactions run the gamut from sadness to shock to rage.  
 
There is no disputing that the content of Maafa 21 can be a little overwhelming, but it "connects the dots" in a way that makes it clear why the abortion holocaust is happening.  
 
Legalized abortion has killed 50 million unborn children so far in America and it kills over 3,000 more every day.  At least now, people will no longer be able to deceive themselves into thinking that this is happening for one reason when, in reality, it is happening for a totally different and totally unrelated reason.
 
In the final analysis, Maafa 21 does what all good documentaries do: It exposes what the media have been hiding and tells you what the political establishment doesn't want you to know.  To learn more, go to Maafa21.com.  

Contact: Mark Crutcher

Source: CNSNews.com
Date Published: September 4, 2010

Abortion Official Charged with Faking Bomb Scare at Own Clinic

       

An abortion facility director has been accused of misleading police after telling authorities that she had found a bomb at her facility, according to federal court papers.

Linda Meek, 63, whose is no longer employed by Reproductive Services of Tulsa, will face a federal lawsuit for intentionally giving "false and misleading information" resulting in a bomb scare at the facility on August 13. Reports did not specify the circumstances behind the end of Meek's employment at the abortion mill.

The police report said that an unnamed employee had reported seeing a box she did not recognize as facility waste in a trashcan. After the building was evacuated, Tulsa Police Department bomb technician examined the package, and discovered no explosive device.

Tulsa Police Officer Leland Ashley told the Tulsa World that reports that the employee claimed to hear a ticking sound coming from the package were unconfirmed.

The facility had been the site of an actual bombing and other attacks in 1997.

Neither Assistant U.S. Attorney Dennis Fries nor Meek's attorney, Allen Smallwood, would tell the World what Meek's suspected motivation was in initiating the false bomb scare.

Meek is being charged by the U.S. Attorney's Office, and according to officials could face as many as five years in prison if found guilty.  She is scheduled to appear in court on Thursday.

Pro-life Republican state Representative and family practice physician Mike Ritze told the Associated Press (AP) that the bomb scare was part of a growing trend among abortion activists to paint opponents as dangerous.

"Either she did it maliciously to harm the opposition or is trying to draw attention away from the abortion industry," said Ritze.

Tony Lauinger, chairman of Oklahomans for Life and vice president of the National Right to Life Committee, also told the AP that "there was an apparent rush to judgment" that pro-lifers were to blame for the incident. "We are opposed to violence. We're opposed to the violence that occurs on a daily basis inside abortion facilities. We are likewise opposed to any violence being directed toward those facilities," he said.

Planned Parenthood of Oklahoma City declined to discuss the incident but told the news service that, in the AP's words, it wasn't the "policy" of pro-abort activists to portray pro-lifers as dangerous.

Contact: Kathleen Gilbert

Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Date Published: September 8, 2010

Judge to Obama administration: Yes, I meant it, stop tax-paid embryo research Loved this headline, as if judges are supposed to rule on the basis of liking or disliking cases at hand… Yesterday Chief Judge Royce Lamberth of the Federal District Court

      

Loved this headline, as if judges are supposed to rule on the basis of liking or disliking cases at hand…

Yesterday Chief Judge Royce Lamberth of the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia denied the Obama administration's emergency request to lift his August 23 temporary injunction against federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.

Lamberth based his decision on the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, which bans such funding.

Obama's lawyers argued Lamberth's decision would do irreparable harm to research already underway and would also stop research funding authorized under the Bush administration of embryonic stem cell lines already created.

     

Lamberth, pictured, was quite snippy, writing:

Defendants are incorrect about much of their "parade of horribles" that will supposedly result from this Court's preliminary injunction.

Plaintiffs agree that this Court's order does not even address the Bush administration guidelines… The prior guidelines, of course, allowed research only on existing stem cell lines, foreclosing additional destruction of embryos.

Plaintiffs also agree that projects previously awarded and funded are not affected by this Court's order….

Additionally, since plaintiffs anticipate filing their motion for summary judgment by September 10…  the length of time this preliminary injunction will be in place should be limited.

In this Court's view, a stay would flout the will of Congress, as this Court understands what Congress has enacted in the Dickey-Wicker Amendment. Congress remains perfectly free to amend or revise the statute. This Court is not free to do so.

Congress has mandated that the public interest is served by preventing taxpayer funding of research that entails the destruction of human embryos. It is well-established that "[i]t is in the public interest for courts to carry out the will of Congress and for an agency to implement properly the statute it administers." Mylan Pharms., Inc. v. Shalala….

NIH funds research projects this way, as described by Science magazine:

When NIH disburses a grant, it doesn't hand the money over to the researcher's institution. Instead, the Treasury has a special account that the institution draws down to pay an investigator's research project expenses. 

Technically, the money is held by the Treasury Dept. and is paid out gradually over the year.

So while NIH has begun funding some escr projects, if Lamberth's ruling stands, federal funding will stop midstream. This means, according to the New York Times:

But if the ruling is upheld, the government will be forced to suspend $54 million in financing for 22 scientific projects by the end of September. An additional 60 projects are threatened….

In 2009, the health institutes spent $143 million to underwrite more than 330 scientific projects using human embryonic stem cells, and it estimated that it would spend another $137 million in this fiscal year, which ends in September.

