White House Threatens to Prosecute Private Medicare Companies for Warning Seniors of Cuts
The Obama administration has aroused a fierce First Amendment controversy after threatening companies selling private Medicare coverage not to tell their customers that current health care legislation would result in benefit cuts - or else face a lawsuit.
The administration and Senate Democrats justify the move by saying the claim, spread by at least one such company, is patently false. Yet some say the administration is the one twisting the facts to help the unpopular legislation: critics note that even the head of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office agrees that the legislation would mean a loss of senior benefits.
The general warning came after the Department of Health and Human Services launched a probe against the insurance giant Humana earlier this month after it sent out a mailing warning of the possible cuts.
"As we continue our research into this issue, we are instructing you to immediately discontinue all such mailings to beneficiaries and to remove any related materials directed to Medicare enrollees from your Web sites," the HHS Centers for Medicare and Medicaid told health insurance companies in a notice Monday.
The bill currently under construction in the Senate Finance Committee includes a proposal to cut Medicare and Medicaid spending by about $500 billion over the next decade, including about $125 billion cut from Medicare Advantage plans.
The Humana mailer had told its members that, "if the proposed funding cut levels [in the current health care legislation] become law, millions of seniors and disabled individuals could lose many of the important benefits and services that make Medicare Advantage health plans so valuable." The company encouraged seniors to contact their congressional representatives on the issue.
The AP reports that the government, in addition to launching an investigation, ordered Humana to cease distributing the mailer and indicated that further action could be taken against the company. According to a company spokesman, Humana is cooperating with the investigation and stopped the mailer earlier this month.
Democratic Sen. Max Baucus sparked the probe after he complained that the mailer was misleading. He insists that the cuts will not amount to a loss of benefits for seniors, but will in fact improve Medicare by making it more efficient.
"I'm not going to let insurance company profits stand in the way of improving Medicare for seniors," said Baucus in a statement.
The Obama administration similarly denies that the large proposed Medicare cuts will reduce seniors' benefits.
An email distributed to White House subscribers today referred to an "ongoing effort by many in Washington to scare America's seniors with myths about what reform would mean for their health care benefits," saying that this is "a bunch of malarkey." The email encouraged readers to contact elderly friends and family to ensure that they "get the facts."
However, the head of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget office says the claim Democrats call misleading is, in fact, accurate.
Douglas Elmendorf confirmed to members of the Senate on Tuesday that the proposed cuts for Medicare's managed care plans in the Finance Committee bill would mean fewer benefits for seniors in the plan.
Despite the White House's vigorous attempts to dispel anxiety over the health care overhaul, seniors in public polls continue to display broad skepticism of the legislation set to undergo crucial construction in the next several days. America's Health Insurance Plans spokesman Robert Zirkelbach pointed out in a FOX News report that the Obama administration's order was sent out to about 200 companies Monday night, just before the Senate Finance Committee commenced debate on the latest version of the health overhaul.
"This is an effort to stifle any dissent," said Zirkelbach.
Capitol Hill Republicans have pushed back against the Humana probe, calling it a politically-motivated "gag order" and an "astonishing overreach" of the administration's power. On Thursday, Senate Republicans threatened to block Obama's health care-related appointments until the decision is reversed, while House Republicans called for a hearing on the matter.
In a letter to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Senate Republicans pointed out that a 1997 directive from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services explicitly allowed HMOs to tell members about legislation and urge them to express opinions.
"Now, the Obama administration has reversed this longstanding HHS decision -- in the midst of a critical debate about the future of health care services in our country -- to shut down communication between private companies and America's seniors on an issue that has a direct impact on their health care," said the Senators.
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert Source: LifeSiteNews.com Publish Date: September 25, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
NEWS SHORTS FOR MONDAY
(Referral to Web sites not produced by The Illinois Federation for Right to LIfe is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)
National Life Chain To Link Up Against Abortion
The central Illinois portion of the National Life Chain to protest abortion will be linked from 2:30 to 3:30 p.m. Oct. 4 on sidewalks along University Street, Northmoor and Allen roads. The Peoria chain will link the city's abortion clinic, National Health Care, 7405 N. University St., to the Esther House, an in-house, long-term facility for women and women with children at 6847 N. Allen Road. Life Chain is intended to be a peaceful and prayerful public witness by people who oppose abortion. It is an effort by the Christian community to make a visual statement as participants stand for one hour, praying for the nation and for an end to the practice.
Click here for the full article.
Springfield Planned Parenthood to Offer Abortion Drugs
Local Springfield reporter publicizes Planned Parenthood killing babies by drug induced abortions in a positive light. When a person calls evil good it is evidence that they are cursed by God and given over to a reprobate mind (Isaiah 5: 20-24; Romans 1: 28-32).
Elective abortions will be available in Springfield for the first time next year when Planned Parenthood of Illinois begins to dispense abortion-inducing pills at its downtown health center. “We’re thrilled with this expansion of services,” Planned Parenthood board member Lyn Schollett of Springfield said Wednesday. “I think we’ll actually find there’s a lot of support for these services in the community.” Planned Parenthood officials have discussed the need for easier access to abortion services in the Springfield area for years, said Steve Trombley, president and chief executive officer of Chicago-based Planned Parenthood.
Click here for the full article.
Obamacare Is 21st Century Eugenics
The relationships between American Eugenicists and their German counterparts only grew stronger for the most part in the years leading up to World War II. The 1920's continued to see trans-Atlantic cooperation between the scientists, with parties from both groups traveling overseas to see the work being done and share any new insights they may have achieved. Harry Laughlin, the superintendent of the Eugenics Record Office used his position to collate & disseminate Nazi propaganda in the U.S.
Click here for the full article.
Forced Abortions and Mass Sterilization Needed to Save the Planet
Forced abortions. Mass sterilization. A "Planetary Regime" with the power of life and death over American citizens. The tyrannical fantasies of a madman? Or merely the opinions of the person now in control of science policy in the United States? Or both? These ideas (among many other equally horrifying recommendations) were put forth by John Holdren, whom Barack Obama has recently appointed Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Co-Chair of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology -- informally known as the United States' Science Czar.
Click here for the full article.
Scott Roeder Trial Reset Again - Jan. 11, 2010 - Eleven Days Before Roe v. Wade Anniversary
The trial of the man accused in the killing of Wichita abortion provider George Tiller has been rescheduled to Jan. 11. The Sedgwick County District Attorney's office announced the new date Wednesday. Scott Roeder's trial had previously been scheduled to begin Jan. 25. Roeder is accused of shooting Tiller on May 31 as the doctor was ushering during Sunday morning services at his Wichita church. The 51-year-old suspect is charged with first-degree murder and aggravated assault.
Click here for the full article.
