Stem Cell Research in 2011

Stem cell research will continue to be debated in scientific circles and in the halls of Congress but unfortunately, political funding and research decisions might not line up with sound science.

More than a decade after embryonic stem cells were first isolated, a top priority for some pro-embryonic stem cell scientists is an increase in taxpayer funding for this life-destroying research. But each year more of the scientific discussion focuses on the ever-developing alternatives to this research.

Based on a number of recent groundbreaking studies using non-embryonic sources, we can only hope this ethical research to take more of center stage.

In many ways, those in favor of embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) have painted themselves into a corner.  In an effort to gain widespread support for ESCR, they have made some high level promises to the American people.  The story line went like this:

-  "We can treat disease if we destroy young human embryos for research."

-  "Patients are suffering from horrible diseases and these balls of cells will be destroyed anyway, let's use them to cure people."

-  "We need to pursue the best research that has the quickest potential to treat disease, which requires ESCR." 

But, so far, embryonic stem cells have failed to fulfill any of these promises. 

Why Not Embryonic Stem Cell Research?

The public promotion of ESCR is by no means at a stand-still.  ESCR is the subject of frequent and overly-hyped press releases that usually consist of exclamations about great "breakthroughs."  What these releases fail to mention is that at least one of three limitations calls into question virtually all of these ESCR "successes:" 1) scientists are experimenting in animals (never humans because it's too risky) 2) immune rejection problems or cancer-causing tendencies are always an issue, and 3) research normally entails making embryonic stem cells behave like adult stem cells (rather ironic if you think about the strides being made with adult stem cells).

 

Proponents of ESCR continue to run into dead ends with these cells.  New animal studies identify the same significant hurdles of previous research.  As long as embryonic stem cells are rejected by patients and replicate wildly, causing cancer, there is little potential for these cells to treat disease.

In addition to the practical problems that continue to plague ESCR, obvious moral problems exist.  Embryonic stem cells are harvested from a young human embryo and as a result, that embryo is destroyed.  And this process – or anything that destroys, harms, or puts human life at risk – is contrary to the sacredness and value of human life.

When we consider how God designed the human body to function, it should come as no surprise that scientists continue to encounter problems with embryonic stem cells.  A human life at the embryonic stage of development is on a fast-track to becoming a fully formed human being.  In order to develop all the cells, tissues and organs necessary for the human body to function, embryonic stem cells divide and specialize rapidly.  So it makes sense that these cells, when taken out of God's natural order, would replicate too quickly and form tumors.  In contrast, cells in a fully formed body are replenished and rejuvenated during the natural wear and tear of life – by adult stem cells.  So, it's no surprise that the adult stem cells God designed to heal our bodies are the most successful in stem cell treatments and therapies.  These stem cells also pose no ethical concerns, making them ideal for these purposes.

Adult Stem Cell Successes

Fortunately, not all scientists have jumped on the ESCR bandwagon.  Some scientists continue to move forward with morally acceptable stem cell research.  These cells – often referred to as adult stem cells – have been successfully treating patients for more than a decade.  In fact, more than 70 diseases and conditions are being treated with these cells.  Even the federal government recognizes the importance of research with these cells – more than 2100 clinical trials with adult stem cells are being funded by the National Institutes of Health, with more added every day.

The Pentagon also understands the unique therapeutic potential of ethical stem cells.  They are investing a quarter-billion dollars into adult stem cell research to help service members and war veterans injured on the battlefield. 

Col. Bob Vandre of the Army's Medical Research and Material Command launched this five-year initiative that will use patients' stem cells to stop scarring, rebuild tendons and grow new ones.  He believes that "regenerative medicine is going to change the world."  He understands that it will be the means for "increasing the quality of lives, and [become] a huge technology that'll completely change the way we do medicine throughout the country."

 

There is a clear reason that this multi-million dollar initiative focuses on adult stem cells:  Unlike embryonic stem cells, adult stem cells have a proven track record, with a steady stream of new examples almost every week.  Here are a few recent success stories:

-  Blindness – in London, patients who lost their eyesight from chemical accidents or genetic disease have reported significant improvement in their eyesight. 

-  Back and spinal injuries – In Colorado, a spinal surgeon performed the diskectomy (to remove a herniated or bulging disk) surgery with adult stem cells to help heal the lower back.  This means that patients may be able to get long-term relief from back pain and minimize their need for further surgeries.

-  Transplant patients – In Boston, transplant patients have avoided the use of long-term immune suppressing drugs.  These drugs have serious side affects but are necessary to keep the patient's body from rejecting the new organ.  A new treatment injected the patients with bone marrow stem cells from the organ donor. The stem cells from the donor trick the recipient's immune system into thinking the donated organ is part of the patient's natural self.   Four of five kidney recipients were still off immune-suppressing medicines up to five years later. 

-  Regenerating kidneys – Dr Anthony Atala of Wake Forest University used amniotic fluid stem cells to regenerate human livers and other tissues.

-  Lung disease (pulmonary hypertension) – In Canada, two patients were treated with genetically modified (enhanced) versions of their own stem cells.  

-  Spinal cord injuries – In Portugal, Dr Carlos Lima is treating patients with spinal cord injury by using the patients' own stem cells from their nasal cavity.

-  Cancers – A number of cancers, from leukemia to breast cancer, are being successfully treated using adult stem cell.

-  Blood disorders/anemia – patients with rare blood conditions and genetic disorders are finding relief, and sometimes being cured, with use of adult stem cells.

The list continues to grow — evidence that adult stem cell research isn't theoretical; these are real therapies, helping real patients.

Looking Ahead

Not only are the traditional forms of adult stem cells continuing to help patients, scientists are discovering other helpful alternatives to destructive research.  The newest research uses ordinary adult body cells and transforms them into the embryonic-like stem cell research without harming human life.  To learn more about iPS cells and this research, please visit Looking Forward: Ethical Stem Cell Research.

So what should scientists, medical professionals and politicians consider when they debate this issue in the coming months?

Morally problematic, life destroying embryonic stem cell research is losing ground as a viable option for research and treating disease.  In fact, some scientists have gone so far as to say ESCR is on its way to becoming obsolete.  That's some intellectual honesty that is nice to report. 