Contact: Jill Stanek

Source: JillStanek.com
Date Published: September 8, 2010

Pro-Life Action League Returns to Lake Zurich, Mundelein for Truth Day Protest

Group Will Line Streets with Graphic Abortion Images September 15

      

Next week, the Pro-Life Action League will return to Lake Zurich and Mundelein, Ill. with graphic abortion images for its September "Face the Truth" Day.

"These two sites have historically been very opposed to facing the truth about abortion," said Eric Scheidler, executive director of the Pro-Life Action League. "These signs are disturbing to passers by, but they should be -- they expose the gruesome reality of abortion and its very real human cost."

Tensions with Lake Zurich ran high after this year's July 15 Face the Truth Day when the city's police chief said the Pro-Life Action League would have to meet with them before another demonstration. The chief claimed the demonstrators deliberately disrupted traffic. In 2006, Mundelein police shut down the Truth Tour claiming that the League needed a permit to demonstrate. 

However, the League has a long history of cooperating with police and conducting peaceful, well-organized public protests. Before every Face the Truth demonstration, attorneys for the Pro-Life Acton League send a letter to the local police, as a courtesy, informing them about the upcoming demonstration. 

"We hope and expect that both Lake Zurich and Mundelein will respect our First Amendment rights to deploy our signs and show the public the reality of abortion," said Scheidler.

The Truth Day will take place:
Wednesday, September 15, 2010 
- 9:00-10:30 a.m. at Rand Road (Route 12) & Main Street (Route 22) in Lake Zurich
- 11:30-1:00 p.m. at Townline Road (Route 60) & Lake Street (Route 45) in Mundelein

Contact: Stephanie Lewis

Source: Pro-Life Action League
Date Published: September 8, 2010

Editorial promoting telemed abortions in Iowa admits they’re currently being done illegally

     

In a September 5 editorial promoting the legalization of RU-486 telemed abortions, the Des Moines Register editorial board had to admit Planned Parenthood of the Heartland is currently committing them illegally. Read carefully:

… Planned Parenthood of the Heartland has used telemedicine as it was intended: to expand access to legal health services in rural Iowa. The challenge of that smart approach should prompt state leaders to update laws and policies – to give Iowans increased access to health care, including abortion, through the use of technology.

Now it's up to Iowa leaders to:

- Re-evaluate outdated abortion laws in this state.

The law requiring physicians to perform abortions made sense when all abortions were surgical procedures. But that requirement is called into question now that women are increasingly choosing to take a drug….

Iowa should take a step forward in fostering 21st century medicine – including using it to give women access to a legal medical procedure.

In touting the need for telemed abortions in rural areas, the editorial board did not present a solution for aborting mothers who encounter emergencies in rural areas.

Instead the editorial board ridiculously relied on unsubstantiated data from the fox guarding the hen house to say the hens are safe:

PP says that of the 1,500 women who have used telemedicine for abortions over the past 2 years, none has reported complications.

Yes, let's take the word of the megaabortion industry committing these abortions to say all is well.

Are you really that gullible, Des Moines Register? Not one complication of 1,500 telemed abortions committed over the course of 2 years? Not one? Planned Parenthood Federation lists 5 possible complications, which I'm copying and pasting:

- an allergic reaction to either of the pills
- incomplete abortion – part of the pregnancy is left inside the uterus
  (To clarify, by "part of the pregnancy… left inside the uterus," PP means not to say "part of the baby.")
- infection
- undetected ectopic pregnancy
- very heavy bleeding

So out of 1,500 abortions there has not been one allergic reaction, not one infection, not one ectopic pregnancy found after the fact, and not one case of heavy bleeding? Wow.

I skipped the complication of an "incomplete abortion" because the PP Federation elsewhere states:

Complete abortion will occur in 96–97 percent of women who choose mifepristone. In the small percentage of cases that medication abortion fails, other abortion procedures are required to end the pregnancies.

This means PP of the Heartland, which should have encountered 45-60 incomplete abortions out of 1,500 RU-486 telemed abortions, in actuality encountered not one? Wow again. That's amazing.

Because if there were any complications or need for surgical abortions in the event of an RU-486 fail, again the question for mothers in rural areas would be, where to go?

Had the Des Moines Register editorial board written this opinion piece for a Journalism 101 class, it would have gotten an F for not checking the obviously biased source of a pretty incredible and unsubstantiated statistic.

And the board had the nerve to call pro-lifers "backward."

Contact: Jill Stanek

Source: JillStanek.com
Date Published: September 8, 2010

The Coming Battle Over the Dickey Amendment

      

The Dickey Amendment forbids federal funding of destructive embryo research. That is, it doesn't prohibit the research, it just doesn't permit the federal government to pay for it.

Recently, President Obama's ESCR funding policy was blocked by a federal judge because it violated Dickey. The Obama Administration sought a stay, but no go. From the story:

A federal judge Tuesday rejected the Obama administration's request to stay his recently imposed injunction against use of public funds in embryonic stem-cell research. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth said he could not agree to delay his injunction while the case is appealed. "Defendants (the government) are incorrect about much of their 'parade of horribles' that will supposedly result from this Court's preliminary injunction," Lamberth wrote in his court order. The "horribles" he referred to are an extensive list of research projects outlined by the National Institutes of Health that will have to be shelved if a stay is not granted. "Congress has mandated that the public interest is served by preventing taxpayer funding of research that entails the destruction of human embryos," Lamberth said "In this court's view a stay would flout the will of Congress as this Court understands what Congress has enacted…Congress remains perfectly free to amend or revise the statute. This Court is not free to do so," Lamberth concluded.

