Monthly Archives: June 2014

America’s Highest Court Unanimously Affirmed the Right to Free Speech for Sidewalk Counselors

LIVE ACTION

Friend of life,

Today, America’s highest court unanimously affirmed the right to free speech for sidewalk counselors outside abortion clinics.
This is a huge win for pro-lifers across the nation!  This decision strikes down the Massachusetts buffer zone designed to bar pro-lifers from standing near the entrances of abortion centers. At a time when it seems like injustice runs rampant, it is refreshing to know that more lives will be saved as a result of this ruling.
Pro-life sidewalk counselors can continue to offer the help and hope that so many young girls and women desperately seek, often times thinking abortion is their only option.

Check out our article on the ruling posted on Live Action News.
Yours in the fight for life,   Lauren Merz Strategic Development Team Live Action

Advertisements

What this Taxpayer-Funded Corporation is Teaching our Nation’s Children

Dear Friend,   Live Action has conducted a nationwide undercover investigation into Planned Parenthood, to find out what this taxpayer-funded corporation is teaching our nation’s children.  We sent an investigator posing as a fifteen-year-old girl into Planned Parenthood’s Midtown Health Center, located in Indianapolis, with questions about dangerous sex practices.
The results were shocking and disgusting.    The counselor portrays sexual behaviors such as role-play and BDSM as mainstream, encouraging the supposed 15-year-old girl to partake in them. The same counselor also advises the girl to seek out someone over 18 years old to procure items for her from a sex shop and recommends that she look up pornography on the internet for “ideas” about how to inflict or receive pain.   Not only is Planned Parenthood teaching this to a fifteen-year-old, but this so-called education is paid for by our tax dollars.  In addition to receiving almost half of its $1.2-billion budget from taxpayers, Planned Parenthood has gotten millions from the federal government to be a “navigator” for ObamaCare – in other words, to sell the program, which indisputably funds abortions, to the American populace.     Finally, an additional $75 million in public money has been allocated under ObamaCare, through the Department of Health and Human Services, for sex education, with Planned Parenthood at the front of the line to receive said funds.   In light of what we have discovered in Indianapolis, it is clear that not only is Planned Parenthood unqualified to teach sex education to children, but this abortion corporation is also an eminent threat to the well-being of those children. And this threat is funded by our tax dollars.   What we have revealed happening in Indiana is only the tip of the iceberg. Stay tuned for more videos to come.   Thank you for your constant support and prayers!
Yours in the fight for life,

Lila Rose President Live Action

Voluntarily Stopping Eating and Drinking, or VSED.

June 24, 2014

Dear Friends,

The right-to-die movement is heading into even more dangerous territory by spreading the message that people can agree to a protocol known as Voluntarily Stopping Eating and Drinking, or VSED. Residents of assisted living facilities and others who are considered frail or disabled are being urged to consider this “option” while they are still competent to make that choice.

Joining Radio Maria’s “Gospel of Life” host Janet Morana tonight at 6 p.m. ET for a discussion of VSED will be Rita Marker, J.D., executive director of the Patients Rights Council in Steubenville, Ohio.

VSED is legal in every state,” Rita says. Patients who choose VSED will then expect health-care facilities to make them comfortable during the extended and painful death brought on by dehydration. If hospitals, nursing homes, hospices or other health-care facilities do not have written policies stating that they will not provide this palliative care, they could find themselves in the position of having to help a patient kill themselves by VSED.

“We’re not talking about people being fed through a feeding tube, or people who can’t eat or can’t swallow,” Rita says. “We’re talking about people who choose, or are encouraged, to stop eating and drinking.”

To read more about VSED, go to http://www.patientsrightscouncil.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/VSED_Questions.pdf and be sure to tune in “Gospel of Life” at http://radiomaria.us.

Tonight Janet and Rita also will discuss the Protective Medical Decisions Document available from the Patients Rights Council. The document allows individuals to name a trusted family member or friend to make health-care decisions for them if they become permanently or temporarily unable to make such decisions for themselves.

By contrast, a Living Will gives power and authority to an “attending physician” to withhold or withdraw medical interventions under certain circumstances. Family members and others who are familiar with the signer’s values and wishes have no legal standing to interpret the meaning of the Living Will.

Tune in to this vitally important discussion, and if you have a question or comment during the show, call 866-333-6279 to speak to Janet or Rita on the air. You can also email questions to info@gospeloflife.com before or during the show.

“Gospel of Life” is presented by Priests for Life/Gospel of Life Ministries. It airs on Radio Maria every Tuesday at 6 p.m. ET, and is rebroadcast on Thursday at 2 a.m. Past shows are archived at www.priestsforlife.org/radiomaria.