In stark contrast to the failures of ESCR, ethically and scientifically sound non-embryonic stem cell research is providing real therapies.  And basic research with adult cells continues to show promise for even more ways to obtain new, ethical, and useful stem cells.

The reality is that while science is leading researchers down a more ethical path, none of this would have been possible if pro-life voices had not persevered in their call for ethical research.  The morally acceptable research we see today is a testimony to those voices.

Contact: Dawn McBane

Source: CitizenLink

Legislation, Studies Point to Success of Adult Stem-Cell Research

The Oklahoma House of Representatives has voted 86-8 to protect tiny human embryos from destructive research.

House Bill 1442 would make it a misdemeanor to destroy embryos for research purposes, and prevent the buying and selling of embryos for research.

"We value life here in Oklahoma," said the bill's author, Republican Rep. George Faught.

Those who support embryonic stem-cell research claim it holds promise for curing diseases. Faught pointed out, however, that the destructive research has not produced a single treatment.

"The embryonic stem-cell fervor has blinded people to what else is available in the medical research field," he said. "The focus as well as the financial resources are being diverted from the very promising field of adult stem-cell research, which to date has yielded at least 73 cures or treatments."

In Florida, 68-year-old Max Eaton can testify to one such treatment. After suffering a heart attack 11 years ago, his heart had swollen. As part of a study at the University of Miami Medical School's Interdisciplinary Stem Cell Institute, doctors took Eaton's own stem cells and inserted them into his heart.

Across the study, the patients' swelling went down by as much as 25 percent; medication and pacemakers typically reduce the size of the heart by about 5 percent. The study appears in the March 18, 2011, issue of Circulation Research: Journal of the American Heart Association.

Source: CitizenLink

The Democrats’ Reocurring Abortion Nightmare

It was only 18 months ago that President Obama said in a nationally-televised health care message to Congress that "under our plan no federal dollars will be used to fund abortion." That touched off a firestorm because the statement was untrue.

Dozens of pro-life House Democrats, arms twisted tightly by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, voted for the bill and then gamely tried to defend themselves in November's elections. They were decimated by pro-life voters in the Republicans' historic sweep of the House.

And now the fig leaf has finally blown away for good.  Among the first bills to emerge from the Republican House majority in the new Congress were two that do exactly what the president claimed his own law would do. Those bills actually would shut the door on federally-funded abortion businesses. The president's Democrat allies in the House furiously tried, but failed, to kill those bills in committee.

So the obvious question is this one: If indeed the health care law does not pay for abortions, as the President said it did not, then why would the pro-abortion Democrats object so strenuously when the pro-life Republicans nailed that door shut?

The answer of course is that in the bill's thousands of pages, and the thousands of pages of regulations written after the passage of the bill, there are ample (we count four) ways in which abortions would be paid for. The whole thing is so complicated that it was possible to make claims about it that were not true.

Although the media like to tell us that those pesky "social issues" have been pushed to the back of the stove, the debate over abortion is boiling on the front burner, as the Democrats' hostile reaction to these two pro-life bills shows. In fact, the abortion issue has such a vise-like grip on politics just now that the contortions are astonishing.

One of the pro-life Democrats who was defeated in November was Steve Driehaus of Cincinnati. Driehaus fiercely objected to anyone who alleged that he was pro-abortion just because he voted for the president's health care bill. One pro-life group, the Susan B. Anthony List, intended to say just that about Driehaus in billboards around his district, so he sued them for lying about him. The suit was so outlandish the American Civil Liberties Union filed a friend of the court brief on behalf of the pro-lifers.

After the election, Driehaus dropped that suit and filed another one, this time claiming that he had been defamed, and that the pro-life group had deprived him of his livelihood. The response from Marjorie Dannenfelser, the group's president, was simply that, no, it was the voters of Driehaus' district who deprived him of his livelihood, as voters often do when politicians transgress voters' values. Nonetheless, that suit drags on.

Perhaps the most interesting outcome of the fierce battle over abortion was the election to the House of Blake Farenthold of Corpus Christi. Though he lacks the starched shirt and chiseled looks of many in politics, he took on a 28-year Hispanic incumbent, Solomon Ortiz, in a south Texas district that is 71 percent Hispanic. Ortiz usually wins in a landslide, but he was another member who caved under pressure to vote for ObamaCare, and Farenthold went straight at him on the issue of abortion. Neither side thought the challenger had a chance, but the district is strongly pro-life, and Ortiz had other problems as well. Early in the campaign Farenthold also had doubts: "Early on in the race I had a nightmare that I had won and now it's like, 'Now what do I do?' "

Farenthold won by 800 votes, and for the pro-abortion members of Congress who remain, the issue will likely be a recurring nightmare for them as well.

Contact: Tom Minnery

Source: CitizenLink

An Overview of CDC’s Most Recent Abortion Data Report

On February 25^th, 2011, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released its annual abortion surveillance report with their most recently compiled data and statistics — in this case, from 2007 — on abortion in the United States.

Since 1969, the CDC has reported annually on abortion-related data; typically this information is made public in November, usually during Thanksgiving week. As reported by Erick Erickson earlier this year, the CDC did not release this information as expected in November, 2010, and as late as January, 2011, there was even a rumor that the CDC would not be releasing this information at all.

However, that proved to be false as the report was eventually published on February 25, 2011. The CDC claimed that it was late because of data compilation problems.

So now that we have the report, what does it tell us about abortion and women's health?

To begin with, it is important to know what is absent from the report. Because state reporting of abortion is strictly voluntary, the CDC abortion surveillance report, while providing important numbers about abortion in the U.S., is not providing an accurate estimate of an overall picture of the US.

Up until 1998, every state annually reported abortion-related data. However, beginning in 1998, some combination of states refused to report abortion data each year. Included in the non-reporting states are California (1998-2007), New Hampshire (1998-2007), Oklahoma (1998-1999), Alaska (1998-2002), West Virginia (2003-2004), Louisiana (2005), and most recently, Maryland (2007). California has the highest number of abortions in the U.S., so in particular withholding their information from the total number bears great significance.  Given that reporting abortion data ultimately serves to benefit women's health, I can't help but wonder why these states refuse to make this information public. In the report most recently released, California, New Hampshire and Maryland withheld their abortion data.