This means that unless the government can get an emergency stay on appeal, federal funding of ESCR will grind to a halt. If that happens, expect the Congress to try and move The Stem Cell Research Advancement Act of 2009" (HR 4808),  that would specifically authorize federal funding of ESCR, and thereby get around Dickey.

While I wouldn't like it, I  think that provision alone would probably pass in the current Congress.  But there is a hitch that raises the stakes even higher: As I reported here, the bill also specifically authorizes the federal funding of human cloning research. And that is a line in the sand we cannot allow to be crossed.  So, if H R 4808 is not amended, expect a concerted effort in the Congress to block it.  It will be an interesting Fall.

Contact: Wesley J. Smith

Source: Secondhand Smoke
Date Published: September 7, 2010

Four-State Abortion Empire Crumbles Following Botched Abortion

      

The empire of a troubled New Jersey abortionist who headed a four-state abortion ring is slowly crumbling after Maryland began investigating the setup following a teenager's botched abortion. In addition to unveiling the illegality of the setup, the investigation resulted in one raid where police discovered a gruesome display of 35 frozen unborn children preserved in jars.

Stephen Chase Brigham is the owner of American Women's Services, which operated 15 abortion facilities in states including New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Maryland. Brigham's operation involved at least two other abortionists, George Shepard, Jr., of Delaware and Nicola I. Riley of Utah, whose Maryland licenses have both been suspended for their role in Brigham's business.

The Maryland Board of Physicians issued a cease and desist order against Brigham August 25 after concluding that the abortionist had been routinely skirting New Jersey law by bringing clients to his facilities in Maryland, where he does not have a license to practice. According to the Board, Brigham was in the habit of performing the first phase of the procedure, dilating the patient's cervix, in New Jersey; however, because his clinics did not meet safety standards to perform the whole procedure there, Brigham would then direct the patients to drive down to Maryland to have the abortion completed.

The setup was discovered after Brigham was forced to bring one of his teenage patients to a Maryland hospital after a botched abortion last month, according to the medical board's documents.

The 18-year-old was one of several Brigham had directed to drive in a car caravan from Voorhees, New Jersey to Elkton, Maryland in order to complete the abortions. After abortionist Riley accidentally cut through the patient's uterus and lacerated her bowel and vagina, Brigham refused to call an ambulance, and put the teen in the back of his Chevrolet Malibu to bring her to the local hospital. There, he and Riley dodged questioning on "who they were, what had happened, and from where they had come." The patient's injury was so severe she had to be flown to Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore.

The Board found that Brigham had performed surgical procedures in Elkton as regularly as four to six times per week for several months. "The health of Maryland patients is being endangered by the Respondent's unlicensed practice of medicine in this State," stated the cease and desist order.

Prior to the Board's order, Elkton police had removed the remains of 35 "late-term fetuses and fetal parts" from Brigham's office in that town. His office in Voorhees, New Jersey was also raided by police.

In July, the Pennsylvania Department of Health ordered Brigham to shut down his abortion facilities in the state for allowing unlicensed employees to give medical care. Brigham is appealing the decision.

While the abortionist has served jail time and paid thousands in fines for failing to pay taxes, his run-ins with the law do not stop there: Brigham was once licensed to perform abortions in New York, but had that license revoked in 1994 for "gross negligence" and "inexcusably bad judgment" in the case of a woman's botched abortion. The same incident caused Brigham to lose his license in New Jersey, but he fought successfully to have it restored three years later.

Operation Rescue reports that Brigham has been under investigation and discipline throughout his entire 20-year career: he voluntarily retired his medical license in Pennsylvania while under investigation just six years after graduating from medical school. Since then, Brigham had medical licenses revoked in New York and Florida, and received disciplinary action in California and New Jersey, and has served 120 days in jail in 1998 for Medicaid fraud.

In addition, according to the group, a judge once ordered him to stop advertising his abortions as "painless" and "safe."
 
Operation Rescue has sent a letter to Maryland's Attorney General urging that criminal charges be brought against Brigham.

"There is a largely unspoken crisis in this country brought on by abortionists who insist that they are above the law," said Operation Rescue spokesperson Cheryl Sullenger.

"We can no longer turn a blind eye to these abortion abuses and pretend that things like this can't happen in a nation where abortion is legally permissible. Brigham is just one example in an industry where this kind of behavior is the norm and not the exception."

Contact: Kathleen Gilbert

Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Date Published: September 7, 2010

Pastor in battle over food, water suffers fatal seizure

Native of Sri Lanka had been on no-treatment regimen at hospital

     

A pastor who had been at the center of a fight over whether seriously injured patients deserve food and water while hospitalized has suffered a seizure and died, officials confirmed.

Joshua Kulendran Mayandy arrived in Canada about 10 years ago to serve ethnic Tamil immigrants from Sri Lanka near the East York area of Ontario.

He had complained of chest pains and was hospitalized in Brampton after collapsing with a heart attack May 29.

He was revived but suffered what had been termed brain impairment due to lack of oxygen. He was placed in the intensive care unit where he regained consciousness. An eyewitness said Mayandy continued to improve, regaining some movement of his arms and legs, and even speaking some words.

