Science of fetal pain advances federal abortion ban

1999: Spina bifida surgically corrected on as-yet-unborn baby, Samuel Armas,whose hand grasps the surgeon’s finger. (Photo by Michael Clancy)

Infant pain capability is now so well established and studied that the specialty of pediatric anesthesiology has evolved to help tiny babies tolerate surgical interventions.

Consider how mainstream medicine acknowledges that newborns (including preemies) feel pain: circumcisions are now routinely performed after topical numbing and the World Health Organization recommends pain relief for the mandatory “heel sticks” drawing the child’s blood after delivery.

Medical researchers continue to test and analyze the kinds of pain-techniques that are most beneficial on tiny patients, leading to the increased surgical successes on children before and after birth. (Read about the photo here and here and developments in spina bifida here.)

In fact, science now knows that

between 20-30 weeks gestation, the highest density of pain receptors per square inch of skin develop in the unborn–five times the pain sensitivity that any child or adult will ever be capable of.

However, the developing unborn child has not developed the mechanisms needed to modulate and tone down pain, because that “pain-dampening” development occurs around 40 weeks gestation (term delivery) –and afterword!

Only the abortion industry wants to perpetuate the myth that unborn children are non-feeling and impervious to the experience of being dismembered. One wonders whether abortionists and their staff personally reject anesthesia for their own newborns and preemies that undergo medical procedures?

PAIN-CAPABLE LEGISLATION
The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) led the charge to end partial-birth abortions –a gruesome method used on a child exiting the birth canal. In NRLCs overall plan to systematically dismantle the U.S. Supreme Court’s enduring support for abortion, they have crafted legislation presenting evidence that unborn children feel pain.

Kansas is one of the few states banning abortions at 22 weeks gestation (20 weeks post-fertilization) due to the recognized pain-capability of the unborn. While legal injunctions to the Idaho, Georgia and Arizona pain-capable laws have predictably been secured, we hope that state appeals of those decisions will be taken up for review by the U.S. Supreme Court.

HR 1797 is a federal bill, spearheaded by NRLC, that would ban elective abortions at 20 weeks fetal age, due to pain-capability. The measure is co-sponsored by all four members of the Kansas delegation to the U.S. House  and by both Kansas U.S Senators in a companion bill. The House Judiciary Committee could vote on the bill before mid-June, with action by the full House any time thereafter. For more details, go here.

The issue of whether aborted children could experience the pain of abortion had not been a specific consideration in the 1973 Roe v Wade ruling. In that era, surgery for preemies, infants and toddlers relied on taping the child to the surgical table to immobilize the body so that the needed procedure could be performed!

Can our country– where hospitals seek the best way to protect newborns from the pain of a needle prick –continue to allow the horrific dismemberment of pain-feeling children inside abortion clinics?

Read Full Post »

Gosnell and pain-capable unborn child-protective legislation

Kermit Gosnell was convicted of murder, supported by photographic evidence of preterm babies with deep gashes to the neck, applied with sharp scissors.  Gosnell’s associate called the method of their demise “a beheading”.

Fox News reporter and seasoned litigator Megyn Kelly, 6 months pregnant, admitted how hard it was to force herself to look at the photos. Any decent person would get the shivers imagining how such a slashing might feel—particularly on the tender bodies of tiny children.

However, an even more chilling component exists, as revealed in scientific studies developed over the past three decades: that unborn children are “wired” to feel pain MORE intensely than any child or adult ever can!

This is due to the physiology of the pre-term child, reported Emory University professor/ pediatric intensive care physician, Dr. Jean Wright to Congress,“the fibers and structures needed to feel pain are present but the mechanisms needed to modulate and tone down the response are poorly developed.”

“The highest density of pain receptors per square inch of skin in human development occurs in utero from 20-30 weeks gestation,” testified Prof. Kanwaljeet Anand to Congress, based in part on his  seminal work, first published in1987. Anand explains,

“the process of…surgical incision into the fetal cranium / upper neck of the fetus will result in prolonged and intense pain… more intense than [that of] older infants, children or adults to a similar injury.”