Women Are Risking Their Lives to Have IVF Babies
Couples who are desperate to have children are undergoing insemination procedures in spite of risks that could prove fatal, warns fertility expert. Women are risking death and bankruptcy in their desperation to become mothers, according to Professor Sammy Lee, one of the country's leading experts on infertility. Some couples going through fertility treatment are driven by an urge "stronger than addiction and more powerful than obsession", said Lee, who pioneered egg donation in the UK when he was chief scientist of the IVF programme at Wellington Hospital, London.
Click here for the full article.
"Death Spiral" Rationing in Baucus Bill Gravely Endangers America's Seniors
The health care bill proposed by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus on September 16 contains a dangerous provision that creates a financial incentive for Medicare doctors to deny treatments to seniors says the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC).
"This is the cruelest and most effective way to ensure that doctors are forced to ration care for their senior citizen patients," said National Right to Life Executive Director, David N. O'Steen. "It takes the telltale fingerprints from the government: instead of bureaucrats directly specifying the treatment denials that will mean death and poorer health for older people, it compels individual doctors to do the dirty work. It is an outrageous way to provide coverage for the uninsured - by taking it away from America's senior citizens."
The provision penalizing doctors establishes that for at least five years, Medicare physicians who authorize treatments for their patients that wind up in the top 10% of per capita cost for a year will lose 5% of their total Medicare reimbursements for that year. NRLC argues that this means that all doctors treating older people will constantly be driven to try to order the least expensive tests and treatments for fear that they will be caught in that top 10%.
It is noteworthy, says NRLC, that this feature operates independently of any considerations of quality, efficiency, or waste. If a physician authorizes enough treatment for their patients, however necessary and appropriate it may be, they are in danger of being one of the 1 in 10 doctors who will be penalized each year. Moreover, it creates a moving target - by definition, there will always be a top 10%, no matter how far down the total amount of money spent on Medicare is driven.
"It's like a game of musical chairs, in which there is always one chair less than the number of players - so no matter how fast the contestants run, someone will always be the loser when the music stops," O'Steen added.
The incentive this creates is purely cost-driven, without any balancing of benefit, says NRLC. The groups argues that this will create a constant sense of uncertainty in doctors, since none can know in advance precisely what the cutoff for a given year will be - resulting in still more pressure to limit treatment and diagnostic tests to the bare minimum.
Source: LifeSiteNews.com Publish Date: September 18, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Life Chain to Be Held Across North America on Sunday October 4, 2009
The annual Life Chain, a pro-life prayer and witness event, will take place this year in cities across the United States and Canada on Sunday October 4.
Life Chain involves an hour of silent prayer and public witness and will take place from 2 to 3 p.m. Participants stand in witness for one hour on sidewalks along major streets in towns and cities, peacefully and prayerfully holding signs reading "Abortion Kills Children," "Abortion Hurts Women," "Jesus Forgives and Heals" and "Adoption: The Loving Option" before passers-by and motorists.
Suresh Domenic, past Canadian co-ordinator for Life Chain at the national headquarters of Campaign Life Coalition in Toronto said Life Chain "is for anyone who cares about the sanctity of life, of whatever faith or no faith."
"It's also to increase public awareness of the abortion issue and to support, through our prayers, women who have undergone abortions and their babies. We are a voice for the victims and we pray for the conversion of those who promote abortion and that those who have been hurt by it will be consoled," Domenic noted.
This year's Life Chain marks the 22nd year that thousands of pro-lifers throughout the USA and Canada have stood for one hour in peaceful and prayerful public witness, praying for their countries and for an end to abortion.
Mary-Ellen Douglas of Campaign Life Coalition told LifeSiteNews.com, "Life Chain is a peaceful and prayerful event. It gives people the opportunity to stand up for what they believe in with a sign that gets a message out there. It's a nice opportunity for people to pray for the victims of abortion, the babies, the parents, the nurses, and the doctors, everyone who's involved."
"It's a very spiritual event. We do encourage everyone to come out. It's only for an hour. Even if it's not a nice day we don't care. Come out anyway."
Endorsers of this year's Life Chain in Canada include: Most Reverend Thomas C. Collins - Archbishop of Toronto, Most Reverend Terrence Prendergast - Archbishop of Ottawa, Most Reverend Brendan Michael O'Brien - Archbishop of Kingston, Most Reverend Nicola De Angelis, CFIC, DD Bishop of Peterborough Diocese, His Eminence Metropolitan Archbishop Sotirios - Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Toronto, Most Reverend Michael Mulhall - Bishop of Pembroke Diocese, Most Reverend James M. Wingle D.D. - Bishop of St. Catharines Diocese, Bruce Clemenger - Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, Rabbi Jack Farber - Congregation Melech Yisrael, Habeeb AlIi - Secretary Islamic Council of Imams Canada, Equipping Christians for the Public Square, National Campus Life Network, Niagara Region Right to Life, Teachers for Life, Toronto Right To Life, and Salt & Light TV.
Click here for the Campaign Life Coalition's 2009 Life Chain poster.
Click here to find Life Chain locations across North America and find the closest one to you.
Contact: Thaddeus M. Baklinski Source: LifeSiteNews.com Publish Date: September 18, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Pro-life group still 'deeply concerned' about abortion in health care bill after White House meeting
Americans United for Life Action (AULA)
President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest
The pro-life group Americans United for Life Action says it is still "deeply concerned" about abortion funding in health care reform following its meeting with White House officials.
Americans United for Life Action (AULA) President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest met on Thursday with Melody Barnes, who is Director of the Domestic Policy Council, and Tina Tchen, the White House Director for Public Liaison.
Dr. Yoest asked the White House to clarify President Obama's statements supporting the exclusion of abortion from health care reform, an AULA press release says.
She presented a legal brief on the necessity of an explicit abortion funding and coverage ban prepared by the Americans United for Life. Yoest also delivered a petition with over 39,000 signatures from pro-life Americans urging a veto on any bill that does not specifically forbid requiring insurance companies to cover abortion.
"After the meeting, we remain deeply concerned about abortion funding and the abortion mandate in health care reform. Ms. Barnes reiterated the President's statement about opposing abortion funding in his address before Congress last week but the White House would not commit to language that explicitly excludes abortion from health care reform.
"The reality on the Hill right now is that the health care bills do include abortion funding," Yoest added. She said an explicit ban on abortion funding is necessary and that the pro-life movement will "vigorously" oppose the inclusion of abortion in health care.
Source: CNA Publish Date: September 18, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Obamacare: "The Case for Killing Granny"
I have been a speaking fool (don't agree so fast!) for the last week and a half, and have not had a chance to post on last week's astonishing Newsweek cover story: "The Case for Killing Granny." (I will bet the POTUS was not please with this cover!)
