Rockford Abortion clinic mocks pro-life demonstrators
An Illinois group wants the public to learn about some of the abuses pro-life demonstrators face.
The Northern Illinois Women's Center in Rockford is one of the most "anti-life and anti-Christian abortuaries in America." Rockford Pro-Life Initiative produced a video (Warning: Inappropriate for children) of the abortion clinic showing some of the "mocking, hateful, and grotesque" signs and exhibits in the windows of the facility. Frequent pro-life demonstrator Kevin Rilott describes some of them.
"Anything from Jesus hanging by a noose to a rubber chicken placed over the body of Jesus on a cross, to a sign that put the name of the abortion facility and put the number 50,000 under it. That's when they reached the 50,000th abortion and then they put the initials J.C. for Jesus Christ and the number 50, saying that Jesus has only been able to save 50," he says.
IllinoisPro-lifer George Lambert noted there have been streams of "vicious personal attacks, hatred for God, bigotry, racism, ridiculing people with HIV" for years at the facility. Rilott adds there have also been acts of violence as cars arrived at the clinic.
"In fact, the last incident was this summer, but there were two other occasions where abortion facility workers have actually hit pro-lifers on three separate occasions," he says.
Rilott concludes that if people are exposed to the kind of hatred and mocking of God in the video, they will have a better understanding of the steadfast faith and kindness of demonstrators.
Contact: Charlie Butts Source: OneNewsNow Publish Date: September 30, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
NEWS SHORTS FOR WEDNESDAY
(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.)
More Pro-Life Voices Plead for No Vote in Irish Lisbon Referendum
Two more Irish pro-life voices have joined the chorus of those urging the Irish voters to reject the EU's Lisbon Treaty in Friday's referendum. Pro-life former MEP Dana Rosemary Scallon and the group Ireland for Life have warned that the Lisbon Treaty, the EU's replacement for the defeated Constitution, poses a threat to the country's constitutional protections of the unborn, as well as national sovereignty.
"I am not afraid to vote No to Lisbon," said Scallon on Tuesday. Referring to a set of promises made to Irish politicians by EU officials, Scallon said, "The people must know the truth, that the guarantees are worthless and that the EU will have primacy over Ireland's Constitution."
"Voting No," she said, "will protect Ireland's constitution in matters such as the definition and protection of the family; children's rights; parent's rights; the protection of life and the child embryo; the right to a fair trial; the right to strike etc."
Click here for the full article.
Pro-Abort County Judge In Arizona Blocks Key Parts of State's New Abortion Regulations
A state judge has blocked implementation of key parts of a new Arizona law restricting abortion. Judge Donald Daughton of Maricopa County Superior Court late Tuesday issued a preliminary injunction granting most of a request by Planned Parenthood, the state's largest abortion provider. Daughton's order blocks implementation of requirements for a 24-hour waiting period and specific in-person disclosures by a physician to a woman before getting an abortion. Other blocked provisions include a requirement that parental consents for a minor's abortion be notarized and a ban on nurse practitioners performing abortions.
Click here for the full article.
96,000 Women Have Abortions Over Medicine
Many pregnant women make the hasty decision to have an abortion because of medication they were taking when they became pregnant. The practice is often based on unfounded fears that the medicine could lead to fetal deformities, says Dr. Kim Tae-yoon, head of the gynecological department of Miz Medi Hospital. "Though doctors assure them that most of the drugs are okay and recommend them to keep the baby, they just ask for the procedure," he said. Kim's remarks came in response to the Korea Food and Drug Administration's report that about 96,000 women, 10 percent of pregnant women, were having abortions for drug-related reasons each year.
Click here for the full article.
Bill Would Require Birth Control Abortion Pill Coverage
At the Ohio Capitol Tuesday, State Senator Teresa Fedor and State Representative Tyrone Yates introduced a bill that immediately generated controversy. It involves birth control, sex ed, and abortion. "These are issues that need to be talked about," Fedor told ONN's Jim Heath. "The more we're talking about reasonable honest sex education it helps people understand it, and make good decisions that put people in charge of their health." Among other things, the Ohio Prevention First Act would mandate schools teach sex education, and that pharmacies sell the morning after abortion pill. Ideas, Yates said, the public shouldn't fear. The legislation would also force all insurance companies to offer birth control, but Fedor admits she's not sure how many companies would be affected.
Click here for the full article.