Thus, the stabbing of those babies at the Gosnell clinic is more horrific than can be imagined.

Abortion was legalized without the scientific knowledge that pre-term children not only can feel pain, but feel it more excruciatingly; massive medical documentation can be found at  www.doctorsonfetalpain.org. National Right to Life developed a strategy to pass legislation that will reach the Supreme Court and confront the justices with this additional concept.  This allows states to show the High Court that civilized people want abortion banned at least at the stage when children can acutely feel the torture of abortion.
         
Kansas passed the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act in 2011, after we informed legislators that the issue of whether aborted children could experience the pain of abortion had not been a consideration of the 1973 Roe v Wade ruling.

At that time, surgery for preemies, infants and toddlers relied on taping the child to the surgical table to immobilize the body so that the needed procedure could be performed! Ill children were considered too frail to tolerate anesthesia, and there was insufficient data on how, and in what amounts, successful pain relief could be administered.

That medical era changed in the 1980s with increasing studies showing the hormonal and cardio-resuscitory responses of unborn children to painful stimuli. With this new knowledge, the specialties of pediatric surgery and pediatric anesthesiology developed, as well as NICU units with special protocols acknowledging the hypersensitivities of preemies.

Physicians now know how to detect and treat pain in the tiniest of patients. In fact, due to advances in pediatric anesthesia techniques, unborn children can be removed temporarily from the womb, endure surgical repair, and be returned to finish gestation.

With some limited coverage by the mainstream media of Gosnell’s vicious murder of pre-term children born alive, the general public has now been awakened. It would be a silver lining if the same public who feel pity for Gosnell’s tiny victims, allow themselves to actively reflect upon the acute pain-capability of the children destroyed during abortion.

The time is ripe for passage of a federal Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. Read more in key articles here, here, and here.

Read Full Post »

KS abortion numbers continue drop, “pill” method rises

KDHE, the state health department, released preliminary annual data on abortions performed in Kansas, showing a 5.4 % decrease overall from 7, 885  in 2011 to  7,457 abortions in 2012.  This is  the lowest state total since 1987, two years after all abortion providers were legally mandated to report.  The total was divided between 3,661 obtained by residents and 3,796 by non-residents.

143 women were certified for abortion at Kansas clinics this year and did not return to obtain the procedure, compared to 182 in 2011. KDHE does not collect reasons for these “no-returns.” Kansas requires “Woman’s Right to Know” (WRTK) informed consent materials be accessed 24 hours prior to abortion, whether received from the abortion clinic at her initial visit, or through the state hotline, or just by viewing online at http://www.womansrighttoknow.org.

It is not unreasonable to surmise that the WRTK materials both contribute to “no-returns” as well as deter some women from ever entering a clinic.  A woman contemplating abortion may fear a lack of support for her pregnancy needs, or be responding to subtle or overt pressure from her family or the father of the child.  In the WRTK info, she finds:

1. fetal development explanations with high definition real-time sonography;
2. a directory of statewide locations for free individual ultrasounds and 80 pregnancy maintenance centers;
3. links to assistance for medically-challenging pregnancies;
4. warnings that coerced abortions are illegal.

OTHER STATS:
All categories saw a decrease except “RU486″ abortions by pill, which rose from 20% to 30% of total Kansas abortions. This rate exceeds the 2012 CDC chemical abortion national average of 17.4%. Kansas enacted a ban on chemical abortion obtained “by webcam” in the 2011 clinic regulation law, which is not in effect due to litigation.

Two-parent consent for abortions to minors under age 18 became law in July 2011.  KDHE did not publish the number of requests for judicial bypass (waiver of parental consent). Abortions to minors continue to decline, with those obtained by minors numbering 331 in 2011 and 304 in 2012.  Abortions to girls age 15 and under declined from 32 in 2011 to 25 in 2012.