Evan Thomas, one of the dying newsweekly's most notable writers pushes the meme that the elderly should have their health care rationed. From the article:
The idea that we might ration health care to seniors (or anyone else) is political anathema. Politicians do not dare breathe the R word, lest they be accused—however wrongly—of trying to pull the plug on Grandma. But the need to spend less money on the elderly at the end of life is the elephant in the room in the health-reform debate. Everyone sees it but no one wants to talk about it.
But that is precisely what health care rationing to the elderly would be–pulling the plug on Grandma. And it wouldn't stop there. People with disabilities may be far more costly to treat, since they live longer than the frail elderly. Once you decide that saving money is the primary goal, those who need help the most will be the ones denied it–ironically, in the cause of expanding access to care
Still, the story does not at all match the cover's hysterics. Thomas has some good suggestions in his article that are not rationing, for example, allowing nurse practitioners to be more involved in a "gate keeper" role between very sick patients and the costlier consultation with a physician:
Physicians at Massachusetts General Hospital are experimenting with innovative approaches to care for their most ill patients without necessarily sending them to the doctor. Three years ago, Massachusetts enacted universal care—just as Congress and the Obama administration are attempting to do now. The state quickly found it could not afford to meet everyone's health-care demands, so it's scrambling for solutions. The Mass General program assigned nurses to the hospital's 2,600 sickest—and costliest—Medicare patients. These nurses provide basic care, making sure the patients take their medications and so forth, and act as gatekeepers—they decide if a visit to the doctor is really necessary. It's not a perfect system—people will still demand to see their doctors when it's unnecessary—but the Mass General program cut costs by 5 percent while providing the elderly what they want and need most: caring human contact.
Thomas also pushes hospice, which I support too–as long as it is not coerced. But changes are needed in the regulations around hospice, for example, explicitly stating that tube feeding is permitted. Today, some hospices refuse to accept patients receiving ANH in the fear that it will be deemed life-extending treatment for which they will not be paid by Medicare. That limitation, in turn, prevents some patients–who don't want to dehydrate to death–from agreeing to the palliative approach.
Thomas's article mostly dealth with alternatives to rationing boards and thus deserved a more substantive headline than "The Case for Killing Granny." But Newsweek is desperate for readers, and so–ignoring their own criticisms of Sarah Palin for being alarmist with her "death panel" charge–the editors threw caution to the wind.
Contact: Wesley J. Smith Source: Secondhand Smoke Publish Date: September 21, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Nurse practitioners to perform abortions?
Pro-life laws recently passed in Arizona are being challenged in state and federal courts.
Pro-abortion groups, including Planned Parenthood, are responsible for the lawsuits, but Cathi Herrod of the Center for Arizona Policy is not surprised. "As we've seen repeatedly through the years, the abortion industry will challenge virtually every pro-life law that's passed that puts forth a reasonable measure to regulate abortion," she contends.
According to Herrod, one of the laws being challenged would bar nurse practitioners from performing surgical abortions.
Cathi Herrod (Center for AZ Policy)"As the abortion industry, led by Planned Parenthood, has difficulty getting doctors to perform abortions, they are increasingly allowing non-doctors to perform abortions, so a key issue will be whether nurse practitioners are allowed to perform surgical abortions," she says.
Herrod contends Planned Parenthood is fighting on the basis of its agenda, ignoring the fact that the Supreme Court has upheld laws requiring that only doctors perform them. Herrod believes other laws challenged in the lawsuits simply protect Arizona citizens, including medical personnel, who oppose abortions on ethical or religious grounds.
She thinks the litigation will go on for years but the laws will ultimately be upheld.
Also from Arizona...
Two Women Attack 69-Year-Old Pro-Lifers Outside City Hall
A pro-life protester, who is a regular fixture on Route 66 in front of City Hall, was attacked by two women during the lunch hour Friday. According to information from the Flagstaff Police Department, the 69-year-old victim was standing in front of City Hall with a graphic sign of an aborted fetus when he was approached by the two women. According to witnesses, the two women began to yell profanities at the victim. One woman kicked the sign and tried to take it. The victim tried to protect the sign and took the woman to the ground. While the two were on the ground fighting, the second woman joined the fray and tried to take the sign. The victim had to fight the other woman off as well. The two women, both 48, were cited and released on misdemeanor charges of disorderly conduct and criminal damage.
Click here for the full article.
Contact: Charlie Butts Source: OneNewsNow Publish Date: September 19, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Abortion Supporters Should Seek Facts before Calling People Racist Says Dr. Alveda King
Dr. Alveda King, Pastoral Associate of Priests for Life and niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., today addressed the charge that opposition to the health care plan backed by President Obama is racist in nature.
"Congressman Joe Wilson's breach of etiquette was definitely wrong, but to call it racist is to cry wolf," said Dr. King. "What really is racist is singling out minorities, who now receive about two-thirds of the abortions in this country, for discriminatory treatment. Those of us who care about the civil rights of all Americans, born and unborn, oppose Obamacare because we oppose the expansion of the most racist industry in America – the abortion industry. This is why we also are asking the Justice Department to investigate the racist practices of Planned Parenthood."
"Anyone who supports so called abortion rights, even an ex-President, should check the facts and take the mote out of his own eye before calling someone else a racist," added Dr. King. "Fact one – abortion has taken 17 million African American lives since 1973. Fact two – the President's health care plan, as presently written, will dramatically add to that number as it will cause the government to start subsidizing abortions that it doesn't now."
"The abortion movement has targeted minorities since its inception," said Dr. King. "There is no greater step one can take to oppose racism today than to oppose the expansion of abortion that would take place under the health care plans currently under consideration. The choice is simple, promote health with prenatal care or promote death with abortion. I say choose life."
Dr. King will join with other African American leaders this Wednesday through Friday for a Capitol Hill education campaign on abortion and racism.
Contact: Margaret Source: Priests for Life Publish Date: September 21, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
NEWS SHORTS FOR MONDAY
(Referral to Web sites not produced by The Illinois Federation for Right to LIfe is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)
Scott Roeder Trial Postponed Until Roe v. Wade Week - January 2010
Trial was scheduled to start Monday, but has been rescheduled to January 25, 2010 so the mainstream news media can browbeat pro-lifers with the Tiller shooting during the anniversary of Roe v. Wade
'Vigilante suspect' Scott Roeder, the man charged with killing a Wichita abortion doctor, won't go to trial until at least next year, the Sedgwick County District Attorney's office said this morning. Roeder was scheduled to go on trial Monday, charged with first-degree murder in the May shooting death of George Tiller. Roeder's new trial date has been set for Jan. 25, 2010. Tiller was shot to death inside Reformation Lutheran Church, where he was serving as an usher, on the last Sunday in May.
Click here for the full article.
Open Season on the Vulnerable in the UK as Prosecutor Effectively Decriminalizes Assisted Suicide
Democracy means nothing any more. The UK Parliament repeatedly refused to legalize assisted suicide. Then, a woman with MS named Debbie Purdy wanted to be able to go to Switzerland to kill herself, with her husband in attendance. So she sued. The Lords–the UK’s supreme court–ruled that she had a right to know whether her husband would be prosecuted and ordered the prosecutor to publish guidelines as to when the law would and would not be enforced.