Because of incomplete data, groups studying trends and working on public policy related to abortion are forced to rely on the Guttmacher Institute's statistics. In the words of the CDC, "CDC is unable to obtain the total number of abortions performed in the United States. During 1998–2007, the total annual number of abortions recorded by CDC was only 65%–69% of the number recorded by the Guttmacher Institute, which uses numerous active follow-up techniques to increase the completeness of the data obtained through its periodic national survey of abortion providers."

Another missing piece to the abortion surveillance report is the abortion fatality rate. Page 36 of the report indicates that from 1998-2007 the CDC did not calculate the fatality rate due to the fact that they did not have all of the states' abortion data. Given that the majority of statistical conclusions included in the CDC's abortion surveillance reports since 1998 have in some capacity lacked U.S. data in its entirety, this claim does not seem to pass muster. It is sensible to believe that in the same way the abortion rate was computed with the information provided that the abortion fatality rate would be computed.

However, while missing important data, the report is extremely valuable and provides a great deal of important information. For example, the CDC indicates that in 2007, six women died in the US (in the reported states) as a result of complications related to abortion.

• We also learn that approximately one-fifth of all children in the U.S. are aborted.  "Among the 45 reporting areas that provided data every year during 1998–2007, a total of 810,582 abortions (97.9% of the total) were reported for 2007; the abortion rate was 16.0 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years, and the abortion ratio was 231 abortions per 1,000 live births."
• We know that most abortions were performed on women in their 20s. "Women aged 20–29 years accounted for 56.9% of all abortions in 2007 and for the majority of abortions during the entire period of analysis (1998–2007).  In 2007, women aged 20–29 years also had the highest abortion rates (29.4 abortions per 1,000 women aged 20–24 years and 21.4 abortions per 1,000 women aged 25–29 years)."
• The report states that the majority of abortions are performed early in pregnancy. "In 2007, most (62.3%) abortions were performed at ≤8 weeks' gestation, and 91.5% were performed at ≤13 weeks' gestation. Few abortions (7.2%) were performed at 14–20 weeks' gestation, and 1.3% were performed at ≥21 weeks' gestation."
• We also read that in 2007, approximately 20% of women used RU-486, the dangerous abortion drug, and that approximately 78% of abortions were surgical ("curettage").

In the end, while not complete data, the annual CDC abortion surveillance reports are hugely significant and provide invaluable information to those of us who are daily engaged in the battle to fight for women's health – both those women who are born, and those women (and men, too) who are unborn.

Contact: Jeanne Monahan

Source: FRC Blog

More than 1 Million Pro-Life Activists to Flood Congressional District Offices with Calls to Defund Planned Parenthood

Expose Planned Parenthood Coalition Mobilizes Grassroots to Call for Defunding in Congressional Districts   The Susan B. Anthony List (SBA List), Family Research Council Action (FRC Action), 40 Days for Life, Students for Life of America (SFLA), Concerned Women for America (CWA), Catholic Vote, LifeNews.com, American Values and Catholic Advocate have launched a grassroots campaign to flood the phones of Members of Congress, asking them to defund Planned Parenthood in the Continuing Resolution (CR). From Monday, March 21 to Friday, March 25, SBA List and other members of the Expose Planned Parenthood coalition will mobilize pro-life activists to call and visit district offices and attend town hall meetings while their representatives are in their home districts, asking them to defund Planned Parenthood in the next CR.   "The momentum behind defunding Planned Parenthood is building," said SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. "The message from the grassroots has been clear: the time to end taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood is right now. Whether in a short-term or long-term Continuing Resolution, defunding Planned Parenthood in this bill is a non-negotiable."   Lila Rose, President of Live Action, filmed a grassroots call-to-action in the nation's capital, announcing the Week of Action campaign. Available here, the video asks pro-life activists to join in the effort to defund Planned Parenthood of the $363 million it receives in government funds each year by contacting their Members of Congress during the Week of Action.   The effort comes on the heels of a successful 13-district SBA List "Women Speak Out: Defund Planned Parenthood" bus tour conducted between March 7 – 11, which rallied pro-life grassroots activists across Iowa, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Rhode Island and New Hampshire. SBA List Project Director Marilyn Musgrave and Live Action President, Lila Rose led tour stops including press conferences with local pro-life leaders, thanking Members who voted for Rep. Mike Pence's amendment to defund Planned Parenthood in the Continuing Resolution (CR) and targeting those who voted against the measure.   The tour was a part of a larger $200,000 grassroots campaign including radio and television ads thanking Members for their votes to defund Planned Parenthood. Overall, the Expose Planned Parenthood grassroots effort to defund Planned Parenthood has drawn more than 1.2 million contacts to Congress through e-mails, phone calls and petitions. Contact: Kerry Brown, Source: Susan B. Anthony List

Religious freedom at issue in Illinois contraception case

Illinois pharmacists who won't sell certain drugs for religious reasons are awaiting a court decision on a law that requires them to do so.

In 1995, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich instituted a rule by executive order forcing pharmacies to sell contraception -- including Plan B, the "morning-after" pill.

 

The lawsuit was filed by two pharmacists who refused for religious reasons. Attorney Mark Rienzi argued the case on their behalf.

 

"One thing I think the trial showed is that there's really no compelling government interest in forcing these particular people to sell the drug," says Rienzi. "One of these pharmacies is in Chicago with competitors just three blocks away and more than a dozen pharmacies within three or four miles. There's really no legitimate reason the government needs that guy to sell that one particular drug."

 

Rienzi adds that the pharmacists' refusal on religious grounds does npt equal the denial of access.

 

"We thought it was very revealing when the government admitted during the trial that they're actually not aware of a single human being who was ever prevented from getting emergency contraception. So they made a whole lot of noise about the issue -- but when it comes right down to the question, under oath, are you aware of anybody who was ever unable to get the stuff, the answer is no," the attorney points out.

 

If the law is upheld, says the attorney, pharmacists with a conscience will be chased out of the profession. A decision is expected within a few weeks.

Source: OneNewsNow

Action Alert SB 1619

PLEASE CONTACT YOUR STATE SENATOR TO OPPOSE SENATE BILL 1619 – VOTE EXPECTED IN APRIL!