Since July 2011, Kansas bans abortions to pain-capable unborn children at 22 weeks gestation, and KDHE reports 3 Kansas women obtained out-state abortions past 22 weeks gestation, compared with 8 in 2011 (before and after the new law).

Continuing a two-year trend, more abortions in Kansas are obtained by non-residents than residents. In 2011, non-resident abortions exceeded resident by 3,939 to 3,912, in 2012 by 3,796 to 3,661. 97% of the non-residents are from Missouri, a consistent figure, as 2 of 3 Kansas abortion providers  are located in the Kansas City KS/MO metro area.

There were 5 reports of abuse or neglect collected in conjunction with these abortions (4 in 2011) but no further details on resolution of these matters are published.

HB 2253, the Pro-Life Protections Act, has passed the House and awaits Senate action next week. Relevant to informed consent, HB 2253 will:

• add clarifying language to the coercion warnings that must be posted inside abortion clinics;
• maintain modest, medically-based risk discussion in WRTK materials about abortion, pre-term birth and breast cancer;
• require KDHE to beef up medical information access and community support connections for coping with pre- and post-natally-diagnosed disabilities.

Read Full Post »

Kansas House passes Pro-Life Protections Act for 2013

Rep. Lance Kinzer

The Kansas House today provisionally passed HB 2253, an updated version of last year’s Pro-Life Protections Act, with a final vote to be taken Wednesday. UPDATE Mar.20: Passed 92-31

The bill–which passed without any of the four hostile amendments offered–

• removes tax breaks for abortionists and tax funding of abortion & abortion training;
• codifies informed consent already created and in use by KDHE (state health dept.);
• unifies abortion statute definitions;
• adopts ‘Life begins at conception/fertilization’ as basis for legislation; and
• improves support for medically-challenging pregnancies and disabled children.

Opponents’ game plan today was to introduce a new headline for the liberal press—which ate it right up—that Kansas rejected a rape exception for abortion. Nevermind that the ‘exception’ was actually a bold attempt to overthrow ALL state abortion regulation from the past two decades with one floor amendment. The headline got through, to be sent out on social media.

Neither did abortion supporters brush aside their usual untruths that the Kansas bill is ‘sweeping’ and forces doctors to lie to women that abortion causes breast cancer. No matter how many times the truth is told that the bill contains over 50 pages of required tax statutes, and that abortionists will not be required to utter any KDHE scripted remarks, they will ignore it.

The most vocal opponent, as usual, was long-retired anesthesiologist, Rep. Barbara Bollier with her perennial complaint that the bill was medically inaccurate. “I’m so disappointed in you all who have not gone to medical school, who have not gone to nursing school and think you know better. It’s shameful” said the Republican from Mission Hills, addressing the House.

Bollier has many ‘facts’ wrong, for example,

there is no phrase “abortion-causes breast-cancer” in the state informed consent materials, or in this bill that codifies those materials—no matter how many times she repeats it.

Even though she was made to admit at the podium, near the end of debate, that the first full-term pregnancy is well known to give lifetime risk protection from breast cancer, Bollier stubbornly said that does not prove that abortion has any effect on a pregnancy. She denied the logic of alerting a woman experiencing her first pregnancy of the risk that can result by preventing a full term delivery!

The first of Boiller’s 3 hostile amendments attempted to remove the topic of abortion’s link to breast cancer and pre-term future births from Woman’s Right to Know informed consent materials. Then Bollier tried to delete information describing the pain capability of the unborn child from the same materials. As she did 2 years ago when fighting passage of a law protecting pain-feeling unborn children, Bollier insisted no science backs it up. This time, her defense was more astounding.

First, Bollier—who has not practiced medicine for 14 years, was flat out wrong when she told House members that anesthesia is never given to unborn children directly, but only through their mothers. Then, in an even more insistent and embarrassing display, she argued that unborn children can’t feel pain, or “feel” a stress reaction, they can only “mount” a stress reaction!