The prosecutor has gone beyond the court ruling and decriminalized assisted suicides in country committed by friends and relatives of people with terminally illnesses and serious disabilities.
Click here for the full article.
Health Care Reform Sponsors Support Physician Assisted Suicide
American Life League's new video, "Obamacare: Ending the Elderly," reveals that HR 3200 sponsor Henry Waxman and co-sponsors John Dingell, George Miller, Peter Stark, and Frank Pallone all voted against a federal ban on use of drugs for physician assisted suicide. "Those supporting HR 3200 claim Obamacare won't cover abortion and euthanasia," said Michael Hichborn, host of the American Life League Report, "but history tells a different story. Supporters of the bill overwhelmingly favor abortion, euthanasia or both."
Click here for the full article.
Birth Control Could Help Combat 'Climate Change'?
Giving contraceptives to people in developing countries could help fight climate change by slowing population growth, experts said Friday. More than 200 million women worldwide want contraceptives, but don’t have access to them, according to an editorial published in the British medical journal, Lancet. That results in 76 million unintended pregnancies every year. If those women had access to free condoms or other birth control methods, that could slow rates of population growth, possibly easing the pressure on the environment, the editors say.
Click here for the full article.
Shocking, Unforgettable Pro-Life Film
"It's The Same Thing" is controversial, polarizing, and unique in the way it depicts present-day attitudes about abortion. This film will impact you deeply, and you'll either be infuriated or in solemn agreement. Regardless of your beliefs about abortion, you will never forget "It's The Same Thing."
UN General Assembly Gives Green Light to New Super-Agency on Women
The United Nations (UN) General Assembly voted unanimously this week to create a new, more powerful agency for women after three years of negotiations. The resolution calls for the four existing UN offices that address women's issues to be merged into a new "super agency" headed by an under-secretary-general - the third highest ranking position in the UN system, after secretary-general and deputy secretary-general.
While the resolution was approved by the 192 UN member states by consensus, it was not without drama. Four states - Egypt, Iran, Sudan and Cuba - led a last-minute campaign asking UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to elaborate on the new agency's structure and present a comprehensive proposal detailing the agency's mission statement, organizational arrangements, funding and executive board before giving the go-ahead.
Four existing UN offices are dedicated to women - the UN Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), the Office of the Special Adviser on Gender Issues, the UN Division for the Advancement of Women and the International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women. During the rounds of consultations leading up to this week's vote, states were pushed by UN officials to come to a quick decision on amalgamating the offices and create a new agency even though many had expressed concern at the lack of details on budget, structure, staffing, or mandate.
The particulars regarding the new entity are still unclear. While the resolution approves the new agency, it also tasks the Secretary-General with producing a comprehensive proposal outlining the specifics of the composite entity to be presented to member states for consideration during the current General Assembly session, which opened this week.
The new "composite entity" is expected to have an annual program budget of approximately $1 billion, including an estimated $300 million in salaries for a projected 1000 staffers.
A coalition of radical feminist groups allied under the Gender Equality Architecture Reform (GEAR) campaign worked in tandem with prominent UN staffers to demand a new, super-agency with a budget and staff to match those of the other major UN funds and programs, such as the UN Children's Fund (UNICEF), the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) and the UN Development Program (UNDP). Charlotte Bunch, executive director of the Centre for Women's Global Leadership and vocal advocate for the GEAR campaign, called the General Assembly decision to create the new agency "a great victory."
Critics fear that instead of advocating for the real needs of women worldwide, the new women's agency will be used as a tool to promote the abortion rights agenda of the radical feminist organizations who demanded for its creation in the first place.
After the resolution passed, the GEAR campaign started pushing Ban Ki-moon to start the recruitment process for head of the new women's agency immediately. A statement issued by the group read, "We expect a broad, open search process to start promptly so that the USG [under-secretary-general] is in place and the entity can be operational by the time of the Beijing + 15 Review at the Commission on the Status of Women in March of 2010."
Contact: Samantha Singson Source: C-FAM Publish Date: September 17, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Obama speech false: Insurance company didn't kill the chemo patient - but he would have
President Obama's speech writers apparently relied on the liberal online journal Slate for this false story Obama told during his speech before the Joint Session of Congress last week:
More and more Americans pay their premiums, only to discover that their insurance company has dropped their coverage when they get sick, or won't pay the full cost of care. It happens every day. One man from IL lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because his insurer found that he hadn't reported gallstones that he didn't even know about. They delayed his treatment, and he died because of it.
Now here's what really happened, from the Wall Street Journal, yesterday:
In fact, the man, Otto S. Raddatz [pictured left in undated photo with wife Marie], didn't die because the insurance company rescinded his coverage once he became ill, an act known as recission.
The efforts of his sister and the office of IL Attorney General Lisa Madigan got Mr. Raddatz's policy reinstated within 3 weeks of his April 2005 rescission and secured a life-extending stem-cell transplant for him. Mr. Raddatz died this year, nearly 4 years after the insurance showdown.
Obama aides say the president got the essence of the story correct. Mr. Raddatz was dropped from his insurance plan weeks before a scheduled stem-cell transplant....
In fact, the "essence of the story" is incredibly ironic. Raddatz had 3 years added to his life by ADULT stem cell treatment, the very research Obama rescinded funding for on March 24, 2009.
[Top photo via the Associated Press; bottom photo via the Chicago Sun-Times]
Contact: Jill Stanek Source: jillstanek.com Publish Date: September 18, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Missouri Group Launches Campaign for Personhood Rights of Pre-Born Babies
Personhood Missouri Submits Personhood Amendment to Missouri State Constitution
Pro-life Missourians submitted language late yesterday to the Missouri Secretary of State to bring the protection of the Missouri Constitution to the most defenseless human beings, preborn children.
The amendment, which is known as the Personhood Amendment, will define all human beings as equal persons under the law from the beginning of the biological development of that human being.
Led by local pro-lifers, Gregory Thompson and Mark Kiser the Missouri Personhood Amendment joins Florida, Montana, Colorado, and Mississippi, which started Personhood efforts earlier this year.
"No human being in the state of Missouri should ever be considered property," stated Gregory Thompson of Personhood Missouri. "Right now, the child in the womb has no rights. The Personhood Amendment will simply ensure that our laws recognize what we already know: a person's a person no matter how small."
"Personhood USA is proud to stand with those in Missouri as they work to have all humans protected by love and by law," added Keith Mason of Personhood USA.