Planned Parenthood Honors Tiller with Highest Award
The late Wichita abortionist George Tiller was awarded posthumously with the International Planned Parenthood Federation's top honor over the weekend, according to the Wichita Eagle.
The abortionist's widow Jeanne received the group's Medal of Honor for "outstanding individual contribution to sexual and reproductive health" on his behalf. George Tiller was shot and killed May 31 at his Lutheran Church.
Tiller, whose booming late-term abortion business was once the source of national controversy, had boasted of killing over 60,000 children in the womb over the course of his 30-year career.
The award was presented in a Washington, D.C. ceremony by Alexander Sanger, grandson of Planned Parenthood's eugenicist founder Margaret Sanger.
Click here for the full article.
Most Americans favor healthcare reform, excluding abortion coverage
There's more confirmation that the public does not want abortion funded in any healthcare reform.
Deirdre McQuade, assistant director for policy and communications at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' secretariat of pro-life activities, tells OneNewsNow her organization conducted a poll this month.
"And that survey found widespread public opposition to the inclusion of abortion and any erosion of conscience rights protection for healthcare workers, while at the same time finding that those views are shared by those who favor efforts to pass healthcare reforms," she notes.
McQuade says the public perception that opponents of abortion are trying to kill healthcare reform is not true. But the opposition to financing abortion, she says, goes beyond any government proposals for reform.
Click here for the full article.
Obamacare: Zeal to Cover Abortion Could Kill the Bill
Whenever we have discussed national health care here, I warned that proponents would try to take things too far at too great a cost, and that their desire to cover abortion could kill the bill. That very scenario is playing out. Amendments in the House Committees to explicitly bar abortion funding from the government plan were repeatedly defeated–as politicians promised abortion wasn’t in the bill. Then, an amendment passed that permits the Secretary of HHS to cover abortion, blowing up that myth. And, to make sure that government funding could be added in the regulations, health care was put in a different government account than the usual HHS appropriation–meaning the Hyde Amendment would not be relevant since it only applies to HHS appropriated funds. Tricky and disrespectful of democracy. (More on that particular political ploy here.)
Now, the Senate is taking up the issue. An amendment has been offered to prevent people who receive federal premium subsidies from using those taxpayer funds to pay for policies that cover abortion. From the story:
Abortion opponents in both the House and the Senate are seeking to block the millions of middle- and lower-income people who might receive federal insurance subsidies to help them buy health coverage from using the money on plans that cover abortion. And the abortion opponents are getting enough support from moderate Democrats that both sides say the outcome is too close to call. Opponents of abortion cite as precedent a 30-year-old ban on the use of taxpayer money to pay for elective abortions.
Proponents of government funding for abortion point to an accounting gimmick that they claim means that the current bill would not subsidize abortion:
Democratic Congressional leaders say the latest House and Senate health care bills preserve the spirit of the current ban on federal abortion financing by requiring insurers to segregate their public subsidies into separate accounts from individual premiums and co-payments. Insurers could use money only from private sources to pay for abortions.
But opponents say that is not good enough, because only a line on an insurers’ accounting ledger would divide the federal money from the payments for abortions. The subsidies would still help people afford health coverage that included abortion.
Opponents are right. Money is fungible. The bill, as it currently stands, would permit federally subsidized abortion.
The Hyde Amendment is essential for national comity because it does not impinge on the abortion right, while at the same time, protects abortion opponents from becoming complicit in pregnancy terminations through the use of their tax dollars. But that comity and basic respect is under sustained attack in the health care debate in both the House and Senate versions of the bill. And it just might tear the whole reform effort apart.
Here is where I come down: A healthy pregnancy is not an illness because the baby is unwanted. Tens of millions of people should not have to help fund an elective medical procedure not related to protecting physical health that they find morally abhorrent. On a broader note, the only way this will be even close to affordable is to cover only fundamental medical needs, meaning that the desired extras will have to be paid privately (yes, including Viagra).
Contact: Wesley J. Smith Source: Secondhand Smoke Publish Date: September 29, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Sunstein: Government must fund abortion
Declares 'no problem' forcing taxpayers with religious, moral conflict
Cass Sunstein
The government should be required to fund abortion in cases such as rape or incest, argues President Obama's newly confirmed regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein.
"I have argued that the Constitution ... forbids government from refusing to pay the expenses of abortion in cases of rape or incest, at least if government pays for childbirth in such cases," Sunstein wrote in his 1993 book "The Partial Constitution."