HB 2253 bill sponsor, and House Judiciary chairman, Rep Lance Kinzer (R-Olathe), rebutted Bollier:

When it comes to stress reactions I imagine an unborn child does indeed experience stress when being dismembered and having arms and legs torn off. He cited the scientific evidence at doctorsonfetalpain.org.

Retired surgeon, freshman Rep. Shanti Gandhi, (R-Topeka) stood in strong support of the bill: “I come here to confirm one fact that’s indisputable, at least in my case having studied medicine, that is that life does start at conception. If we believe that, I think this bill is too long. All it needs is one paragraph that says life begins at conception.”

Speaking in SUPPORT of the bill were Reps. Kinzer, Gandhi, Steve Brunk (R-Wichita), Peggy Mast (R- Emporia), Allan Rothlisberg (R-Grandview Plaza), and Joe Edwards (R-Haysville).

Speaking in OPPOSITION to the bill were Reps. Bollier, Jim Ward (D-Wichita), Louis Ruiz (D-Kansas City), Anne Kuether (D-Topeka), Annie Tietze (D-Topeka), John Wilson (D-Lawrence), Roderick Houston (D- Wichita), Patricia Sloop (D-Wichita), and Carolyn Bridges (R-Wichita).

Read Full Post »

Abortion lobby’s errors and deceit about KS pro-life bill

Testimony last Wednesday to the Kansas House Federal State Affairs committee from opponents of this year’s version of the Pro-Life Protections Act, HB 2253, showed they don’t know how to read a legislative bill.

Pro-abortion conferees so misunderstood which parts of the bill include existing statute that they were asking the committee not to pass provisions [the pre-abortion 24-hour waiting period, and definitions of medical emergency and bodily health] that already exist as state law!

Of course, the other explanation is that the abortion lobby doesn’t care about accuracy as long as the spin works. Some examples follow.

ABORTION SPIN: Up again for consideration in Kansas is “70 pages of anti-abortion regulations”.

FACT: In Kansas, bill drafts must include the entire statute that is relevant– even for just a one-word change. The lengthiness of HB 2253 is due to the necessary inclusion of the revenue tax code plus the  “Woman’s Right to Know” (WRTK) handbook, issued by KDHE (the state health department).

ABORTION SPIN: This bill “forces doctors to lie” and “contains a huge amount of medically inaccurate information that doctors should never have to repeat.”

FACT: HB 2253 does not mandate abortionists “tell” women anything, period. The abortionist is free to disagree with KDHE materials, even mock them—as one KCK clinic has done on its website for years. By law since 1997, the abortion-seeking woman signs a paper for her clinic file that she has ‘accessed” these materials 24 hours prior to the abortion. HB 2253, codifying the WRTK handbook, conforms to the ‘reasonable patient standard’ in law covering potential risks needed to be revealed. If breast cancer and pre-term birth risks are nonexistent, KDHE can say so under this bill.

ABORTION SPIN: “No credible evidence exists” linking abortion with future pre-term birth.

FACT: In 2006 the Institutes of Medicine listed induced abortion as an immutable cause of premature birth in its publication on prematurity. A 2009 analysis of international studies concluded prior induced abortion, especially repeat abortions, as associated with a significantly increased risk of low birth weight and preterm births. KDHE finds this persuasive.

ABORTION SPIN: This bill says “abortion causes breast cancer”.

FACT: HB 2253 does not say that! It requires that the WRTK handbook “shall also contain objective information… including risk of premature birth in future pregnancies, [and] risk of breast cancer.”  The information currently provided is one short paragraph on each topic, based on medical and scientific evidence. To read the pertinent section from the WRTK booklet go here.

ABORTION SPIN: “Claims linking abortion and breast cancer fly in the face of scientific evidence.”