Read WorldNetDaily's unparalleled, in-depth coverage of the life-and-death fight over Terri Schiavo, including over 150 original stories and columns.

But the staff at Brampton Civic Hospital, part of the William Osler Health Center, disagreed with the assessment of Mayandy's health, asserting there was no hope of recovery.

In Ontario, disagreements over the condition of a patient between families and doctors requires the intervention of a "Consent and Capacity Board."

The board determines proper medical treatment for patients who cannot make decisions themselves.

The board ruled that since Mayandy's family was too far away, they could not understand his medical situation, and they appointed a close friend to be his "Strategic Decision Maker," or SDM.

After hearing from "all parties," the Capacity Board ruled that Brampton Hospital could remove all of Mayandy's life support, which officials proceeded to do on Aug. 17.

Even though eyewitnesses said Mayandy had regained consciousness and appeared to be recovering from both his heart attack and partial brain damage, he was not given food and water for more than a week.

Then his "SDM" had a change of heart, asking the hospital to feed him orally. A nurse, who also was a member of Mayandy's church, began to feed him even though Mayandy had a tracheotomy.

Hopes that Mayandy might recover were dashed when he suffered another seizure and slipped back into a coma about a week ago.

Since Mayandy no longer could be fed orally, little was done to help him. The hospital still was operating under the original order from the "Consent and Capacity Board" that ruled he never would recover. Thus, the hospital did not have to give him either a food tube or IV fluids.

WND requested from the hospital the official cause of death, but there was not an immediate response.

Dr. Bernard Stephenson, a friend of Mayandy's, has said the hospital only offered seizure medicine, but nothing else was required.

Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition pointed out that once the seizure had occurred, the damage probably was fatal.

However, Schadenberg also pointed out that prior to the seizure the hospital could have done several things to help Mayandy, including inserting a feeding tube and providing IV fluids.

Schadenberg said that Mayandy's Strategic Decision Maker never made that request to the hospital.

Stephenson added his concerns, saying that, "I hate to live in a society … almost a Hitlerian society where people with disabilities don't have a say or don't have any value any more. I think that's the kind of society I'm scared of living in and people need to know this is happening."

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is also urging Canadians to contact them about a document they believe can provide assistance should the circumstances of this type of case appear again.

Mark Handelman, an attorney for Brampton Civic Hospital, said the decision removing the food and water from the pastor was unanimous and denied that any pressure was applied to Mayandy's friend.

"Justice was seen, and justice was done," he said.

Schadenberg, however, points out that Ontario is "$20 billion in debt."

"There are unwritten rules. One of them is that long-term care is simply too costly," he said.

The issue of rationing health-care dollars has generated considerable alarm in the United States amid debate and enactment this year of President Obama's nationalization of health care decision-making.

Critics such as former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin have cited Obamacare plans to cut $500 billion in health-care spending on seniors. Palin stirred controvesy by labeling the bureacratic process set up to allocate funds "death panels."

Obamacare critics have argued that the government will be forced to ration care because of budget constraints.

The Mayandy case recalls the high-profile life and death of Terri Schiavo, who died after being deprived of food and water in a Florida dispute that made headlines nationally. 

Contact: Thom Redmond

Source: WorldNetDaily
Date Published: September 7, 2010

Sept. 10 is “Worldwide Suicide Prevention Day”–With Exceptions

      

September 10 is Worldwide Suicide Prevention Day.  Good.  But, I fear not very effective.

The well meaning people behind WSPD have missed-or were afraid of the controversy that would be caused by tackling–the proverbial elephant in the living room.  You see, many high profile voices now urge that suicide not only be permitted, but facilitated.  Thus, Worldwide Suicide Prevention Day should have an asterisk after the title:

Worldwide Suicide Prevention Day*

*Prevention, that is, unless:

you have been diagnosed with a terminal illness;
you have become seriously disabled;
you are elderly and "tired of life:"
you are a baby born with disabilities and live in the Netherlands or Belgium (where doctors will commit your suicide for you);
you are a spouse who doesn't want to live without your dying husband or wife, and you go to Switzerland for some suicide tourism.
In other words, I don't see how suicide prevention can be effective when there is so much outright suicide promotion going on. But the International Association for Suicide Prevention is silent about the threat posed to the cause of suicide reduction by assisted suicide and "rational suicide" advocacy. Not. A. Peep.

And let me also express my frustration with an aspect of this campaign that we now see ubiquitously in "cause" advocacy. We have become a world in which meaningless symbols often matter more than effective action. Not only does Worldwide Suicide Prevention Day not tackle the problem of suicide promotion in society–it suggests we engage in gesture advocacy to show how much we care.  From the Suicide Prevention Day website:

Some people have contacted us saying that they would like to meaningfully participate in World Suicide Prevention Day but cannot attend events or activities. This year we are starting a new activity which anyone can do in support of: World Suicide Prevention Day, suicide prevention and awareness, survivors of suicide and for the memory of loved lost ones. It is called "Light a Candle on World Suicide Prevention Day at 8 PM." If you like this activity and know of family members, friends and associates who would be interested in participating, would you kindly share with them this WSPD activity? We are hoping this activity will bring light into the world and increase awareness of the good work so many people do in preventing suicide.

And then, let's pin colored ribbons to our lapels.