SB 1619 deals with requiring all public schools that do sex education programs to follow certain requirements of curricula.  We are familiar with these kinds of programs that promote abortion and homosexuality and condom training and other graphic subjects -- teaching 5-8 year olds about masturbation!!   One curriculum we have seen states that the "morning after" pill is not an abortion when in fact Plan B and its types do have an abortifacient property by not only being a contraceptive but acting on the uterine wall to prevent the new human life [fertilized embryonic stage of life] from attaching to the wall -- thus it is a chemical abortion.  How terrible to convince a pro-life girl that taking a "morning after" pill is not abortion!

This bill is on the Illinois Senate floor and can be voted on anytime in the next few weeks.

SB 1619 (STEANS) – Amends The School Code to require that public elementary and secondary education school classes that teach sex education shall "place substantial emphasis on both abstinence and contraception" Takes out the teaching of "abstinence until marriage" as the expected norm. Requires all course material and instruction to be "free from bias in accordance with the Illinois Human Rights Act."

SB 1619 would significantly alter how sex education in the public schools shall be taught!

LOCAL CONTROL DECISIONS BY SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND SCHOOL BOARDS ARE REMOVED!

Currently, school districts and school boards that decide to teach sex education can choose what curriculum they feel is best for their students and community. A number of schools have chosen to teach sex education from an "abstinence education" perspective that does not go into graphic condom training and homosexual agenda instruction. SB 1619 states that schools choosing to do sex education programs MUST emphasize "contraception" in their programs. What would this mean? Several examples of the type of programs that schools MUST do were provided to legislators from proponents of SB 1619. These programs are strong on condom training, "what turns you on" and masturbation as well as that abortion is ok!

SB 1619 REQUIRES THAT SCHOOLS THAT DO SEX EDUCATION MUST INCLUDE THE HOMOSEXUAL

LIFESTYLES

SB 1619 clearly states that "Course material and instruction shall be free from bias in accordance with the Illinois Human Rights Act." Sex education programs talk about boy and girl relationships within a "sexual" or "romantic" context. That must change in order to be "free from bias" since the Human Rights Act includes "sexual orientation" as a protected class of persons. So, all "course material and instruction" must talk about boy and boy romantic relationships or girl and girl romantic relationships or same-sex marriage/ civil unions in order to be "free from bias." To be "free from bias" instruction must also include the cross-dressers among other lifestyles as part of a sex education scenario. Promoting homosexual relationships is clearly part of SB 1619.

THE LONG-STANDING ILLINOIS POLICY THAT FOSTERS ABSTINENCE UNTIL MARRIAGE IS REMOVED

SB 1619 removes all references to instructing students in sex education and comprehensive health education programs [which even private and parochial schools are required to teach under the law – 105 ILCS 110/3] that "sexual abstinence until marriage" is to be taught. This has been the important bar that Illinois has set for its students for decades. Regardless of one's views, it is importance that students be given a clear message on not having sex until marriage. With this gone, what is the point of teaching "abstinence"? Are they to be taught abstinence until when? – until a certain grade? ; until "he says he cares?" Do our anti-drug programs teach that students should abstain from drugs until they are older or are mature enough? No! A clear message is not to do illicit drugs, regardless of what may actually be going on with youth.

ABORTIONS PROMOTED IN VARIOUS WAYS

Additionally, abortion is in effect promoted in these programs with information that "women" have a "right to abortion" to end a pregnancy and that "no one has the right to impose their values on others" and more. Also, Some curricula states that Plan B types of "morning after" pills are not abortion, when in fact Plan B works as an abortifacient and therefore IS abortion. This is especially deceitful to those who oppose abortion and would not what to have an abortion.

This is a particular agenda that requires your local schools to teach a homosexual agenda, graphic condom training and if it feels good training and more, and that abstinence until marriage is not a good public policy for Illinois.

There has been a national "worldview" battle going on for decades on what to teach in "sex education" and proponents of "anything goes" are well known to us. SB 1619 is part of that battle.

Please contact your state senator and urge him/her to vote NO on SB 1619 – protect our children and encourage our children to stand on strong moral values!  Capitol Switchboard in Springfield at 217-782-2000

“Abortion is the ultimate exploitation of women”

Last night on the House Floor, a number of pro-life congresswomen celebrated Women's History Month with an incredible discussion of abortion, feminism, and women's rights. Below are a few of my favorite quotes although it is definitely worth taking the time to read through the entire text:

"In a letter to Julia Ward Howe in 1873, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the woman who shocked society, Mr. Speaker, by daring to leave her house proudly showing her pregnancy–because that was just not done–wrote: `When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women to treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit.'" — Rep. Jean Schmidt quoting Elizabeth Cady Stanton

"Guilty? Yes. No matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed. It will burden her conscience in life; it will burden her soul in death." — Rep. Jean Schmidt quoting Susan B. Anthony

"Abortion is the ultimate exploitation of women." — Rep. Virginia Foxx quoting Alice Paul

"The original feminists were, indeed, against abortion. These women believed that there was power in motherhood and in choosing life…

"It is this exploitation by groups like Planned Parenthood that frighten me for the women of our country. It has been proven that a woman who has had an abortion is six to seven times more likely to commit suicide in the following year than a woman who chooses to deliver her child. We all know of the syndrome postpartum depression. Women who abort are 65 percent more likely than women who deliver to be at risk for long-term clinical depression. Sixty-five percent of U.S. women who had abortions experienced multiple symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder, which they attributed to their abortions. In another study, 60 percent said they felt "part of me died." Compared to women who deliver, women who abort are more than twice as likely to be subsequently hospitalized for psychiatric illnesses within 6 months and to subsequently require significantly more treatments for the psychiatric illnesses through outpatient care.

There are also numerous health risks that can occur after an abortion is performed. Reproductive complications and problems with subsequent deliveries can occur, one of these being pelvic inflammatory disease, which is a major direct cause of infertility. After an abortion, there is a 7- to 15-fold increase in placenta previa in subsequent pregnancies, which is a life-threatening condition for the mother and baby that increases the risk of birth defects, a still birth and excessive bleeding, leading to the possible loss of life of the woman."