In the book, obtained and reviewed by WND, Sunstein sets forth a radical new interpretation of the Constitution. The book contains a chapter entitled "It's the government's money" in which Sunstein strongly argues the government should be compelled to fund abortions for women victimized by rape or incest.
The Obama czar posits that funding only childbirth but not abortion "has the precise consequence of turning women into involuntary incubators."
Sunstein argues that refusing to fund abortion "would require poor women to be breeders," while co-opting women's bodies "in the service of third parties" – referring to fetuses.
Sunstein wrote he has no problem with forcing taxpayers to fund abortions even if they morally object to their money being used for such a purpose.
He wrote: "There would be no tension with the establishment clause if people with religious or other objections were forced to pay for that procedure (abortion). Indeed, taxpayers are often forced to pay for things – national defense, welfare, certain forms of art, and others – to which they have powerful moral and even religious objections."
Sunstein is not shy about expressing his radical beliefs in papers and books, although many of his controversial arguments have received little to no news media attention or public scrutiny.
WND previously reported Sunstein drew up in an academic book a "First Amendment New Deal" – a new "Fairness Doctrine" that would include the establishment of a panel of "nonpartisan experts" to ensure "diversity of view" on the airwaves.
WND also reported Sunstein proposed a radical new "bill of rights" in a 2004 book, "The Second Bill of Rights: FDR'S Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need It More than Ever," in which he advanced the radical notion that welfare rights, including some controversial inceptions, be granted by the state.
WND has learned that in April 2005, Sunstein opened up a conference at Yale Law School entitled "The Constitution in 2020," which sought to change the nature and interpretation of the Constitution by that year.
Sunstein has been a main participant in the movement which openly seeks to create a "progressive" consensus as to what the U.S. Constitution should provide for by the year 2020. It also suggests strategy for how liberal lawyers and judges might bring such a constitutional regime into being.
Just before his appearance at the conference, Sunstein wrote a blog entry in which he explained he "will be urging that it is important to resist, on democratic grounds, the idea that the document should be interpreted to reflect the view of the extreme right-wing of the Republican Party."
In his "Second Bill of Rights" book, Sunstein laid out what he wants to become the new bill of rights, which he calls the Second Bill of Rights:
Among his mandates are:
* The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
* The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
* The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
* The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
* The right of every family to a decent home;
* The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
* The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
* The right to a good education.
On one page in his "Second Bill of Rights" book, Sunstein claims he is "not seriously arguing" his bill of rights be "encompassed by anything in the Constitution," but on the next page he states that "if the nation becomes committed to certain rights, they may migrate into the Constitution itself."
Later in the book, Sunstein argues that "at a minimum, the second bill should be seen as part and parcel of America's constitutive commitments."
Contact: Aaron Klein Source: WorldNetDaily Publish Date: September 29, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
38 Babies Saved Since Beginning of 40 Days for Life Campaign
David Bereit,
National Coordinator, 40 Days for Life
While Jackie was praying at the 40 Days for Life vigil in Greenland, New Hampshire, a car slowly pulled up in front of the clinic. The driver rolled down the window and said, "I don't know what you're doing here; but whatever it is, it's working!" The driver went on to say the abortion center had let employees go because business was off.
All Jackie could say was, "Praise God for victories!"
The staff at yet another abortion center has shrunk by at least one. But this wasn't a layoff. This was a clinic nurse who walked out and quit!
Angela of the 40 Days for Life team in Granite City, Illinois, said the abortion facility nurse came out and hugged her. "Thank you for praying for me," she told Angela. "Your witness has been powerful to me. This is my last day! I'm going off to do what real nurses should be doing." With that, she walked to her car and drove away.
This is the second abortion worker to quit during this 40 Days for Life campaign!
And yes, there are amazing stories to share about babies saved from abortion as well.
Thus far in this fall 40 Days for Life campaign, we've received reports of 38 mothers who changed their minds and chose life. And of course, those are just the ones we know of!
Here are just a few of those stories:
In Hartford, Connecticut, Al reported that while people were praying at the 40 Days for Life vigil across from the abortion center, a man came over with a simple message: "Thank you!" His niece had been scheduled for an abortion. But after seeing the group praying, she simply could not go through with it.
In Washington, D.C., Dick tells of a young couple who walked into the Planned Parenthood abortion facility. Volunteers at the 40 Days for Life vigil didn't have much time to talk with them on their way in. But after an hour or so, they came back out. "They said they changed their minds about having an abortion."