Don't get me wrong. I am obviously for suicide prevention and the WSPD can't hurt.  But avoiding crucial issues and engaging in, "It makes me feel good" symbolism, just doesn't cut it.

Contact: Wesley J. Smith

Source: Secondhand Smoke
Date Published: September 6, 2010

Adult Stem Cell Scientists Oppose Government's Request to Lift Federal Judge's Order Enjoining Unlawful Federal Funding of Research Involving the Destruction of Living Human Embryos

      

Responding to the government's request for an emergency stay pending appeal of federal district court Chief Judge Royce Lamberth's August 23rd decision and preliminary injunction enjoining unlawful federal funding of "research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death," lawyers for adult stem cell scientists this evening timely filed their opposing memorandum of law and evidentiary declarations of Drs. Deisher  and Sherley that seek to correct the government's misstatements of law and fact contained in its stay request and accompanying Declaration by National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director, Francis Collins.

Advocates International (AI), part of the public interest legal team along with the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher (GD&C) who brought the case before the court more than a year ago, seeks to maintain the preliminary injunction issued by the United States District Court of the District of Columbia enjoining HHS and NIH from unlawfully expending taxpayer funds on research involving the destruction of living human embryos.  The district court's opinion followed the decision by the United States Court of Appeals earlier this summer finding that doctors doing adult stem cell research have 'competitive standing' to sue. Therefore, the court reinstated the doctors' federal lawsuit, filed last summer that seeks to preliminarily enjoin and ultimately overturn the controversial guidelines for public funding of embryonic stem cell research that the NIH issued on July 7, 2009. 

In their opposition, plaintiffs notified the court that plaintiffs intend to file a motion for summary judgment, seeking permanent injunctive and declaratory relief, by September 10, and will not object to expedited consideration of that motion.  Samuel B. Casey, AI's General Counsel, explained plaintiffs' opposition to the stay request, stating that "the government's claims of irreparable harm absent a stay rest on speculation, misinformation, and hyperbole.  At every turn, the government presents this case as a choice between spending federal dollars on human embryonic stem cell research -- funding that the district court has previously determined has only speculative benefits and violates federal law against killing or discarding living human embryos -- or nothing at all.  To the contrary, the preliminary injunction frees up millions in limited grant dollars that the National Institutes of Health ("NIH") can now award to projects that promise more tangible medical benefits, raise fewer ethical issues, and comport with the law, including adult and induced pluripotent stem cell research." 
 
Since 1996, in what has been popularly known as its Dickey-Wicker Amendment to each HHS Appropriations Bill, Congress has expressly banned NIH from funding research in which human embryos "are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death."

According to AI's General Counsel, Samuel B. Casey, United States District Court Judge Lambreth's ruling, quoted below, "could not be clearer":

ESC research is clearly research in which an embryo is destroyed. To conduct ESC research, ESCs must be derived from an embryo. The process of deriving ESCs from an embryo results in the destruction of the embryo. Thus, ESC research necessarily depends upon the destruction of a human embryo. Despite defendants' attempt to separate the derivation of ESCs from research on the ESCs, the two cannot be separated. Derivation of ESCs from an embryo is an integral step in conducting ESC research. Indeed, it is just one of many steps in the "systematic investigation" of stem cell research. 45 C.F.R. § 46.102(d). Simply because ESC research involves multiple steps does not mean that each step is a separate "piece of research" that may be federally funded, provided the step does not result in the destruction of an embryo. If one step or "piece of research" of an ESC research project results in the destruction of an embryo, the entire project is precluded from receiving federal funding by the Dickey-Wicker Amendment. Because ESC research requires the derivation of ESCs, ESC research is research in which an embryo is destroyed. Accordingly, the Court concludes that, by allowing federal funding of ESC research, the Guidelines are in violation of the Dickey-Wicker Amendment.

According to GD&C's Thomas G. Hungar, lead trial counsel for the plaintiffs who argued the case before the Court of Appeals and before Judge Lamberth: "We are gratified that the Court agreed with our plain-language reading of the Dickey-Wicker statute.  Congress has forbidden federal funding of research that entails the destruction of human embryos, and rather than seek a stay the NIH needs to start complying with the law." 

The plaintiffs contend that the NIH guidelines violate the congressional ban because they "necessarily condition funding on the destruction of human embryos."  In addition, the plaintiffs also allege that the NIH guidelines were invalidly implemented, because the decision to fund human embryonic stem cell research was made without the proper procedures required by law and without properly considering the more effective and less ethically problematic forms of adult and induced pluripotent stem cell research. 

President Obama, in his March 11, 2009 Executive Order announcing his Administration's policy stated he was determined to fund ethically "responsible, scientifically worthy human stem cell research...to the extent permitted by law". Sadly, said AI's Casey, "these guidelines while claiming to 'implement' the President's directions, failed his own test because they are not only unlawful, they are based upon an ethically irresponsible misunderstanding of available scientific evidence. 

In opposing the government's request for a stay of the preliminary injunction, one of the expert stem cell researcher plaintiffs, Dr. Theresa Deisher, points out that NIH Director Francis Collin's declaration "contains numerous factual assertions and characterizations regarding the nature of and prospects for adult stem research, human embryonic stem cell research, and induced pluripotent stem cell research that are directly contrary to the evidence in the administrative record, and that do not accurately reflect the published literature on those subjects."