Contact: Gregory Thompson, Mark Kiser Source: Personhood Missouri Publish Date: September 18, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Survey: 48 percent of Americans want ban on abortion funding in health care bill
The latest poll from the independent pollster Rasmussen shows that 48 percent of Americans want a ban on coverage for abortion in any government-funded health care plan, while only 13 percent believe that it should be covered.
The issue of taxpayer funding for abortion has been raised by numerous politicians and pro-life groups who insist that history shows a clear precedent that unless the legislation specifically prohibits paying for abortions, it will end up being funded.
During the consideration of H.R. 3200, the House Energy and Commerce Committee approved the Capps Amendment, which allows abortion to be covered under the public plan and subsidizes private plans that cover abortion.
The plan, introduced yesterday by Senator Max Baucus (D-Mont.), is also coming under fire from National Right to Life for containing "an array of pro-abortion mandates and federal subsidies for elective abortion."
Rasmussen Reports published a national telephone survey today that shows that 48 percent of Americans believe any government-subsidized health care plan should be prohibited from covering abortion procedures. The poll also found that 13 percent believe such plans should be required to cover abortions, and 32 percent favor a more neutral approach with no requirements in either direction.
Even among those who support the passage of the current legislation, 22 percent want a prohibition banning abortion coverage and 22 percent want a mandate requiring such coverage. The remaining supporters (47%) prefer the neutral approach, and nine percent are unsure.
The abortion factor seems to be a strong indicator of opposition to the health reform bill, with 72 percent favoring a prohibition against coverage of abortions.
Rasmussen Reports also indicated that a sizable minority (48%) of Independents want to see a ban on taxpayer funding of abortion in any new health plan.
On a more general level, 52 percent of Americans still think it is too easy to get an abortion in the U.S. and 58 percent say abortion is morally wrong most of the time.
The nationwide phone survey involved 1,000 likely voters was conducted September 14-15. The Rasmussen report carries a 95% level of confidence.
Source: CNA Publish Date: September 17, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Baucus Senate bill at odds with Obama abortion pledge
A health care plan introduced Sept. 16 by U.S. Sen. Max Baucus would cover elective abortions and is fraught with many of the same problems found in the leading House bill, pro-life leaders say.
Baucus, a Democrat from Montana who is the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, released his much-anticipated plan one week after President Obama pledged that "no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions" in any plan he supports. On Sunday, Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, repeated Obama's promise, saying regarding the issue of abortion, "I think the legislative language will reflect what the president has just said."
But Baucus' 223-page bill explicitly lays out a plan for abortion coverage on pages 25-27, and critics say it uses federal funds to fund the procedures.
The bill will be debated in the Senate Finance Committee and Republicans are pledging to offer amendments explicitly prohibiting abortion coverage.
"There are still some serious outstanding issues that have yet to be resolved," Sen. Chuck Grassley, R.-Iowa, said in a statement. "Like preventing taxpayer funding of abortion services...."
Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee, said in a statement regarding the House bill and the Baucus bill, "These bills are not consistent with President Obama's September 9 claim that 'no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions.'"
Baucus' plan does not include a government-backed public option, which has been a source of controversy in the House bill because of its method of funding abortion. But the Baucus bill nevertheless ensures that abortion will be covered. For instance, the bill:
-- allows tax credits and cost-sharing subsidies for lower-income people to be used to purchase private insurance plans that pay for elective abortions. The bill requires the insurance companies to segregate their internal funds and not use federal dollars to pay for the abortions. Critics call it an accounting gimmick.
-- requires that each area of the country offering an insurance exchange provide at least one plan that pays for elective abortions and one plan that does not pay for them.
-- prevents private insurers from being required to cover elective abortions but leaves the door open to changing the policy if the Hyde Amendment is not renewed. The Hyde Amendment traditionally has been attached each year to the Health and Human Services appropriations bill to prevent Medicaid from covering abortions except in cases of rape, incest and to save the mother's life. It must be renewed each year to remain in effect, and many Democrats in Congress oppose it.
Much of the Baucus bill language on abortion, in fact, includes loopholes that would further liberalize the abortion policy if the Hyde Amendment is not renewed.
For instance, the bill states, "[A]bortion cannot be a mandated benefit as part of a minimum benefits package except in those cases for which Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services are permitted" -- meaning that if the Hyde Amendment is not renewed and HHS is allowed to cover elective abortions through Medicaid, then private insurance companies could be forced to cover elective abortions under a minimum benefits requirement.
The bill further states, "No tax credit or cost-sharing credits may be used [by insurance companies] to pay for abortions beyond those permitted by the most recent appropriation for the Department of Health and Human Services." Thus, if the Hyde Amendment isn't renewed, insurance companies would no longer be required to segregate their funds.
The bill also provides $6 billion to set up consumer-run insurance cooperatives but provides no restrictions on abortion coverage.
Pro-lifers say any health care program should follow the lead of current law, which prevents the Federal Employees Health Benefits program -- the insurance plan used by federal employees -- from covering elective abortions.
Johnson said the bill "contains an array of pro-abortion mandates and federal subsidies for elective abortion."
"National Right to Life strongly opposes the legislation in its current form," Johnson said. "We will work in support of amendments to eliminate the abortion mandates and federal abortion subsidies."
The bill, Johnson added, "contains provisions that would send massive federal subsidies directly to both private insurance plans and government-chartered cooperatives that pay for elective abortion."
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said the "accounting used in the bill is a matter of smoke and mirrors, since elective abortion is authorized for health plans receiving government subsidies."
"If President Obama is serious about preventing funding for abortion in health care reform, he should immediately support adoption of Democrat Rep. Bart Stupak's amendment to exclude abortion from all health care reform legislation. Democrat Senator Bob Casey voted for such an amendment in the Senate Health Committee," Perkins said. "It's time for President Obama to stop the smoke and mirrors on abortion and health care and straightforwardly tell Congress to permanently exclude abortion coverage," Perkins said.
A Rasmussen poll released Sept. 17 suggested that 48 percent of likely voters believe any federally subsidized health care plan should prohibit abortion coverage. Another 13 percent believe it should cover abortion and 32 percent believe it should have no requirement concerning abortion. The poll of 1,000 likely voters was conducted Sept. 14-15.
Related News...
Senate Finance Committee Health Reform Bill Produces Mixed Reactions
Reactions were mixed on Wednesday to Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus' (D-Mont.) release of his panel's health reform bill, the Washington Post reports. Although House Democratic leaders and some liberal groups were critical of the measure, some influential players -- particularly industry groups -- "held their firepower," according to the Post. The muted reaction from industry -- which has been highly critical of the House bills and another Senate bill -- is perhaps the "best evidence" that the Finance Committee bill has a positive future, according to the Post. In an attempt to quell attacks from interest groups, the Obama administration has agreed to several deals in which the health industry would make financial concessions in exchange for the prospect of new customers. The Baucus bill takes a similar approach.
Click here for the full article.