FACT: That sentence was taken from the national ‘fact sheet’ issued by Planned Parenthood and submitted by their Kansas facility as defending their opposition to WRTK info. However, two paragraphs further on that ‘fact sheet’, the section on breast cancer reads:

“reproductive factors have been associated with risk for the disease since the seventeenth century…it is known that having a full-term pregnancy early in a woman’s childbearing years is protective against breast cancer.”

Now compare Planned Parenthood’s statement with the first 3 sentences in the WRTK booklet under breast cancer risk :

Your chances of getting breast cancer are affected by your pregnancy history. If you have carried a pregnancy to term as a young woman, you may be less likely to get breast cancer in the future. However, your risk is not reduced if your pregnancy is ended by an abortion.

Gee, sounds nearly identical; even the World Health Organization acknowledged over 50 years ago that the first, full-term birth gives women the “greatest lifetime protection” against breast cancer. When a woman is pregnant, it is her unborn child who sends the chemical signal (after the 32^nd week) to the mother’s breast cells to “mature” and become milk-producing. This breast cell maturation brings resistance to cancer-causing agents.

Thus, if an already-pregnant woman deserves all relevant information, the fact that delivering this child will enhance her breast cancer protection and abortion will decrease it, is relevant. And the fact that abortion raises future pre-term birth risk is also relevant. The KDHE is on solid ground, as is the Pro-Life Protections Act. (read more here)

Abortion opponents are intentionally promoting deceit.

Read Full Post »

Kansas informed consent website aids abortion decrease

In 1997 Kansas enacted state-issued informed consent provisions for abortion, with a 24-hour phone hotline and printed informational booklets. Part of the  “Woman’s Right to Know” law required abortionists to report, not only the numbers of abortions performed, but also how many women they saw for an initial visit at which time informed consent printed state materials were presented.

The encouraging result is that from 1998 through 2011, the state health department received confirmation that 3,551 women did not proceed with abortions after their initial clinic contact.

To better educate pregnant women, as well as deter them from even entering abortion clinics, Kansans for Life shepherded the “Women’s Right to Know and See” law. Passed in 2009, the law gives women not only the option to see their child’s ultrasound taken inside the abortion clinic, but also

created a state health department-run website with real-time sonography of the developing unborn child.

At www.womansrighttoknow.org, a scientifically accurate description of prenatal development accompanies a breathtaking day-by-day view inside the womb.

A pregnant women considering abortion in Kansas, whether due to personal ambivalence or coercion, no longer has to actually contact the abortion business or wait for printed materials to arrive in the mailbox. Now, thanks to this state website, the pregnant woman has direct, private access to gaze at ultrasounds of children the same age as her unborn child… without time limits. Website access to informed consent warnings and prenatal ultrasound allows her to contemplate –at her own pace –the real person already living inside her, without clinic pressure or misinformation.

We asked the Kansas health department about website traffic. They answered that in the 26 months from May 2010 through June 2012, the right-to-know website has been phenomenally busy, with 152,173 ‘hits’! 

Logically some of these hits were repeat visits and some were from students or other non-pregnant interested individuals.  But undoubtedly, the right-to-know website has contributed to the continuing decrease in Kansas abortions.

In 2008 (before the website), 10,642 pregnant women entered Kansas abortion clinics, in 2009, 9,701 did so, in 2010, 8,615, and in 2011, 8,033. Thus, nearly 2,700 women never stepped inside a Kansas abortion business, due to their access to a state informed consent website!

So, while we are pleased that a few hundred women each year do reject abortion upon reflection AFTER entering Kansas clinics, the number choosing life has greatly increased with the online website.

Read Full Post »

KS Abortionist Neuhaus “can’t pay” but will get appeal

Kris Neuhaus

The Kansas state Board of Healing Arts will likely never be repaid the $93,000.00 it already spent revoking the medical license of abortionist Kris Neuhaus. And it’s hard to believe the ongoing expenses of the district court and the Board involved in her appeal will ever be reimbursed either.