Casey, added:  "The majority of the almost 50,000 comments that the NIH received were opposed to funding this research, and by its own admission, NIH totally ignored these comments, including the extensive scientific and legal comments submitted by AI as part of a coalition known as Do No Harm.  The so-called spare human embryos being stored in IVF clinics around the United States are not 'in excess of need,' as the NIH in its guidelines callously assert.  They are human beings in need of biological or adoptive parents."

The lawsuit was initially instituted more than a year ago by a broad coalition of plaintiffs, including Dr. James L. Sherley, a former member of the MIT faculty, currently working as a senior scientist at the Boston Biomedical Research Institute; Dr. Theresa Deisher, the founder, managing member, and research and development director of AVM Biotechnology; Nightlight Christian Adoptions, a non-profit, licensed adoption agency dedicated to protecting and finding adoptive parents for human embryos conceived through in vitro fertilization; all individual human embryos whose lives are now at risk under NIH's guidelines; parents seeking to adopt human embryos; and the Christian Medical Association, a non-profit association of doctors dedicated to improving ethical standards of health care in the United States and abroad.  The Alliance Defense Fund, a legal alliance of attorneys and like-minded organizations defending religious freedom and the sanctity of human life, is also serving as co-counsel on the case and providing financial support.

Contact: Samuel B. Casey

Source: Advocates International
Date Published: September 3, 2010

Citizens Group Calls for Councilmember to Retract Threats and Release NOW Financial Records

      

Maryland Citizens for Responsible Government (MCRG) calls on both the Maryland Chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW) and Councilmember Duchy Trachtenberg to release all records involving Trachtenberg's actions as NOW's treasurer from 2006 until November 2008, when Trachtenberg resigned from her position and membership with the organization. 

MCRG has anonymously received an unsettling document which purports to be a summary of a November 9, 2009, NOW Grievance Committee Decision against Trachtenberg. The grievance allegedly cites Suntrust Bank records for NOW's checking account and claims that Trachtenberg misused NOW's ATM card to make unauthorized cash withdrawals; make purchases at retail stores like Lord & Taylor, Victoria's Secret, and Filenes Basement; and write numerous checks to herself and her husband.

The grievance further alleges that at the end of her term as NOW treasurer, Trachtenberg failed to provide accounting records.

Trachtenberg currently sits on the County Council of Montgomery County, Maryland. In her infamous letter to the Department of Justice, Councilmember Trachtenberg requested transparent behavior of all public servants. "Threatening the National Organization for Women with legal action if they publicly speak about their grievance is not transparent behavior," said Dr. Ruth Jacobs, MCRG President. 

"MCRG calls on Trachtenberg to retract threats of legal action against NOW, confirm the outcome of this grievance, and produce all records concerning her actions as treasurer for NOW as the grievance allegedly demands. As Trachtenberg herself has said, Montgomery County residents deserve transparency of their public officials." 

A January 20, 2010, Gazette article documented that Trachtenberg had threatened legal action against officers of Maryland NOW for defamation and invasion of privacy if they discuss the grievance with the media. Trachtenberg's attorney also asked that NOW "dismiss a claim that Trachtenberg mishandled money while serving as treasurer of the organization."

Trachtenberg is seeking re-election this fall to her Montgomery County Council at-large seat. Both Montgomery County NOW and the Gazette have not endorsed Trachtenberg. And the alleged grievance forbids Trachtenberg from holding any leadership position with NOW. Montgomery County Now is reported to have added a new question to their candidate questionnaire -- "Is there anything in your background that might disqualify you from an endorsement by MCNOW?"

Source: Maryland Citizens for a Responsible Government
Date Published: September 7, 2010

Pro-life activists call for charges against assailant

Threat alleged was to shoot sidewalk counselor 'in the heart'

      

After enduring repeated threats and physical assaults outside abortion clinics, Albuquerque pro-life activists are calling on the police and prosecutors to protect them by filing charges against a recent armed assailant.

Police responded in force on August 25 when an armed Arizona man bringing his 16-year-old daughter for an abortion at an infamous late-term abortion facility, Southwestern Women's Options, threatened to "shoot [a sidewalk counselor] in the heart."

They failed, however, to show up after being summoned in at least one previous violent incident.

"This is the first time the police have responded properly to threats we've received in front of the abortion mill," said Father Stephen Imbarrato, head of Project Defending Life, an Albuquerque-based pro-life ministry. Imbarrato recently has been reaching out to Albuquerque's mayor, district attorneys and police to improve relationships with the pro-life community.

Imbarrato plans to ask the local district attorney to press charges against the Arizona man. The man had at least two firearms in the trunk of his vehicle when, according to Imbarrato, he made two separate threats to shoot two sidewalk counselors.

Police confiscated his weapons after the incident, but apparently plan to return them, according to pro-life activist Bud Shaver.

"No charges have been pressed against the guy," said Shaver. "The police confiscated the weapons, but he may get them back. Father Stephen is trying to get in touch with the mayor's office."

Such threats are old hat to Shaver, a veteran activist who describes himself as a "pro-life missionary."

"I was threatened one week ago. A month ago a woman was choked, and the police did not respond."

Shaver described these two incidents in detail.