Contact: Michael Foust Source: BP Publish Date: September 17, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Notre Dame's Father Jenkins Begins Pro-Life Measures at University, but Still not Dropping Charges against Pro-Life Protestors
Notre Dame's President Fr. John Jenkins, who was the subject of heavy criticism earlier this year for honoring pro-abortion President Barack Obama at the university's commencement ceremonies in May, has issued a letter to the Notre Dame community outlining various pro-life initiatives the university will be undertaking.
In his letter, Fr. Jenkins expresses a desire that the community "overcome divisions" stemming from the Commencement scandal "to foster constructive dialogue." While some of the most vocal opponents of the scandal have indicated that they are encouraged by Fr. Jenkins' statement of support for the pro-life cause, they insist that Jenkins' desire is impossible to achieve while the university president refuses to request leniency for the 88 peaceful pro-life protesters that the university had arrested on the day of the commencement.
"Coming out of the vigorous discussions surrounding President Obama's visit last Spring, I said we would look for ways to engage the Notre Dame community with the issues raised in a prayerful and meaningful way," writes Fr. Jenkins. "As our nation continues to struggle with the morality and legality of abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and related issues, we must seek steps to witness to the sanctity of life."
Fr. Jenkins outlines two new measures the university will be adopting. First, Jenkins himself will be participating in the January 22nd March for Life in Washington, D.C. He also extended an invitation to the Notre Dame community to join him.
Second, he says that he has recently initiated a 'Task Force on Supporting the Choice for Life', "to consider and recommend to me ways in which the University, informed by Catholic teaching, can support the sanctity of life." The topics he lists that the task force has already begun discussing are: "fostering serious and specific discussion about a reasonable conscience clause"; "the most effective ways to support pregnant women, especially the most vulnerable"; and "the best policies for facilitating adoptions."
Jenkins points out that he is on the Board of the Women's Care Center, a Catholic pregnancy resource center, and that such centers "deserve the support of Notre Dame clubs and individuals."
"Our Commencement last Spring generated passionate discussion and also caused some divisions in the Notre Dame community," he concludes. "Regardless of what you think about that event, I hope that we can overcome divisions to foster constructive dialogue and work together for a cause that is at the heart of Notre Dame's mission."
Thomas Brejcha, President & Chief Counsel of the pro-life law firm, the St. Thomas More Society, told LifeSiteNews.com that he was "encouraged" by Jenkins' expression of support for the pro-life cause. However, Brejcha also indicated that unless the university seeks leniency for the arrested protesters, who face heavy fines and jail time, any attempts at healing divisions are unlikely to succeed.
In June, the Society joined the defense of the arrested protesters. Two weeks ago, Brejcha issued an open letter calling on Fr. Jenkins to seek to drop the charges.
"Every signal we've had so far has been either hostile or at best indifferent to these folks who've been arrested," Brejcha said. "We'd like to hope that this is a signal that [the university] might be turning a corner and moving toward the stronger pro-life position that certainly they've shown in the past."
Brejcha noted that up until this point all the university had done was profess their pro-life values. "Actions speak louder than words," he said. "So we're looking for action."
Brejcha said he is pleased that Fr. Jenkins will be joining the March for Life, but pointed to commentary on the Society's new website FreetheND88.org, which highlights the irony of the situation: "Apparently the irony was lost on Jenkins that while he will be preparing to protest against Roe v. Wade, the actual Roe, Norma McCorvey, will be preparing for her criminal trial for protesting at Notre Dame after she was arrested under orders from Father Jenkins who has, so far, refused to drop the charges brought against McCorvey and the rest of the 'ND 88'."
"I just think that Notre Dame is in a position here that is untenable," said Brejcha, "in terms of being ... the complaining witness against all these very dedicated pro-life folks who dared to cross the line, so to speak, and speak out on the sanctity of life. They just should drop the charges. It doesn't make any sense. There's really nothing for them to gain by pressing these cases."
Patrick Reilly of the Cardinal Newman Society, an organization dedicated to the renewal of America's Catholic colleges, issued a press release today in response to Fr. Jenkins' letter.
"These are welcome steps in the right direction," Reilly said about Fr. Jenkin's pro-life initiatives, "the sort of activities that Catholics should expect from any Catholic college or university - but there are serious steps that Notre Dame should take immediately to atone for its shocking betrayal of the U.S. bishops and the Catholic Church last spring."
Reilly lists four such steps, including dropping the criminal charges against the protestors. Reilly also says that Jenkins should apologize for the scandal generated by honoring Obama, should develop policies to prevent such scandal in the future, and should "support the Notre Dame Fund to Protect Human Life, already established by the Notre Dame Center for Ethics and Culture and excluded from mention in Father Jenkins' announcement of new pro-life efforts."
"There is much more that should be done to renew and strengthen Notre Dame's Catholic identity," Reilly says. This includes "ensuring fidelity to Catholic teaching in the classroom, increasing Catholic faculty, and restoring authentic academic freedom." However, "the above actions would help indicate the seriousness of Father Jenkins and the Notre Dame trustees in upholding the mission of 'Our Lady's University.'"
Contact: Patrick B. Craine Source: LifeSiteNews.com Publish Date: September 16, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
NEWS SHORTS FOR FRIDAY
(Referral to Web sites not produced by The Illinois Federation for Right to LIfe is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)
S.Dakota AG Challenges Court Ruling on How State Can Kill Babies by Abortion
The state filed an appeal challenging a portion of a lower court ruling involving Planned Parenthood... according to Attorney General Marty Jackley. Planned Parenthood challenged a 2005 South Dakota law requiring informed consent to an abortion. A prior court ruling validated one provision and tossed out two others. Now Jackley says those two provisions that were tossed out are what they will be appealing. Those include telling women seeking abortions they would have a risk of suicide. And that they are ending a relationship with an unborn child. Less than 30 minutes ago we spoke to Jackley who said these two provisions need a closer look. "We have sorted out two main legal issues that again we feel warrant further review by the higher court."
Click here for the full article.
Doggone Abnormal Clones
A U.S. company is backing out of the dogfight over cloning dogs, but leaving behind some interesting kibbles and bits about the cloning business. BioArts International, associated with disgraced cloner Woo-Suk Hwang, has announced it is ending its pet cloning business. BioArts had been in a patent dispute with South Korean cloning firm RNL Bio, started by some of Hwang's colleagues.
BioArts has issued a press release detailing why they are getting out of the dog cloning business. While most of the reasoning is financial and related to the competition with RNL Bio, there are some shocking revelations related to dog cloning, and perhaps the cloning process in general.
Under reason #4, titled "Unscalable Bioethics", the numbers of dogs necessary for the cloning process:
"At current cloning efficiencies, an average of twelve dogs are needed as donors and recipients to produce a singled cloned puppy."
Click here for the full article.