In Pensacola, Florida, there was another situation in which just the sight of people praying outside made a profound impact. Ernie said an SUV had pulled up to the clinic entrance, where the 40 Days for Life vigil was in progress. The couple inside just stopped, took another look, and drove away without ever going in.
The 40 Days for Life team in El Paso, Texas received a special blessing. Sandra said a woman drove up to the vigil and wanted to talk about the day she decided not to have an abortion. At the time, she saw her pregnancy as something that would just get in the way of her promising career.
But the day of her appointment, people had been praying outside the clinic. When she saw that, she stopped and asked herself, "What am I doing here? This is not right!"
As she continued her story, the young woman rolled down her car window, pointed to the child in the car seat and began to cry. "Thanks to you all," she said, "I have this beautiful son!"
"You could imagine the feeling," Sandra said. "I believe at that moment everybody was crying with her." The group prayed for the mother, her child and for all her family. "We ask God to continue blessing them and thank Him for this wonderful gift of life."
Prayer does work. And sometimes, you don't have to say a word.
Let's keep it up!
Click here to find out more about 40 Days for Life.
Contact: David Bereit Source: LifeSiteNews.com Publish Date: September 28, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Judge in Case of Arrested Notre Dame Pro-Lifers is Married to Pro-Abortion ND Professor
The attorney representing the pro-lifers arrested while protesting Obama at Notre Dame today repeated his request that the judge in the case, who is married to a pro-abortion Notre Dame professor, be removed from the case.
Attorney Tom Dixon's motion provides detailed support for his assertion in a previous recusal motion that there exists sufficient actual and perceived bias that Judge Jenny Pitts Manier, the judge assigned to the "ND 88" case, is required by Indiana state law to recuse herself in the matter. Dixon states that ever since Judge Manier has known her husband, Professor Edward Manier, he has been a well-known and outspoken advocate of the pro-abortion position.
As his views were well-known and have largely defined his identity at Notre Dame, Dixon argues, it seems implausible that Judge Manier could claim to be unaware of his views on the "ND 88" case, which stem from "the single biggest controversy in the history of the University of Notre Dame."
The case surrounds the arrest of 88 pro-lifers from across America who were charged with trespassing after peacefully witnessing against the presence of President Obama at Notre Dame The university awarded Obama with the commencement speech and an honorary law degree on May 17 of this year. Arrestees were singled out for carrying pro-life messages onto campus - including images of aborted children, a large cross, and images of Mary - while several other trespassers with pro-Obama or pro-Notre Dame signage were allowed to roam the campus.
Dixon argues that the career of Judge Manier's husband at Notre Dame was largely defined by the very same controversies which prompted the pro-lifers to travel across America to ultimately land in the St. Joseph County court room. In Indiana, a judge must recuse himself or herself from a case in the event of actual or perceived bias.
In the original recusal motion in August, Dixon says that Judge Manier refused to answer whether her husband had ever written on the topic of abortion, saying only, "I'm not my husband."
Dixon highlights several ways in which actual and perceived bias exists in the "ND 88" case. In addition to several writings revealing his pro-abortion beliefs, the professor donated "a significant sum of money" to Barack Obama's 2008 Presidential campaign, as well as additional donations to other pro-abortion rights candidates in the United States.
Manier, a supporter of the production of "The Vagina Monologues" on Notre Dame's campus, also attacked Pope Paul Paul VI's pro-life encyclical Humanae Vitae as "intellectually stillborn."
"When one analyzes Edward Manier's political contributions to pro abortion candidates and Political Action Committee, when one reads Edward Manier's writings referencing members of the Christian right, calling them 'fundamentalist mullahs' and 'jackleg preachers,'" Dixon writes, "it is hard to comprehend how Judge Manier could derive from her husband's writings the notion that he has no interest in the outcome of these cases."
Last week, University of Notre Dame law professor emeritus Charles Rice issued an open letter to University president Fr. John Jenkins, saying that the school's attempts at reconstructing a pro-life image were a "mockery" while yet refusing to request leniency for the 88 pro-lifers awaiting trial.
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert Source: LifeSiteNews.com Publish Date: September 28, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Council of Europe to Vote on Pro-Abortion Report on the Same Day Ireland Votes on Lisbon
On Friday this week, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) will vote on a pro-abortion report that says that all states should offer abortion by 2015.