"A man told me to quit talking to him or 'I'm going to push you into the street and stomp you to death.' He said that within two inches of my face." In the earlier incident, "a sidewalk counselor was saying 'we care about you, God loves you and your child.' A woman who was belligerent about being spoken to ran up to a counselor, put both hands around her neck and told her to be quiet. The woman being choked called police. They did not respond."

Imbarrato contends that Albuquerque police are more sensitive to complaints from the abortionists than the pro-lifers.

"A no parking sign mysteriously showed up in front of the abortion mill. When we parked there, the abortion mill complained and the police showed up in no time at all," he said.

Imbarrato also is disappointed with the Albuquerque media. Describing the August 28 threats, he said, "Ten police cars showed up. They were there for two or three hours. They made everybody come out of the building with their hands up. Albuquerque TV only covered the story two or three days later, when they got the information from the Operation Rescue website. Then the Albuquerque Journal picked up on the TV. The media in Albuquerque don't monitor the police scanner? It defies imagination."

In spite of the threats and violence faced by activists, Project Defending Life has been very successful in its efforts to save the lives of unborn babies, according to Imbarrato.

"We've had hundreds of turnarounds, and more than a hundred babies born in our ministry in the past two years."

In addition to its work on the streets, Project Defending Life provides assistance to new mothers.

Contact: Brian Fitzpatrick

Source: WorldNetDaily
Date Published: September 4, 2010

Abortions suspended for unsafe practices; 1st under new law

         

The LA Dept. of Health and Hospitals revoked the clinic license of Hope Medical Group for Women in Shreveport, LA, last week and ordered them to halt all abortions there. The action was the first immediate suspension under the new LA law that allows the State to order a clinic to cease operations.

According to a press release issued September 1, 2010, by the LDHH, they found the following violations that posed an immediate threat to the health, welfare, or safety of a client or patient:

Several violations were noted during a recent investigation of the facility, including the facility's failure to ensure that a physician performed and documented a physical exam on each patient prior to a procedure, failure to properly monitor vital signs of patients under anesthesia, failure to have proper procedures in place for administering anesthesia and failure to have properly trained professionals performing certain medical procedures related to the administering of anesthesia.

"When we see this level of egregious conduct at a facility, it is incumbent on us to take steps necessary to protect our residents," said LDHH Interim Secretary Anthony Keck. "The Legislature gave us this authority because they recognized we must have the ability to stop unsafe practices that place these already vulnerable women in danger."

Prior to the passage of the new law, known as Act 490, suspension orders could not be immediately enforced, allowing dangerous abortion mills to continue to endanger the public for months.

Such was the case in January, 2010, when the LDHH suspended the license of Gentilly Medical Clinic for Women in New Orleans operated by troubled abortionist Ifeanyi Charles Anthony Okpalobi (pronounced ok-PAH-luh-bee). The State charged Okpalobi's clinic with violating laws requiring that abortion clinics have a licensed nurse on staff, and that they have proper state and federal licensing for controlled substances. 9 months later, the clinic continues uninterrupted operations pending appeal, even though there is no evidence that the dangerous conditions were ever remedied.

At that time, Operation Rescue called on the State of LA to consider the health and safety of women and take action that would allow the State to close this dangerous abortion mill. Now, the laws give the State the ability to act on suspensions in the interest of public safety.

"Given what we know from our investigations in to Louisiana's abortion clinics, the suspension of Hope Medical Group for Women's seedy abortion operations will not be the last suspension issued by the Health Department," said Newman.

"This is more evidence that pro-life laws, when enforced, close abortion mills and save lives. We are relieved that there is now another layer of protection for vulnerable women and their innocent pre-born babies, but we cannot not rest until every abortion mill is closed and our pre-born children are fully protected by law."

Click here to read LDHH Press Release Concerning Suspension.

Source: Pro-Life Blogs
Date Published: September 7, 2010

Compassion and Choices Uses Murder/Suicide to Advertise Doctor Prescribed Death in Montana

      

The pro assisted suicide group Compassion and Choices, along with a compliant media, continues to romanticize self destruction as an answer to the problem of human suffering. Latest example: In Montana, a man murdered his wife, who had cerebral palsy, set his house on fire, and then, shot himself.  How is the tragedy treated? As an advertisement for assisted suicide.  From the story, byline Michael Jamison:

It was an act of love, Darryl Anderson said, an act of compassion and caring and bullets and arson and it didn't have to be that way. "Basically," Anderson said, "it was a mercy killing, to end the pain. They were good people, but there was terrible pain." William "Ted" Hardgrove used to visit Anderson – Lincoln County's sheriff – at work, showing off his inventions or detailing his own detective work on the latest unsolved case. He'd stay and chat and sometimes harangue, Anderson said, "and I thought he was just a super old guy."

Hardgrove was 81, just like his wife Swanie. She was known for her baking, and her gardening and her lace-making, and for the fact that she had cerebral palsy as well as other crippling medical problems. In recent weeks, the increasing pain had completely overwhelmed her medication. On the last Saturday in August, Ted Hardgrove stopped the pain. He moved their valuables out of the Libby-area house and into the garage, then left a note explaining this final, desperate act of love. He took the household chemicals from the home, took the hunting ammunition and anything else that might explode or burn too hot. Anderson figures Hardgrove was protecting the firemen he knew would come. Then Hardgrove went back inside, shot his wife, set their home afire and shot himself. "It was a very carefully planned thing," Anderson said. "He left that note, said he was tired of seeing her suffer so badly, and there was a better place."