The protracted medical license revocation action against Neuhaus was based on ‘psych referrals’ she made for 11 teens receiving late-term Wichita abortions in 2003. The Board spent $75,000.00 for expert testimony and review of Neuhaus’ records for those cases, finding that she failed in multiple ways to meet medical standards.

District Judge Franklin Theis is presiding over Neuhaus’ appeal of that revocation, which is in the initial stages. The Board issued its final revocation order July 5, 2012, allowing a delay in repayment, but then asked the court to enforce the Board’s right to require a bond. This was the only time in Theis’ memory, he said, that the Board had asked for a bond in this kind of proceeding.

Abortion attorneys argue Neuhaus is impoverished and would not be able to pay the $93,000.00 “in the foreseeable future.”

They said she could only afford a bond of $100, which Judge Theis said “would be a joke.”

Theis then ruled that Neuhaus merely “sign a statement saying she’ll pay any judgment imposed by the courts.”

Neuhaus was uncovered in 2006 as the sole source of second opinions for abortions performed after viability by George Tiller. Under the law, totally “independent” referrals would give proof that the abortion was needed to prevent irreversible and substantial bodily damage- or death– to the mother. Although Tiller escaped a misdemeanor conviction in March 2009 for repeatedly using Neuhaus’ services, the Healing Board proceeded with license revocation filings for Tiller until his murder in May 2009.

Although the Board has regrettably taken no disciplinary actions against other physician associates of Tiller who also used Neuhaus’ referrals, they did proceed with revocation against Neuhaus –a licensee they twice officially called “a danger to the public” and first began to discipline fifteen years ago. (see Neuhaus Board history here)

Neuhaus has no viable medical practice and for the last few years held a strictly limited license until it was revoked. According to sworn testimony, she has worked at a variety of part time positions including a blood bank, laser hair removal salon and an indigent clinic. Yet, under a “due process” claim, she will continue to eat up Court and Board expenses during an appeal process for which she has virtually no chance of winning.

The awful irony is that the court is bending over backward to give Neuhaus the due process that thousands of children and their mothers were denied in Kansas clinics.

Read Full Post »

Trust Women takes over Tiller abortion clinic property

After over a year of threats by ex-Tiller political operative, Julie Burkhart, to re-establish a Wichita abortion business, the Wichita Eagle reports that Burkhart’s Trust Women group officially owns the old Tiller clinic building.

The Eagle obtained no definitive information about how Burkhart would be using the building, but Kansans for Life had alerted its members September 12th of credible inside information that a Wichita clinic staffed with three non-Kansas abortionists would indeed be opening in January 2013.

If in fact Burkhart does open a business with itinerant abortionists, women will be in much jeopardy. Out-of-state physicians do not have

• a stake in the community with family ties,
• a medical reputation to maintain,
• a permanent real estate investment.

Abortion clinics are notorious for sending abortion-injured women to the hospital without the necessary first-hand information for accurate emergency treatment– apparently what happened in the Tonya Reaves botched abortion death from a Chicago-area Planned Parenthood this July.

This is the reason that a provision requiring local hospital privileges for itinerant abortionists was passed in 2011 as part of the abortion clinic licensure law.  Unfortunately, this law is under injunction and thus not in effect, so the Eagle report is wrong that at least one of Burkhart’s abortionists would have to attain hospital privileges within 30 miles of the clinic.

An abundance of incidents across this nation have documented a variety of schemes with abortionists crossing state lines to take advantage of differing state laws governing abortion. Without a clinic licensure law in effect, the Kansas state health department cannot inspect, restrain, or penalize clinics.

Additionally, the Healing Arts Board cannot discipline a non-resident abortionist who drops his/her license and leaves Kansas.  Even if malpractice has occurred, the Board cannot chase abortionists into other states and force them to return to testify in Kansas, nor can the Board compel information from other state medical boards.  And certainly, personal lawsuits for injury and death on behalf of a woman or her family cannot be filed in other states.