— Rep. Renee Ellmers

"So I am proud to stand here today, like my sisters before me–like Elizabeth Cady Stanton, like Susan B. Anthony and, yes, like Alice Paul–and say, enough's enough. Women's rights are women's rights, and if a woman has rights, those rights are the child's rights because everybody has the right to life." — Rep. Jean Schmidt

Contact: Jeanne Monahan
Source: FRC Blog

--
Illinois Federation for Right to Life

2600 State Street, Suite E

Alton, IL  62002

Phone: 618-466-4122

Fax: 618-466-4134

Web: www.ifrl.org

E-mail: mail@ifrl.org

State of Pro-Life Legislation in the States

Polling data affirms that more Americans now consider themselves "prolife" than "pro-abortion" with the percentages coming in at 51% to 42% according to a Gallup poll conducted May 7th – 10th, 2009. This pro-life view was voiced at the polls last November resulting in the election of many pro-life legislatures across the states. Pledging their commitment to support the rights of the unborn child, legislators in many states have sponsored a broad range of pro-life bills. These bills range in subject matter from requiring ultrasounds, to parental consent, to stricter abortion clinic regulations, to bills that would outlaw abortions from the point at which the unborn can feel pain, but all are uniformly based on the fundamental idea that life is precious and should be protected at all stages of development.

The following maps will begin to give you a picture of the state of pro-life legislation in the states.  More maps documenting pro-life legislation will be forthcoming.

Contact: Brianna Walden
Source: FRC Blog
--
Illinois Federation for Right to Life

2600 State Street, Suite E

Alton, IL  62002

Phone: 618-466-4122

Fax: 618-466-4134

Web: www.ifrl.org

E-mail: mail@ifrl.org

Napier to receive Henry Hyde Award

Irene Napier, a longtime McHenry County resident, has been announced as the inaugural recipient of the Henry Hyde Celebrating Life Achievement Award.

"Irene's dedication to the cause has been unmatched," said Brian Kelly, President of Patriots United. "She embodies the fact that this award is about so much more than simply fighting for or against a specific issue. This award is about both standing strong on the fundamental principle of life and living your life as an ambassador and example for all those in the arena who are fighting by your side. Irene has proved this time and again, evidenced by her humble desire to see her fellow activists receive the accolades she so clearly deserves."

This is the first year this award is being given by Patriots United. It will be presented annually to a member of the community who is a true leader for the pro-life cause.

Irene will officially receive the award at the 2nd Annual Celebration of Life Unity Breakfast hosted by Patriots United on Saturday, April 2nd. There are still tickets available for this great event. For more information please visit www.patriotsunited.com or email Meagan@patriotsunited.com.

--
Illinois Federation for Right to Life

2600 State Street, Suite E

Alton, IL  62002

Phone: 618-466-4122

Fax: 618-466-4134

Web: www.ifrl.org

E-mail: mail@ifrl.org

Baby Joseph's struggle a teaching moment on the value of life, says priest

Fr. Frank Pavone, Moe Maraachli and his son Joseph

A priest who helped transfer a terminally ill 13-month-old from a Canadian hospital – where his breathing tubes were slated to be removed – said the fight to keep the baby alive is a "teaching moment for our whole culture" on the value of life.  

Fr. Frank Pavone, who heads the New York-based Priests for Life, told CNA on March 14 it was a "victory for the family" that baby Joseph was moved from an Ontario, Canada medical center to a Catholic hospital in Missouri where doctors plan to perform a temporary procedure to prolong his life later this week.

Joseph's parents – Moe and Sana Maraachli – had asked Priests for Life for help after doctors at  London Health Sciences Centre in Ontario refused to transfer the child to a facility that could perform a tracheotomy on him.

The hospital claimed that the procedure – which would allow for the baby to breath on his own – was reserved for patients who needed a breathing machine long term.

Fr. Pavone responded that the treatment is considered by many doctors as a "standard procedure for Joseph's condition."

Baby Joseph, who suffers from a severe and fatal neurological disorder, was considered to be in a vegetative state by Canadian doctors, who recommended that he have his feeding and breathing tubes removed.

"We and the family felt that they were making a value judgment on his life," Fr. Pavone said. "It's one thing to say a treatment is worthless – it's another thing to say a life is worthless."

The baby had been at the Ontario facility since October of last year. His sister, Zina, passed away from a similar condition years ago.

At the hospital in Canada, Joseph's parents "felt trapped in the situation they were in," Fr. Pavone said.

In response to their pleas for assistance, Priests for Life raised $150,000 to transfer the baby to SSM Cardinal Glennon Children's Medical Center in St. Louis and to pay for subsequent medical tests.

Robert Wilmott, chief of pediatrics at the center, said in a statement Monday that Joseph will likely have a tracheotomy performed by the end of the week to ease his move to a nursing facility.
 
"The doctors here have been evaluating him and continue to evaluate him and we look forward to the fact that they're going to provide the kind of care that's making the family feel good, feel safe and feel that they're doing the best they can for their child," Fr. Pavone said from the St. Louis hospital.

In the future, "how it's going to look is going to depend on the next week or week and a half to see what the doctors decide," he added, saying "a possible outcome" is that the baby would be able to travel back home to Canada with a ventilator.

"Then the parents at least would know that what was reasonable and possible was done and that the baby's life is in God's hands in terms of it's length."

Fr. Pavone said that far from being in a vegetative state, baby Joseph "moves around – he's not lying there motionless – he reacts."

"He's a delightful boy – we always have some good laughs when we're together with him in the room."

The priest called Joseph's parents Moe and Sana, who are Muslim and Catholic respectively, "people of great faith" who "believe in a God who not only answers prayers but is the Lord of life and death."

"They're very, humble, grateful people," and are "so happy that others are helping them," he said.

Fr. Pavone also noted that the family "is very familiar" with the benefits of a tracheotomy, given their prior experience with their daughter Zina, which is "one of the reasons they've been fighting so hard" for the procedure.

He also underscored that the treatment for Joseph should not be considered "extraordinary" in regard to Church teaching on end of life issues.

"In this case, the tracheotomy – as officials have acknowledged – would extend the baby's life," he said. "Would it cure the underlying condition? No, and the parents are not expecting that it would."