"An act of love", "He stopped the pain:" In any other context, this would be looked at as a possible abuse scenario.

That point aside, rather than report on how this tragedy could have been avoided without death, the reporter goes to the Compassion and Choices representative–who despicably seizes upon the story to push the assisted suicide agenda:

But there was also, perhaps, a better way. "What we want people to know," said Steve Hopcraft, "is there is help and information out there." Hopcraft works with a nonprofit called Compassion and Choices, a group that offers free end-of-life planning, counseling and options. "We believe that these tragic and violent deaths are 100 percent preventable," Hopcraft said. "It's a matter, really, of getting the information out." Information such as the fact that Montana is among three states – Oregon and Washington are the other two – where doctors are allowed to provide what's known as "aid in dying." They can prescribe lethal drugs to terminally ill patients, who can then choose whether and when to use the pills.

Talk about a clueless reporter. First, notice he buys the euphemistic "aid in dying."  Second, there is no indication that Mrs. Hardgrove was terminally ill, she was elderly and disabled, nor indeed, that she even wanted to be killed.  Third, when pain control fails, the answer isn't murder, it isn't a lethal prescription, it is to have a doctor improve the pain control.  Fourth, what could Mr. Hardgrove have done to get further help–without resorting to ending his wife's life?  Was he overwhelmed with caregiving?  What services could he have sought? Good grief, at least print the local suicide prevention phone number!

But not to worry, the reporter quotes a physician:

"No one, no matter what their condition, should feel they have to resort to violence when confronting advanced illness," said Stephen Speckart, retired Missoula oncologist. "Patients need to feel safe talking with their doctors about unbearable symptoms and their feelings of desperation and desire for a peaceful death."

Guess what? Dr. Stephen Speckart was a plaintiff in the case that brought legalized assisted suicide to Montana–and the reporter doesn't so identify him!  That is really journalistic malpractice.

This is really disgraceful: We have a story of a murder suicide, turned into a commercial for assisted suicide, in which most of the sources are assisted suicide activists, written by a reporter who treats Mrs. H's death as a necessity, and doesn't explore how people in such difficult circumstances can be helped.  Culture of death, Wesley?  What culture of death?

Contact: Wesley J. Smith

Source: Secondhand Smoke
Date Published: September 4, 2010

Pro-Life Hopes for Illinois Parental Notice Law Dashed by Court

      

Pro-life attorneys hoping anxiously for a speedy conclusion to the legal battle over the state's long-delayed Parental Notice of Abortion Act, saw their hopes dashed when the state Supreme Court refused to transfer the case to their immediate jurisdiction.

The high court denied a motion by the pro-life legal advocacy group Thomas More Society to bypass the appellate court and hear the case brought against the Illinois Parental Notice of Abortion Act of 1995. The act is being challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

"We're obviously disappointed with this ruling, but we remain committed to doing everything we possibly can to bring these appeals to a speedy and positive conclusion," said Tom Brejcha, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Society.

The pro-life attorneys based their motion on a Supreme Court rule that allows transfer of cases to the high court directly when the "public interest requires prompt adjudication." Without the Supreme Court's intervention, they anticipated the case would not see a decision from the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court for at least a year, meaning more secret abortions on minors would end up being performed in the state.

Two members of the state Supreme Court, Justices Robert R. Thomas and Thomas L. Kilbride, showed interest in concluding quickly the 15-year-long legal battle over the Act, and voiced their dissent to the majority's order.

With the transfer motion denied, the First District of Illinois Appellate Court will continue to oversee the case. Thomas More Society attorneys will file their opening appeal brief on Friday.

Brejcha said two courts, the 7th US Court of Appeals and Cook County Circuit Court, have both rendered judgments against the ACLU's legal challenges to the law, indicating the ACLU's case is "legally meritless." He argued that the law should be enforced, not suspended, until the ACLU's appeal was resolved.

Judge Daniel Riley of the Cook County Circuit Court dismissed the lawsuit brought against the Act by the American Civil Liberties Union this past March, ruling the Act constitutionally valid. While he viewed the 1970 Illinois State Constitution as including a right to abortion, he said the Act should stand since the Illinois right to abortion is not broader than the federal right, thereby allowing for certain restrictions.  
   
However, Riley issued an indefinite stay on his order for the duration of the ACLU's legal appeal.

The Thomas More Society believes the state Supreme Court will likely rule in favor of the law. Five years ago, the Supreme Court created a court bypass procedure designed to make the law constitutional in Illinois.

In November 2009, the ACLU intervened in court to strike down the parental notice law on the very day it was finally supposed to go into full effect. Both the Illinois Medical Disciplinary Board and the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation had decided to enforce the pro-life law without further delay when the ACLU intervened.

Since the passage of the Parental Notice of Abortion Act in 1995, over 50,000 Illinois girls below the age of majority have obtained abortions, more than 4,000 of whom were 14 years old or younger, without any requirement to notify their parents beforehand.

However, Illinois is also an abortion oasis in the Midwest for those looking to transport minors across state lines for abortion without their parent's knowledge or consent. In the Midwest, only Illinois lacks a parental notification or consent law for a minor seeking abortion. 

Contact: Peter J. Smith

Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Date Published: September 2, 2010