Ironically, at the same time as Irish voters are being told by their government that there is no threat from the European Union and the Lisbon Treaty to their constitutional protections of the right to life, the PACE Committee of Ministers is being encouraged to start the development of a European Convention "to achieve universal access to sexual and reproductive health and rights by 2015."
The report that PACE will be considering is entitled "Fifteen years since the International Conference on Population and Development Programme of Action."
Pat Buckley, the EU representative of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), Europe's leading pro-life group, said that it is widely acknowledged that 'reproductive health and rights' is the "culture of death code word for 'abortion.'"
Buckley, noting that the PACE vote comes on the same day as the Irish second referendum on the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, called the document part of the "creeping agenda of the pro-abortion/anti-life/anti-family agencies in the European Institutions, be it the Council of Europe or the European Union."
The European Centre for Law and Justice (ECLJ) has rebutted the PACE report, saying in a briefing that the Council of Europe has no authority or competency to promote abortion as a means of family planning and population control which is the underlying purpose of the report.
The ECLJ said the promotion of abortion is "based upon unsupportable concerns regarding the need for greater population control in developing countries." It violates "core values upon which the Council of Europe was built" and offends the "protection of human life and dignity, and respect for national sovereignty." It is based on a "neomalthusianism philosophy" and "unfounded assertions" about the need for population control.
"Attacking the legitimacy of any country's abortion laws is not within the competency of the Council of Europe," said the ECLJ.
The briefing continued, "International law does not provide a so called 'right' to abortion," the briefing says. "Only the right to life is recognized."
The European Convention on Human Rights explicitly contains a provision guaranteeing the right to life.
Contact: Hilary White Source: LifeSiteNews.com Publish Date: September 29, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
NEWS SHORTS FOR TUESDAY
(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.)
China's Population Policy Draws Wide Praise
Demographers and scholars worldwide have spoken highly of China's family-planning policy over the past 30 years and more, saying it has helped lower the world population growth. "We know that China, being the most populous country in the world, is especially important in the area of population," said Hania Zlotnik, director of the Population Division of the U.N. Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA). Whatever happens in China has a great impact on world population, and certainly on the population in the developing world, she explained.
Click here for the full article.
More from China...
Chinese Babies Stolen By Officials for Foreign Adoption
In some rural areas, instead of levying fines for violations of China's child policies, greedy officials took babies, which would each fetch $3,000 in adoption fees. ... Since the early 1990s, more than 80,000 Chinese children have been adopted abroad, the majority to the United States. The conventional wisdom is that the babies, mostly girls, were abandoned by their parents because of the traditional preference for boys and China's restrictions on family size. No doubt, that was the case for tens of thousands of the girls. But some parents are beginning to come forward to tell harrowing stories of babies who were taken away by coercion, fraud or kidnapping -- sometimes by government officials who covered their tracks by pretending that the babies had been abandoned.
Click here for the full article.
ACORN Sues Young Pro-Life Investigators $1M Each for Sting Operation
The liberal community-based organization ACORN, which was recently disgraced by a series of undercover videos showing illegal activity by the group's employees, is now suing the young pro-life duo who shot the videos. Defendant James O'Keefe, 25, who is being sued together with 20-year-old investigative partner Hannah Giles, is known among the pro-life community for conducting sting operations against Planned Parenthood in conjunction with Live Action Films. In one such investigation, O'Keefe caught a Planned Parenthood employee accepting a donation earmarked for the abortion of a black child.
Click here for the full article.
Man Charged with Double Murder for Shooting 8-Mo. Pregnant Girlfriend Who Refused Abortion
A Tennessee man is facing a double murder charge after his girlfriend and her unborn child were shot to death, in what police say was the conclusion to the couple's disagreement over getting an abortion.
Shelby County detectives say they believe Tarence Nelson, 26, shot schoolteacher Tonya Johnson, 35, as a result of an argument over whether Johnson should abort the child, who was at eight months' gestation. Johnson was found in her home by neighbors who said she had bullet wounds to the right abdomen, chest, and the back of her head.
Click here for the full article.
As IVF Debate Rages in Poland, Doctors Propose Ethical, Natural, More Effective Alternative
As the debate over in vitro fertilization (IVF) rages in the Polish parliament, hundreds of doctors and medical professionals have written an open letter to Polish Parliamentarians urging them to vote against legalizing IVF and opt instead for a more successful, safer, natural treatment for fertility problems.
Although IVF is not officially legal in Poland, it has nonetheless been practiced for years in the nation.