However, in this situation the question then becomes, "is there anything that can benefit the patient?" Fr. Pavone said, citing his personal need for glasses as an example.

While his glasses are "not curing what's wrong with my vision," he explained, they are nonetheless "benefiting me."

The procedure for Joseph, then, involves "ordinary means – something that gives benefit to the patient without unreasonable burden," he said.

On his interest and involvement with the case, Fr. Pavone said that since the death of Terry Schiavo – a disabled Florida woman whose feeding tube was removed in 2005 despite her family's protests  – his organization has "been extra sensitive to ways in which we could advocate for families who are facing situations where medical requests are being denied."

"Besides the direct help that we could give the family," Priests for Life saw Joesph's situation as "a teaching moment for our whole culture," Fr. Pavone said.

"Cases like this are happening all the time but only certain ones become public enough to provide a platform, if you will, for reflection of the whole Church and wider society."

"And that's what we've been doing with this case – showing people that it's not just about this one baby, it's really about us all."

The struggle of Joseph and his family during this difficult time "provide a chance for all of us to talk and reflect about these very important issues that effect us all," and "how we make medical decisions for ourselves and for our loved ones," Fr. Pavone said.

Contact: Marianne Medlin
Source: CNA/EWTN News

--
Illinois Federation for Right to Life

2600 State Street, Suite E

Alton, IL  62002

Phone: 618-466-4122

Fax: 618-466-4134

Web: www.ifrl.org

E-mail: mail@ifrl.org

Federal funding of abortion continues

The federal government has been funded for another three weeks, but minus the Pence Amendment -- meaning funding for Planned Parenthood continues.

On Tuesday the House passed a Continuing Resolution (CR), which is the sixth temporary funding bill so far without agreement on a measure for the rest of the federal budget year. The CR, which now goes to the Senate, passed 271-158 (see roll call vote). It includes federal tax dollars for abortions in the nation's capitol and funds non-abortion services for Planned Parenthood.

Pro-life and pro-family groups urged members of Congress to vote against the latest CR unless it included the Pence Amendment, which would have eliminated funds for Planned Parenthood -- but only 54 Republicans voted against it. Marilyn Musgrave, projects director at Susan B. Anthony List, tells OneNewsNow the House failed the test in Tuesday's vote.
 
"Come three weeks, they're going to get another test -- and I hope they pass the test," she states. "At a time of moral outrage and fiscal crisis, now is the time to defund Planned Parenthood."
 
The call for defunding Planned Parenthood came after investigations by Mark Crutcher at Life Dynamics and Lila Rose at Live Action revealed their clinics consistently offering abortion services for minors and trafficked girls, and advice on how to circumvent the law.
 
Musgrave points out that leading up to Tuesday's vote, grassroots activists spoke loudly against funding the nation's largest abortion provider. "And we know we've got problems in the Senate," she offers, alluding to the Democratic majority in that chamber. "So we need an especially strong stand from the House of Representatives."
 
David Christensen with Family Research Council also expresses his displeasure with the House vote. "We are very pleased to see a number of pro-life conservatives vote against the CR, but we are disappointed that it did pass," he says. (Listen to audio report)
 
Both houses of Congress will revisit the subject in a couple of weeks trying to end the budget deadlock. "The Senate and the House are negotiating on a longer-term budget," Christensen explains, "and we are encouraging the Republican leadership and pro-lifers on both sides to make sure that the longer-term budget would not include funding for abortion [or] funding for Planned Parenthood."
 
Another troublesome facet of the approved CR is that it pumps more money into the United Nations Population Fund, which is complicit in China's one-child abortion policies.
 
Christensen encourages voters to contact their members in both chambers to end all abortion funding.

Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
--
Illinois Federation for Right to Life

2600 State Street, Suite E

Alton, IL  62002

Phone: 618-466-4122

Fax: 618-466-4134

Web: www.ifrl.org

E-mail: mail@ifrl.org

Bill focuses on reporting minors' abortions

Illinois lawmakers are trying to tighten up reporting standards for clinics when minors are seeking abortions.

The purpose of H.B. 2093 is to expand the list of abortion clinic personnel who are required to report underage abortions. Under current state law, a limited number of people -- such as the abortionist -- are required to do so. But William Beckman of the Illinois Right to Life Committee tells OneNewsNow that most of the contact abortion seekers have at clinics is with staff other than the abortionist.
 
"[Under this bill] people in the office...would all be considered responsible 'reportees' as well so that they can't hide behind excuses of only certain people being the ones who would be mandated to report," says the pro-life activist.
 
Asked about the need, Beckman referred to undercover investigations by Mark Crutcher of Life Dynamics and Lila Rose of Live Action that revealed the willingness of abortion clinics to do abortions on minors and not report the statutory rape to authorities.
 
"The ability of abortion clinics to skirt the law or even directly and blatantly violate it is obvious," he says. "And so at least having a solid law that makes it more difficult for them to come up with excuses to get around the law...makes it important to have things like this in place."
 
Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union are fighting against the bill, but another prominent pro-abortion group -- NARAL Pro-Choice America -- is neutral on it. The two opponents argue that the law would place an additional administrative burden on clinic staff. Beckman, however, describes that as a "smokescreen" not based on reality.

Conctact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
--
Illinois Federation for Right to Life

2600 State Street, Suite E

Alton, IL  62002

Phone: 618-466-4122

Fax: 618-466-4134

Web: www.ifrl.org

E-mail: mail@ifrl.org

Legislative Updates

HB2093 (Amendment to Abused and Neglected Child Reporting Act) and HB3156( Amendment to the Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Center Act) passed out of the Agricultural and Conservation House committee on Tuesday. HB1919 (Ultrasound Opportunity Act) was not called.

Dawn Benhke gave testimony for HB2093 and Peter Breen gave testimony on HB3156 during the committee hearing held at 1:00 on Tuesday.