Pro-life women target 12 in Congress
The pro-life Susan B. Anthony List has targeted 12 members of Congress up for re-election in 2010 who it says are out of step with their constituents.
The organization's effort will include the use of television and radio ads, as well as telephone conferences and online campaigns, to inform citizens of the voting records of their senators and representatives. The campaign especially will address the congressional members' votes on funding of abortion.
The "Votes Have Consequences" project will seek to educate citizens in the states or congressional districts of the following Democrats: Sens. Michael Bennett of Colorado, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Harry Reid of Nevada, as well as Reps. Alan Grayson of Florida, Debbie Halvorson of Illinois, Suzanne Kosmas of Florida, Frank Kratovil of Maryland, Walk Minnick of Idaho, Glenn Nye and Tom Perriello of Virginia, Carol Shea-Porter of New Hampshire and Harry Teague of New Mexico.
Click here for the full article.
Will Michelle promote partial birth abortion in healthcare pitches?
In a fundraising letter for her husband's US Senate campaign in February 2004, Michelle Obama called partial birth abortion "a legitimate medical procedure."
With Politico reporting yesterday Michelle "plans a packed autumn that aides say will include a 'dedicated focus' on health insurance reform," will she be pitching mandated public and private insurance coverage of partial birth abortions?
Oh, I know pba is now illegal, but Michelle also claimed in that fundraising letter a ban against it was "clearly unconstitutional and must be overturned." Michelle could add relegalizing pba to her healthcare pitch.
Click here for the full article.
Pro-Life Group at St. Mary's University Targeted Again: Booth Contents at Society Fair Stolen
The St. Mary's University (SMU) Students for Life group has once again had its activities disrupted, the second incident this year in which attempts have been made to silence the group's message. According to representatives of the group, last Thursday morning at the student society fair an unknown man stole the entire contents of the group's booth.
Paul Mullen, a SMU student in his final year of a degree in math, computer science, and engineering, says that he had just finished setting up the group's display this past weekend when the theft happened. He says he had only been at the booth for about five minutes, and had already had people sign up, when he stepped away for a few seconds to throw some tape in the trash can.
"I just walked about fifteen feet away, and I turned back around ... and everything was gone, there was nothing on the table," he told LifeSiteNews.com (LSN).
"I wasn't really angry," he said. "I wasn't surprised. I was just disgusted. Because, I mean, that's a line I didn't think they were going to cross ... and they just jumped right over it."
Click here for the full article.
Baucus Bill Contains an Array of Pro-Abortion Mandates
Also includes federal subsidies for elective abortion," and provisions that "will gravely endanger the lives of America's senior citizens."
Senator Max Baucus (D-Mt.)
The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the nation's largest pro-life group comprised of 50 state right-to-life organizations and about 3,000 local chapters, today reacted to the new bill issued by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mt.).
ABORTION MANDATES AND FEDERAL SUBSIDIES
The following statement may be attributed to Douglas Johnson, NRLC legislative director:
The "America's Healthy Future Act," proposed today by Senator Max Baucus (D-Mt.), contains an array of pro-abortion mandates and federal subsidies for elective abortion. National Right to Life strongly opposes the legislation in its current form. We will work in support of amendments to eliminate the abortion mandates and federal abortion subsidies.
The bill contains provisions that would send massive federal subsidies directly to both private insurance plans and government-chartered cooperatives that pay for elective abortion. This would be a drastic break from longstanding federal policy, under which federal funds do not pay for elective abortions or subsidize health plans that cover elective abortions. For example, current law prohibits any of the over 250 private health plans that participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) program from paying for elective abortions, because these plans receive federal subsidies. These private plans cover over 8 million federal employees and dependents, including members of Congress.
Thus, under the Baucus bill, like the House Democratic leadership bill (H.R. 3200), federal funds would subsidize coverage of elective abortions. In addition, the Baucus bill requires that a specific charge must be included in the premiums paid by those who enroll in such subsidized plans, of at least "$1 per enrollee, per month," which amounts to a surcharge specifically for elective abortions.
These bills are not consistent with President Obama's September 9 claim that "no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions," or with Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius's September 13 affirmation that "no public funds would go to fund abortions." Funds spent by federal agencies are, by law, federal funds. The claim that under these bills, a federal agency would use "private funds" to subsidize abortions is absurd on its face -- a political hoax.
In addition, the Baucus bill provides $6 billion in federal funds for the establishment of health insurance cooperatives, without any limitation on the use of these funds to pay for abortions or to subsidize plans that pay for elective abortions.
In addition, the Baucus bill contains language that would allow the federal government to declare abortion to be a "mandated benefit as part of a minimum benefits package" in any circumstances in which the federal Medicaid program could pay for an abortion. Currently, the federal Medicaid program pays for abortion only in three limited circumstances: to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest. But that limitation depends on language, the Hyde Amendment, that expires every September 30, and that must be renewed annually as part of the Health and Human Services appropriations bill. Under the Baucus language, if one house of Congress, and/or the President, blocked renewal of the Hyde Amendment, many private insurance plans could be forced to include abortion on demand as a mandatory benefit in the minimum benefits package. This would be another major departure from the status quo. (Currently, only 13 percent of all abortions are billed directly to private insurance, according to the Guttmacher Institute.)
HEALTH CARE RATIONING
In addition to the abortion funding provisions described above, the bill also contains important elements that would greatly impact the ability of patients to receive unrationed medical care. The following statement may be attributed to David N. O'Steen, Ph.D., NRLC executive director:
With respect to rationing, the proposal contains a Medicare provision that, beginning in 2015, would severely financially penalize physicians who are in the top 10% of medical resource use. This provision does not link funding to outcomes or quality; instead, it will force a "race to the bottom" with relentless pressure on doctors to limit health care for their older patients. On top of the significant Medicare cuts in the bill, this will gravely endanger the lives of America's senior citizens.
The bill does contain language to prevent the use of comparative effectiveness analysis in a manner that would discriminatorily deny treatment because of age, disability, or terminal illness; however, this language would not affect the financial incentive to ration care as described above.
There are other places in the bill where the Secretary of Health and Human Services is given discretion to regulate the treatment that healthcare providers can give to their patients. NRLC will continue to review the bill and provide further analysis.
Contact: Douglas Johnson Source: NRLC Publish Date: September 16, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
First Abortion: 35% Risk Low Birth-Weight and Premature Babies, Second Abortion 93%
A new Canadian study has shown that abortion increases the risk of future premature pregnancies and low birth-weight babies; however, the author has refused to say that abortion should be avoided, instead calling for improved abortion techniques.
Published in BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, the Canadian researchers found that women who had undergone a first or second trimester of pregnancy, when most are conducted, increased the risk of low birth-weight babies and premature babies 35 and 36 per cent respectively.
Those women who had undergone more than one abortion had a 72 per cent increased risk for low birth weight and 93 per cent risk of prematurity.