If the information Kansans for Life received is true, the abortionists for the slated new clinic are residents of Missouri, Oklahoma and Nebraska. Nebraska abortionist LeRoy Carhart, a longtime Tiller-associate, still possesses a Kansas license.

Two other former itinerant Tiller abortionists, Shelly Sella and Susan Robinson, did not renew their Kansas medical licenses after Tiller’s murder.  Although this past year, Kansas State Board of Healing Arts did revoke the medical license of Tiller associate, Kris Neuhaus, for repeatedly violating the medical standard of care, they took no actions to discipline Carhart, Sella and Robinson for fraudulent late-term abortions.

Kansans for Life Executive Director, Mary Kay Culp, commented:

“It is tragic Burkhart appears poised to re-engage in destroying unborn children and exploiting women for money, again using out-of-state abortionists who can escape discipline from the Kansas Board of Healing Arts, and not yet subject to our new licensure law due to litigation; Burkhart knows that illegal abortions in Wichita were not penalized, and more recently, Planned Parenthood escaped prosecution when state documents were shredded with impunity–a situation that key legislators are currently investigating.”

Read Full Post »

Kansans for Life rejoices in Pro-life primary triumph

Kansas pro-lifers can rejoice in Tuesday’s primary results because pro-life candidates, including incumbents, were victorious.

Kansans for Life’s endorsed candidates won handily: In the House, 74%  (31 of 42 races) and in the Senate, 77% (24 of 31 races).

These elections were characterized as a referendum on pro-life Gov. Sam Brownback’s conservative agenda, with the media repeatedly identifying economic conservative groups as major players.  But the GOP rout depended on the candidates’ pro-life credentials and is a reflection of Kansas pro-life persistence, hard work and prayer.

KFL executive director Mary Kay Culp explained: “This continued pattern of electing pro-life legislators is inspired by more than a decade of frustration with the failure to prosecute fraudulent late-term abortions, the Senate resistance to toughening abortion laws, the shameless shredding of evidence of criminal abortion by the Sebelius administration, and the failure of the Senate to throw out the worst state judicial process in the nation, as we watch newly-passed pro-life bills sit in court or head to our extremely liberal state Supreme Court.”

The Senate results were truly stunning: eight ‘moderate’ GOP Senators, including the Kansas Senate President, Steve Morris (with a huge war chest) all lost their primaries Tuesday to authentically pro-life challengers endorsed and promoted by the Kansans for Life political action committee. In addition to Morris, the exiting Senators are: Pete Brungardt (Salina), Bob Marshall (Fort Scott), Tim Owens (Overland Park), Roger Reitz (Manhattan), Jean Schodorf (Wichita), Ruth Teichman (Stafford) and Dwayne Umbarger (Thayer).

Senate President Morris came into his leadership position with a pro-life record, but then betrayed it by rigging Senate committees with pro-abortion majorities and working behind the scenes to hurt pro-life bills! But due to the pro-life routing of ‘moderates’, there is a real possibility that after the November elections, as many as 32 out of 40 Kansas Senate seats could be filled by trusted pro-lifers!

While seven of KFL-endorsed Senate candidates were defeated, in three of those contests, the successful challengers are also pro-life! In fact, the problem KFL faced this cycle was a never-before last minute reconfiguring of legislative districts in June by federal judges. This caused some districts to have two, or even three, proven pro-life incumbent legislators competing with each other.  This problem also stemmed from Morris and his ‘moderate’ GOP associates; they pushed unfair redistricting maps until the legislative session ran out of time and the feds had to do the job—giving us the distinction of being the only state in the nation to fail to fix their maps to reflect census changes (read more here).

By the end of Tuesday evening, only two pro-abortion-voting GOP ‘moderate’ Senators survived KFL candidate challenges: Jay Emler (Lindsborg) and Vicki Schmidt (Topeka).