For more information on these bills, please follow the following links:

HB2093 Amendment to Abused and Neglected Child Reporting Act
Extends the list of persons required to report child abuse or neglect to include any physician, physician's assistant, registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, medical technician, certified nursing assistant, social worker, licensed professional counselor, office personnel, or volunteer of any office, clinic, or any other physical location that provides abortions, abortion counseling, abortion referrals, contraceptives, contraceptive counseling, sex education, or gynecological care and services. (click here for more)

HB3156 Amendment to the Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Center Act
Provides that notwithstanding any other statute, rule, or regulation to the contrary, an ambulatory surgical treatment center where abortions are performed must comply with all of the statutes, rules, and regulations applicable to ambulatory surgical treatment centers generally. (click here for more)

HB1919 Ultrasound Opportunity Act
Provides that at any facility where abortions are performed the physician who is to perform the abortion, the referring physician, or another qualified person working in conjunction with either physician shall offer any woman seeking an abortion after 6 weeks of gestation an opportunity to receive and view an active ultrasound of her unborn child by someone qualified to perform ultrasounds at the facility, or at a facility listed in a listing of local ultrasound providers provided by the facility, at least one hour prior to the woman having any part of an abortion performed or induced, and prior to the administration of any anesthesia or medication in preparation for the abortion. (click here for more)

Sexual abstinence -- numbers up, but funding down

Supporters for abstinence-based education are applauding a new report that sexual activity among teens is decreasing.

Nearly 70 percent of boys (68%) and girls (67%), ages 15-17, have never had sexual intercourse, according to a survey (2006-2008) released last week by the National Center for Health Statistics. In addition, 53 percent of boys and 58 percent of girls in the same age bracket have never had any type of sexual contact -- up from 46 percent of boys and 49 percent of girls in 2002. The new study also shows that more young adults are choosing abstinence.

"It looks like truth is beginning to win the day when it comes to teens and sex," responds Valerie Huber, executive director of the National Abstinence Education Association. "...I think [they] are beginning to learn that they need more than latex to protect themselves and they're choosing to wait -- [that's] very good news." And that data, she argues, renders "null and void" the typical claims by anti-abstinence advocacy groups that abstinence is unrealistic.

She tells OneNewsNow while trends are encouraging, she remains concerned. "...With Congress zeroing out all funds for community-based abstinence education programs, per the president's request, I think we have to ask the question: who is supporting young people and these good decisions?" she wonders.

"With 170 programs around the country no longer able to provide the skills and the encouragement to those young people, it's definitely time for us to take this data and make some policy corrections."

Benefit being lost

Toward that end, young people from across America are meeting today with House and Senate members on Capital Hill, sharing how abstinence education has made a difference in their lives and urging lawmakers to reinstate federal funding for abstinence education. Huber contends that members of Congress are sending the wrong message to students by not giving federal priority to abstinence education. (Listen to audio report)

"Are we encouraging them to engage in behaviors that are going to help them now and later? Or are we sending them messages that are detrimental on a number of different levels?" she asks. "...Right now we are using our federal dollars and our federal priorities in ways that are not helpful to them and, in fact, [are] counterproductive and harmful."

The students are on Capitol Hill to make their message personal, says the abstinence advocate. "Here in Washington it can often become just a bantering of talking points over policy initiatives," Huber acknowledges. "...What gets lost is the benefit of this program for young people. So they can put a real face and a real life story behind the need to change the priorities in the arena of sex education as a nation."

She says while Congress is looking to tighten its fiscal belt, an investment in abstinence education could reap great economic, social, and personal rewards.

Contact: Bill Bumpas

Source: OneNewsNow

Major pro-life bill progresses in U.S. House

Congressman Chris Smith (R-New Jersey) is the lead sponsor of H.R. 3, a bill titled the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act." As a recent guest on American Family Radio's Focal Point, Smith said, “It is a government-wide, permanent ban on all government complicity, except for a couple of very small exceptions for abortion."

At present, Congress fights a battle every session on use of taxpayer dollars for abortion. H.R. 3 would ban federal money for that purpose, putting government out of the abortion-enabling business.

Smith added, "We also have a conscience clause and remedies so that men and women, whether they be in the healthcare profession or hospitals [or] insurance plans … if they are coerced into doing abortions or in any way facilitating, they have a remedy in court pursuant to our bill.”

The bill passed out of the House Judiciary Committee by a vote of 23-14 and is heading to the House floor for consideration, where it is expected to pass. The difficulty in getting the measure into law is the Democratic-led Senate and the White House.

Contact: Charlie Butts

Source: OneNewsNow

Cord blood stem cells used to help cure girl of brain cancer in Spain

A four-year-old girl has become the first patient in Spain to recover from brain cancer after being treated with stem cells from her own umbilical cord blood.

The announcement of the girl's recovery came March 7 from the company Crio-Cord, a stem cell bank in Spain.

Alba was born healthy in 2007, but at age two she was diagnosed with a rare form of brain cancer. Her treatment consisted of extracting the majority of the tumor from her brain. She was then given chemotherapy to reduce and eventually eliminate the remainder of the tumor.

Alba's blood system was destroyed during the final round of chemo, thus requiring a transplant of cord blood stem cells.

The procedure was carried out in 2009 by Dr. Luis Madero of the Department of Oncology and Hematology at the Nino Jesus Hospital in Madrid.

Today, four year-old Alba is a healthy girl.

Periodic Reviews

Sixty days after the transplant, Alba was given new stem cells taken from her peripheral blood in order to accelerate the production of platelets. Fourteen months after the transplant, her blood system was completely restored, and she has since enjoyed a normal life.

Dr. Madero called her case unique in Spain. “The use of stem cells to regenerate the blood system is an extended treatment for this form of cancer,” he said. What makes her case unique, he added, “is that for the first time in our country, the stem cells came from a patient’s own umbilical cord, preserved from birth.

“In recent years, transplants of cord blood stem cells have become increasingly common. In the case of siblings, these stem cells are the best therapeutic option that exists,” he said.

“Our best investment”

Alba’s father, Santiago, who is a computer engineer, and her mother, Teresa, a literature professor, agreed that keeping the blood from Alba’s umbilical cord was the “best investment” they ever made.

Santiago said he had previously seen a report “on the treatment for Parkinson’s using stem cells … and was sympathetic to the idea of using stem cells to treat degenerative diseases.”

“Keeping the umbilical cord is a wager for the future, a life insurance policy that you don’t know if you will need but that could save a life,” Teresa added.

The head of Crio-Cord, Guillermo Munoz, also said he was pleased at the results of the therapy. He noted that the organization was “proud to have participated in Alba’s healing process.”