The figures come from an analysis of 37 studies around the world, carried out between 1965 and 2001, to discover reasons why babies are born underweight and premature.
Far from recommending that women not have abortions, the lead author of the study, Dr. Prakesh Shah of the department of paediatrics at Mount Sinai hospital in Toronto, said that the solution is to improve abortion techniques.
However, "when a woman comes for induced termination of pregnancy, she should be counselled about that risk. At least she will be able to make an informed choice," he said.
Shah told media that he was fearful that "anti-abortion groups" would seize upon the study as proof of the damage abortion does to women.
"I think it should not be used as a way of saying, this is bad and we should not be doing this kind of thing. There is an association which we should be aware of, and we should let mothers be aware. I don't want unintended pregnancies to increase."
The Guardian newspaper reports that the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists concurs. The RCOG spoke of the "importance of support for women's choices." "Abortion remains an essential part of women's healthcare services," they said.
Professor Philip Steer, editor in chief of BJOG, was also anxious that the study not be used by the pro-life movement. "The most important message is not that this should be used in any way to prevent women having a termination of pregnancy.
"The effect has to be balanced against the serious effects of forcing women to continue with unwanted pregnancies," he said. "Any medical procedure is likely to have side-effects."
Anthony Ozimic of Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) commented, however, that the evidence speaks for itself. "The more evidence which emerges about the harm abortion causes, the more the supporters of abortion insist that abortion not be restricted. We will be exposing the contradictions in their responses to the study's findings."
Contact: Hilary White Source: LifeSiteNews.com Daily Mail Publish Date: September 16, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Teen Denied Citizenship for Refusal to Receive HPV Vaccine
A 17 year old British immigrant to the United States has been denied citizenship over her refusal to take the controversial HPV vaccine Gardasil, which is required of all female immigrants to the US.
Simone Davis, a devout Christian, says that she doesn't know why she should have to take the vaccine because she has taken a pledge to remain a virgin until marriage.
"I am only 17 years old and planning to go to college and not have sex anytime soon," she told ABC News. "There is no chance of getting cervical cancer, so there's no point in getting the shot."
Simone, who was abandoned by her mother while still a baby, now lives with her paternal grandmother, Jean Davis, in Port St. Joe, Fl. Davis was awarded legal custody of Simone in Great Britain when Simone was 3. When Jean immigrated to the United States in 2000, the adoption wasn't recognized until 2006. Now, Davis is seeking to make Simone a U.S. citizen.
Davis, who already has U.S. Citizenship, says that she is concerned about the safety of Gardasil for her granddaughter/adopted daughter.
"If I have a choice, I would choose no...for no risk," says Davis. "I am a citizen and I'm trying to do everything legally and correctly and this rule takes away my parental responsibility and takes away my choice."
"My choice to make an informed decision for the health of my child has been taken away ... How can they call this America, the land of the free? Where are my parental rights?"
Simone is also apprehensive about the safety of the HPV shot.
"I don't want to have that shot. I've read a lot of stories about it...a lot of stories with parents saying that their kids' lives have been ruined by the shot."
As LifeSiteNews has reported Gardasil has been linked to 47 deaths since its release in 2006. In 2008 alone, the FDA documented 6,723 "adverse events" related to Gardasil; 1,061 were considered "serious," and 142 considered "life threatening."
The National Vaccine Information Center's (NVIC) website lists arthralgia, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, and seizures as adverse effects of the vaccine.
Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder of the NVIC, believes that nobody should be forced to receive a vaccination.
"We do not support requirements for vaccine use for anyone, whether they are a U.S. citizen or they are trying to become a U.S. citizen," Fisher told LifeSiteNews.
"The right to informed consent, to using a pharmaceutical product that carries the risk of injury or death is a human right, and this young woman should not be denied the right to become a U.S. citizen simply because she does not want to take the risk with an HPV vaccination."
Fisher says that tests like the Pap smear eliminate the need for the HPV vaccine. "There is no reason why any woman should be required to take this vaccine as a condition of becoming a U.S. citizen. HPV infection is almost entirely preventable with Pap smear screens, which have been a routine part of health care in the U.S. since the 1960's."
"It is absolutely unjustified to force women immigrants in this country to use a pharmaceutical product like Gardasil vaccine that carries risks that are not totally known yet."
For more information on Gardasil please visit: www.nvic.org
To voice your concern over this case, please contact the Texas Service Center of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, which is overseeing the case:
USCIS TSC
P.O. Box 850965
Mesquite, TX 751185-0965
tsc.ncscfollowup@dhs.gov
Contact: Matt Anderson Source: LifeSiteNews.com Publish Date: September 16, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Eight Million A Year Contemplate Suicide in USA and the Assisted Suicide Movement
A disturbing number of people–8 million–each year seriously contemplate suicide, with some 32,000 actually doing the deed. From the story:
More than 8 million Americans seriously consider suicide each year, according to a new government study. About 32,000 suicides occur in the United States each year, but a new study by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration indicates that many more give the idea serious thought.
The report is based on a survey of 46,190 people aged 18 and older.
– People 18 to 25 years old were far more likely to have seriously considered suicide in the previous year (6.7 percent) than those 26 to 49 (3.9 percent).
– Just 2.3 percent seriously considered suicide among those 50 or older.
– Among people with a substance abuse disorder, 11 percent had considered suicide, compared with 3 percent without such disorders.
Now, in the face of all of this despair, what is the message of the assisted suicide movement? That killing yourself is a right and proper means of ending your suffering. Some advocates–a minority actually–say this is "only" for the terminally ill. (I think that is a political tactic, but never mind.) But suffering people are not going to hear the message that suicide is okay–but only if you have cancer. Indeed, I believe the assisted suicide movement compromises society's (weakening) anti suicide message, or at the very least, makes it equivocal. It becomes akin to an anti-tobacco campaign telling people to smoke filtered cigarettes. In the end, the message comes out pro smoking.
Contact: Wesley J. Smith Source: Secondhand Smoke Publish Date: September 17, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Science Awards Go to Adult Cell Researchers
Dr. John Gurdon, a developmental biologist from Oxford University, and Dr. Shinya Yamanaka, a physician and researcher at Kyoto University, have been chosen to receive the prestigious Albert Lasker Basic Medical Research Award. In 2007, Yamanaka discovered Induced Pluripotent Stem (iPS) cells.
iPS cells are embryonic-like cells that can become specialized cell types without destroying a human embryo.
In a promotional video from the Lasker Institute, Yamanaka said he's excited about the future of the research.
"I expect some diseases like heart disease, heart failure, and some retinal diseases," he said, "may be a good candidate" (for therapies using this research).
Gurdon and Yamanaka will split the $250,000 cash prize and receive their awards in New York on Oct. 2.
Contact: Steve Jordahl Source: CitizenLink Publish Date: September 16, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