Several Parliamentary proposals have been brought forward to legalize the practice under the guise of regulating the already occurring procedures. The proposals range from taxpayer funding for all IVF treatments without restriction, including for lesbians, and another that would ban creation of human embryos outside the mother's body.
Parliamentarians have ignored a grassroots initiative proposing a complete ban on IVF signed by 160,000 citizens.
Click here for the full article.
'Morning-After' 'Abortion Pill' Available In Spain Without Prescription
The so-called "morning-after" abortion pill was available in Spain without prescription for the first time Monday, in a bid to limit the number of unwanted pregnancies, the health ministry said. "It's important to facilitate access to all women, irrespective of their place of residence, as it is important to take this pill in the 72 hours after sexual relations," said Health Minister Trinidad Jimenez. Pharmacies are now able to sell the morning-after pill to persons of any age. The contraceptive has hitherto been available only on prescription.
Click here for the full article.
Fear grows among pro-life activists
Is a double standard being applied to those in the public debate on abortion?
In the aftermath of the shooting death of pro-life demonstrator Jim Pouillon in Michigan, some members of the movement are hesitant to picket. Eric Scheidler of the Pro-Life Action League believes that should stop no one from expressing a pro-life view.
"It's extremely rare for violence to enter into the abortion battle on either side, and there's no reason to be afraid to go out there on the street," he contends.
But Scheidler does wonder if there is a double standard in Washington.
"After George Tiller was shot by a lone goofball up there in Kansas, Barack Obama immediately deplored the event and sent out federal marshals. [But it took him three days to finally get around to responding to the killing in Michigan of the pro-life activist," he notes. And that response, he adds, did not involve sending marshals to protect pro-life organizations.
Scheidler, while conducting a demonstration recently in Naples, Florida, said it was ironic that a federal agent had been dispatched to the abortion center to watch their peaceful pickets.
Contact: Charlie Butts Source: OneNewsNow Publish Date: September 26, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
People Can Opt Out of Listing STDs, Abortions in Gov't-Mandated Electronic Health Records, Patrick Kennedy Says
Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy (D-R.I.)
Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D.-R.I.) says people will be able to stop doctors from including records of sexually transmitted diseases and abortions in the new national system of Electronic Health Records that was mandated by the stimulus law enacted in February.
The law says that doctors, hospitals and other health care providers must create an Electronic Health Record (EHR) for every American by 2014 or else face deductions in their Medicare payments. The EHRs are supposed to be integrated into a national health care IT system where health-care providers nationwide as well as the government would have the ability to access them when authorized.
“This is totally going to be up to the individual,” Kennedy told CNSNews.com when specifically asked if these EHRs would include any STDs or abortions in a person's medical history.
Title XIII of the stimulus law provided for “the development of a nationwide health information technology infrastructure” that would include “the qualified electronic health record” of “each person in the United States by 2014.”
The law specifically says that this “means an electronic record of health-related information on an individual that -- (A) includes patient demographic and clinical health information, such as medical history and problems lists; and (B) has the capacity -- (i) to provide clinical decision support; (ii) to support physician order entry; (iii) to capture and query information relevant to health care quality; and (iv) to exchange electronic health information with, and integrate such information from other sources.”
These records--including a person’s “medical history and problems list”--must be put into a national system that allows for “the electronic linkage of health care providers, health plans, the government and other interested parties to enable electronic exchange and use of health information among all the components in the health care infrastructure in accordance with applicable law,” says the law.
The law further requires the secretary of health and human services “to improve the use of electronic health records and health care quality by requiring more stringent measures of meaningful use over time,” according to an explanation of the law published by the House Appropriations Committee in February.
Nonetheless, Rep. Kennedy says individuals will be able to opt out of having doctors and health care providers list any STDs or abortions they have had.
By contrast, Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Tex.), who is a doctor, said completeness may be required in the electronic health records for both clinical and liability reasons.
“This is totally going to be up to the individual,” Kennedy told CNSNews.com last when asked whether the records would have to include any STD or abortion a person might have had.
“So, obviously, for the full effectiveness of the person, it’s to their benefit to have everything on a record, but it’s going to be totally up to the individual,” said Kennedy. “We’re not going to get people to fully buy into this if they don’t feel comfortable with the record--and the one way to not make them feel comfortable with the record is to force everything on them and say, ‘This is a mandate, you’re going to have to do this or that.’ Because if that happens, then people aren’t going to want to buy in and the system’s not going to work.