The retention of Schmidt by only 159 votes is particularly disheartening, as her challenger was Joe Patton, a pro-life champion, three-term state representative, and one of the founders of Kansans for Life. State election reports last week showed Schmidt spent over $200,000 where Patton had spent approximately $60,000 in the same reporting period. The race was not only the most expensive in Kansas electoral history, nasty ads supporting Schmidt were acknowledged by the Topeka newspaper to contain “easily disproved” smears against Patton.

According to the Wichita Eagle, Sen. Carolyn McGinn acknowledged the loss of fellow GOP ‘moderates’ in the Senate: “Wow,” she said. “What kind of life is that going to be?”

Kansans for Life’s answer to that question is: “It will be wonderful!”

Read Full Post »

KS Practitioners witness Conscience Protection bill signing

Pro-life practitioners and supporters gathered with Gov. Sam Brownback for the ceremonial signing of the Healthcare Rights of Conscience bill.

Pro-life physicians, pharmacists and their supporters gathered Wednesday with Gov. Brownback for the ceremonial signing of the new Healthcare Rights of Conscience law, a top priority for Kansans for Life.

The passage of yet another pro-life law under a pro-life governor is the result of decades of relentless work by pro-lifers, who refused to allow abortion to be assimilated into society as ordinary healthcare.  Pro-life Kansans put those concerns into action by creating no-cost crisis pregnancy centers across the state –which rely on the volunteer medical help of dedicated physicians and nurses.

The Healthcare Rights of Conscience law, which will go into effect July 1, updates 40-year-old state statutes, which clearly covered hospitals and staff opposed to abortion.

The new law will protect individual medical practitioners from job loss and medical facilities from lawsuits

when they absent themselves from abortion involvement and referrals.  This protection also would extend to involvement with drugs and devices “reasonably believed” to cause abortion.

The majority of ob/gyn physicians nationwide, unfortunately, belong to the abortion-supporting American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). A letter in the New York Times Wednesday from the current ACOG President complains that “Our message to politicians is unequivocal: Get out of our exam rooms.” But ACOG only means that certain politicians should get out— the pro-life ones!

This comports with ACOG’s November 2007 proclamation that Pro-life ob/gyns are not welcome. ACOG’s Ethics Committee Opinion #385 declared that ob-gyns opposed to abortion must provide referrals for, and even perform, abortions in certain situations, despite their conscientious belief that abortion involves the killing of an unborn child. Such a demand is an incursion on conscience that is not backed by any court decisions since Roe legalized abortion.

In rebuttal, to the ACOG demand, the Catholic Medical Association explained, “the committee that wrote this opinion shows no respect for the beliefs of others. They have moved from believing that abortion should be legal to defining it as ‘standard care’ under reproductive services. If physicians refuse to go along with these demands they risk having an ethics complaint filed against them.”

The disrespect for opposition to abortion, when sanctioned by the ACOG trade association, produces a “group think” mentality; as an example, in a new book, Five Strands of Hope, the author complains that she was told by four different physicians to abort one or more of her triplets!

Also, when conscience rights are not a priority in medicine, purposeful exclusion of dissenting voices is the desired norm. A dozen day-surgery nurses in New Jersey were terminated in 2010 for refusal to assist with abortions. They have since been reinstated after litigation, but numerous voices now state that anyone not willing to provide abortion should not enter the field of women’s health.

So, are pro-life practitioners in short supply? No survey gives specific numbers. Perhaps only 8%, or 1 in 12, are practicing pro-life medicine and pharmacy, but even that small a sector can be influential. In the classic movie, Twelve Angry Men, only one of the twelve jurors (played by actor Henry Fonda) wants to vote to acquit the accused. Over the course of the film, he slowly convinces the other eleven that reasonable doubt exists, thus preventing the execution of a possibly innocent man.

That’s what’s at stake— innocent human life, no matter how tiny! This is the time to support ethical practitioners and Kansas has done so with passage of the Healthcare Rights of Conscience law.

Read Full Post »