Cases like these confirm “that umbilical cord blood is an excellent source of stem cells. Being the youngest cells of their kind in the human body, they have great potential to cure,” Munoz explained

Source: CNA/Europa Press

Guttmacher: 54% of Women Who Aborted in 2008 Were Using Contraception

As Family Research Council has previously reported increasing access to contraception does not decrease the number of abortions. In fact, studies show quite the opposite.

Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) and its allies are banging the “family planning decreases the abortion rate” drum on Capitol Hill these days. However the Guttmacher Institute, previously PPFA’s own research arm, reports that over half the number women who had an abortion in 2008 –54%– were using a form of contraception during the month they got pregnant.

In the words of Kristin Powers, who blogged on this story earlier today, “what is truly astonishing about the Guttmacher statistics is that they are completely unchanged from a decade ago.”

She is correct. This is not new. Family Research Council wrote on this very topic in our Top Ten Myths of Abortion piece a few years ago,

“In the United States, a decrease in contraceptive use in recent years correlates to a decrease in the number of abortions. From 1995 to 2002, the rate of contraceptive use decreased from 64 percent to 62 percent,43 while the number of abortions fell from 1,359,400 to 1,293,000.” “Contraceptive Use,” Facts in Brief, The Alan Guttmacher Institute (March, 2005). These numbers represent use among all women age 15-44, and thus, because many women in this age group would not be sexually active, the rate of use among sexually active women would be higher.

There is more. A study recently published in Contraception conducted in Spain from 1997-2007 showed as contraceptive use increased from a rate of 49.1 to 79.9%, simultaneously the elective abortion rate increased from 5.52 to 11.49 per 1000 women.

“[R]esarch here and abroad shows that increasing access to contraception is not a solution to the problem of soaring abortion rates. In fact, it makes the problem worse. In Sweden, for example, an increase in affordable access to contraception and the presence of free contraceptive counseling have resulted in a substantial increase in the teen abortion rate. The abortion rate has climbed from 17 abortions per thousand teens in 1995 to 22.5 abortions per thousand teens in 2001.(Edgardh, K., et al., “Adolescent Sexual Health in Sweden,” Sexual Transmitted Infections 78 (2002): 352-6)

According to Professor Peter Arcidiacono of Duke University, increasing teenagers’ access to contraception “may actually increase long run pregnancy rates even though short run pregnancy rates fall. On the other hand, policies that decrease access to contraception, and hence sexual activity, are likely to lower pregnancy rates in the long run.” Peter Arcidiacono, et al., “Habit Persistence and Teen Sex: Could Increased Contraception Have Unintended Consequences for Teen Pregnancies?” (Oct. 3, 2005), Working Paper, p. 29.

Contact: Jeanne Monahan

Source: FRC Blog

Teenager Forced Off Life Support Survives to Tell the Tale

This would have been a bigger story in the USA where patients still have the right to fight these things. In New Zealand, doctors forced a badly injured teenager–Kimberly McNeill, center in the photo at left–off of life support. But contrary to their certainty, she didn’t die. From the story:

A teenage girl whose life support was switched off by a New Zealand hospital against her family’s wishes defied the odds to recover and returned home this week — walking and talking. Doctors forecasted that Kimberly McNeill, 18, would never recover from her severe injuries and 15 days after being transferred to Auckland City Hospital, authorities turned off the life support machine, the New Zealand Herald reported Sunday. Defying the odds, she pulled through and this week, two months after the wreck, which nearly claimed her life, returned to her parents’ home in Napier, on New Zealand’s North Island, to continue her rehabilitation, Hawkes Bay Today reported.

Note the short time given for the girl to recover! It reminds me of the Haleigh Poutre case in Massachusetts. She’d be dead now if doctors had had their way in a timely fashion. She was only saved because the death bureaucratic necessities gave her time to wake up.

This is a warning. Doctors don’t know everything. Hospitals are not always right. Futile care theory not only violates patient autonomy, but it could abandon some–not many, but some–to death when they might otherwise have lived. And don’t say, “Well, these girl lived, so what’s the harm?” The harm is that was no thanks to the futilitarians. Indeed, Kimberly’s life was surely put at greater jeopardy by the futile care imposition, not the other way around.

More details here.

Planned Parenthood reaches gruesome milestone: 5 million abortions

When on February 23 American Life League spotted and reported on Planned Parenthood’s 2009 annual report, showing it had committed 332,278 that year, ALL also reported that PP had reached a gruesome milestone:

“The records show that Planned Parenthood has committed 5,320,095 surgical and medical abortions from 1970 through the end of 2009,” [Jim] Sedlak [VP of ALL] continued. “We estimate that the income from abortion accounts for 40% of its annual clinic income.”

I asked Jim for his figures. He responded:

Jill –

From our beginning, we have collected PP Annual Reports and other PP documents in an effort to get every statistic we can about the organization. The data that you seek is 40 years worth of documentation in our files….

The numbers of abortions that we know about, by year, are:

YEAR	PP ABORTIONS
1934
1941
1955
1956	0
1957	0
1958	0
1959	0
1960	0
1961	0
1962	0
1963	0
1964	0
1965	0
1966	0
1967	0
1968	0
1969	0
1970	100
1971	500
1972	1,000
1973	5,000
1974	10,000
1975	20,000
1976	40,000
1977	58,660
1978	70,000
1979	67,000
1980	60,000
1981	79,997
1982	80,000
1983	85,242
1984	88,824
1985	91,065
1986	98,638
1987	104,411
1988	111,189
1989	122,191
1990	129,155
1991	132,314
1992	130,844
1993	134,277
1994	133,289
1995	139,899
1996	153,367
1997	165,174
1998	168,509
1999	182,792
2000	197,070
2001	213,026
2002	230,630
2003	244,628
2004	255,015
2005	264,943
2006	289,750
2007	305,310
2008	324,008
2009	332,278
2010
TOTAL	5,320,095

It’s interesting that when you view the stats on the PP Peptobus above, the “2,500,000 Birth Control Patients” is not photoshopped; those numbers were put there by PP. Bryan Kemper added “5,000,000 Babies Slaughtered,” which PP wants to avoid publicizing, of course.