“So what’s going to happen is this is going to be someone’s--people’s opportunity to choose, because they are going to know there are safeguards, and I think over time they are going to get more and more comfortable that this is in the best interest of them and their personal health,” said Rep. Kennedy. “But absolutely, we are going to make sure that’s it’s all up to the individual, because we are not going to get widespread adoption if people don’t feel that their privacy is protected. Privacy is the cornerstone of making sure this thing works.”
Ashley Katz, executive director of Patient Privacy Rights, a non-profit health policy watchdog group, agreed with Kennedy about the importance of protecting the privacy of electronic health records but said that electronic health records as currently used are not generally designed to allow people to exempt parts of their medical history.
“I agree that privacy is the cornerstone of health care and ultimate adoption of electronic health records,” said Katz. “It is assuring to hear that the congressman’s intent is to ensure people can choose what information would go into an EHR versus mandating all data be dumped in without a patient’s consent.”
“However, most electronic health records today are not designed or used to allow people to make informed choices,” said Katz. “There is tremendous opposition by industry to allowing this kind of patient choice, and industry has a powerful influence on policy. We continue to hear that letting a patient segment or block sensitive information from going in to an EHR and allowing a patient to have control over who can see and use their information is too complicated and not worth doing. We wholly disagree. Patient control is essential with EHRs.”
Katz also said there is no language in the stimulus bill that says a patient can prevent something like an STD from appearing on their electronic health record.
“The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) allows a doctor to use/share the information for any purposes that fall under ‘treatment, payment, and health care operations’ without the patients request,” she told CNSNews.com.
“It actually says that the patient may request a restriction, but the provider does not have to comply with that restriction. It’s a toothless ‘right,’” said Katz.
“The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act [ARRA, the economic stimulus law] included a provision that would require a provider to not share information with a health plan, if the patient requested it and if they paid in full out of pocket,” said Katz. “The ARRA requires a policy committee to consider how to allow patients to segment sensitive information but there is nothing in the actual law that says you have this right.”
Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas), a physician, drew a distinction between putting information in the record and actually having a person’s physician release that information to a third party. But health care providers, he said, need to know everything about a patient’s medical history.
“I think it should be up to the patient to decide what information is released,” he said. “The patient, of course, is the one who’s ultimately getting control of devoting that information to their doctor.”
“If they release that information to be shared with whoever requests the sharing of information, I think the patient is going to be aware of that,” Burgess told CNSNews.com. “Again, my perspective is different and it’s more from the standpoint of a provider. I think providers do need to have that information. If I refer a patient to a specialist, yeah, that information needs to go along. It is not only unfair, it is probably a liability on my part if I did not disclose that information to the physician to whom I am referring a patient.”
Rep. Burgess and Ms. Katz told CNSNews.com that it is still unknown how information about a patient will be put into the electronic health database.
“I think that’s still mostly unknown,” Katz told CNSNews.com. “But usually it starts with the encounter at the doctor’s office. Also, all the prescription data is/has been collected every time you get your prescription. Most of these systems still don’t talk to each other (not interoperable) and there is plenty of debate over how to make a ‘national’ system.”
Kerrie Bennett, Rep. Kennedy’s press secretary, was not available to answer follow-up questions CNSNews.com.
Contact: Nicholas Ballasy Source: CNSNews.com Publish Date: September 28, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Right to health care is grounded in sanctity of human life, U.S. bishops consistently hold
The Catholic bishops of the United States have continually emphasized that the right to adequate health care “flows from the sanctity of human life,” a spokeswoman for the Wisconsin bishops has noted.
Minnesota Catholic Conference policy director Alexandra Fitzsimmons has said that previous documents of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) on health care are relevant to the present debate about proposals for reform, the Catholic Spirit reports.
“We cannot let go of the principle that really is why we believe that health care is a basic right,” she said.
Health care reform without respect for life is “empty,” she remarked, which is why Catholics cannot compromise on the abortion issue.
A 1993 USCCB resolution, titled “A Framework for Comprehensive Health Care Reform,” stated that everyone has a right to “adequate health care.”
“This right flows from the sanctity of human life and the dignity that belongs to all human persons, who are made in the image of God,” the document explained.
The bishops’ resolution listed eight criteria for health care reform, including respect for life from conception to natural death, priority concern for the poor, cost restraint, pursuing the common good while preserving pluralism, and universal access for everyone living in the United States, the Catholic Spirit says.
Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Center, N.Y. in a July 2009 letter to Congress said the bishops want to support health care reform.
“We have in the past and we always must insist that health care reform excludes abortion coverage or any other provisions that threaten the sanctity of human life,” added the bishop, who is chairman of the bishops’ Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development.
Archbishop of St. Paul and Minneapolis John Nienstedt, writing in his August 27 column in the Catholic Spirit, has said health care reform legislation has “far-reaching moral implications.”
“What it permits and what it disallows speaks volumes about the values that we hold dear and are willing to fight to defend,” he added.
President Obama in his Sept. 9 speech said that his health care proposal will not fund abortions with federal dollars and will leave federal conscience protections intact.
However, Richard Doerflinger, associate director of the USCCB’s Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities, said that legislative proposals such as H.R. 3200 and the recent proposal of Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) have “the same unacceptable language.”
Rep. Lois Capps’ amendment would require a public health insurance option to cover all abortions eligible for federal funding under the Hyde Amendment, which bars federal funds for abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or endangerment of the mother’s life.
The proposal would also grant the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services the authority to mandate federally funded coverage for abortions in the public plan not eligible for funding under the Hyde Amendment.
Fitzsimmons said that tax credits designed to help low-income people pay their insurance premiums will also subsidize abortions in private plans that cover abortions, the Catholic Spirit reports.
The Capps Amendment says that these credits should not be used to pay for elective abortions, but Fitzsimmons said that this is merely a segregation of funds that will not achieve its stated aim.
Source: CNA Publish Date: September 27, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
U.S. Birth Rate Sees Biggest Drop in Nearly 40 Years
Birth rates in the U.S. fell 2 percent in 2008, the biggest drop in nearly four decades, Time.com reported.
The Guttmacher Institute, which is affiliated with Planned Parenthood, suggested the recession may be to blame, as women factor economic anxieties into their decision about having children.
Steve Watters, director of marriage and parenting preparation at Focus on the Family, agreed that the economic environment is tough right now.
"But couples can still embrace the hope of babies even in these uncertain times," he said. "Couples found a way to care for their children back in the days of the Great Depression — including Dr. James Dobson's parents. This generation might have to make sacrifices, but it's by no means impossible to provide the kind of nurturing environment children need.
"It's my hope that Christian couples will be reminded in this time of economic insecurity that God is still trustworthy as a provider and that babies are still one of His best sources of hope."
Contact: Jennifer Mesko Source: CitizenLink Publish Date: September 25, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
The 2009 State-by-State Legislative Report on State Efforts to Protect and Defend Life
Americans United for Life (AUL) today released their 2009 State Legislative Session Report. This year's report confirms that the majority of states continue to successfully pursue and implement a life-affirming legislative agenda.
Dr. Charmaine Yoest, President and CEO of Americans United for Life, said: "Clearly, we are making progress at the state level -- law by law and state by state -- to protect and defend life. We are encouraged by the progress that has been made in 2009 and enthusiastically look forward to working with pro-life legislators to advance pro-life legislation and policies in 2010."
Denise Burke, AUL Vice President of Legal Affairs added: "The promising and life-affirming trends that we have seen in 2009 bode well for the 2010 state legislative sessions and for a renewed culture of life in America."
According to the report, several notable and promising developments and trends emerged in 2009:
* Approximately 60 life-affirming measures were enacted in 2009, a substantial increase from 2008 activity levels.
* The states considered approximately 300 abortion-related measures, the vast majority of them life-affirming, and virtually every state considered at least one pro-life measure.
* Several states introduced resolutions opposing the federal Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), radical legislation that would enshrine abortion-on-demand into American law and override all federal and state laws regulating or restricting abortion. Meanwhile, attempts in five states to enact a state version of FOCA were handily defeated.
* Further, states continued to seek to protect the unborn in contexts other than abortion by enacting protections for unborn victims of violence, encouraging substance abuse treatment for pregnant woman, and providing legal recourse for families whose unborn children are killed through the criminal acts or neglect of others.
* Measures to regulate biotechnologies and to prohibit or restrict technologies that destroy nascent life increased by nearly 20% -- the first increase in such legislation in three years.
* For the first time in three years, measures to protect conscience outpaced measures to violate or compel conscience by a margin of 2 to 1.
Click here for AUL's complete report, "2009 State Legislative Sessions in Review."
Contact: Heather Smith Source: Americans United for Life Publish Date: September 22, 2009 Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
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.