In Washington State, terminally ill adult patients have had the right to ask their physician to prescribe a lethal dose of medication to end their life since 2009 under the state’s Death with Dignity Act. Nearly 550 people have acted on that right since the law went into effect. In 2013, 175 people were given lethal doses of medication, an increase of 43 percent since 2012.

In New Jersey this month, two dozen disabled people – many in wheelchairs – attended a hearing to warn state legislators that a similar bill under consideration there was an open invitation to abuse. The lawmakers on the Assembly committee passed the measure anyway.

The mainstream media lampooned Gov. Sarah Palin when she warned that the Affordable Health Care Act would lead to death panels for the elderly and terminally ill. Now the federal government is again considering reimbursing doctors for talking to Medicare patients and their families about “advance care planning,” including living wills and end-of-life treatment options.

Doctors who are paid for having these discussions are much more likely to initiate them with their patients, and studies show that when given a choice, patients often forgo invasive procedures at the end of life.

For Rita Marker, executive director of the Patients Rights Council, these developments are all cause for concern. Rita will join “Gospel of Life” host Janet Morana tonight at 6 p.m. ET on Radio Maria for an in-depth discussion of right-to-die movement and where it might lead.

“With spiraling health-care costs, we have to wonder how long it is before life-prolonging treatments aren’t covered by insurance, but doctor-prescribed suicide is,” Rita wrote in an opinion piece for the New York Times.

Priests for Life
PO Box 141172
Staten Island, NY 10314
Phone: 888-PFL-3448
718-980-4400
Fax: 718-980-6515
Email: mail@priestsforlife.org
www.PriestsForLife.org

Toledo Blade Runs Critical ORTL Letter

OHIO RIGHT TO LIFE

Why advocate for clinic, not babies?

 

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Why advocate for clinic, not babies?

 

Your June 2 editorial “Keep the clinic open” represents a declining opinion in Toledo. In 2012, abortions in Ohio increased slightly. But abortions declined in Toledo, even though both Capital Care and Center for Choice were still operating.

Now, members of the Toledo medical community are rejecting abortion – they are opting not to support the practice. This comes from the fact that Toledo area hospitals are not entering into a transfer agreement with Capital Care, which had to go outside of the state to Michigan to find a hospital that would enter into a transfer agreement with them. But this doesn’t seem to matter to the so-called “pro-choice” of Toledo who insist that Capital Care be exempted from Ohio law and stay open.

The whole point of a transfer agreement is to ensure a facility’s ability to adequately respond to life-threatening emergencies. We would hope that this would fit into The Blade’s standards of care. We would hope that such a respected news institution would advocate for the adherence to our laws, even those laws it disagrees with.

Your claim that Ohio’s new pro-life laws deny the “constitutional right to reproductive freedom” is fundamentally false. It is a practice that is neither “reproductive” nor “freedom,” especially for the life that it takes. Not a single one of 2013’s pro-life laws outlawed abortion.

As far as “constitutionality” is concerned, segregation was also once constitutional, as dictated by the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1896 ruling in Plessy vs. Ferguson. Yet decades later, the Supreme Court overturned that in Brown vs. Board of Education.

I hope that somewhere down the line, Americans also will reject the notion that aggressing against and killing another person is a human right.

Indeed, as your editorial stated, “abortion is a deeply personal issue”-especially for the child whose life it takes. It is odd that The Blade should advocate for an abortion clinic’s survival and not the survival of Ohio’s children.

KATHERINE McCANN

Public Relations Manager Ohio Right to Life Columbus

“Return to Zero”: a Powerful Testimony to the Importance of Unborn Life Lost to Stillbirth

 

NRL News Today

“Return to Zero”: a powerful testimony to the importance of unborn life lost to stillbirth

By Dave Andrusko

ReturntoZeroPosterMy excuse for getting to “Return to Zero” a month late is that we were busy watching our grandchildren, so I asked our oldest daughter to record the movie which appeared May 17 on the Lifetime channel (which she generously did).

Only I then promptly forgot to watch (until recently) what turned out to be an absolutely riveting portrayal both of how devastating a stillbirth can be to a marriage and how a couple can survive the death of a child who was only weeks from delivery.

And, without even alluding to it, “Return to Zero” also teaches the wisdom of delivering a child, rather than aborting her, when a couple learns that their unborn child may not survive until birth or live only hours after delivery.

The movie is based on a true story of what happened to television commercial director Sean Hanish and his wife back in 2005 as her due date drew near. His career was on the rise, and “’I felt pretty on top of the world that day,’ Hanish recalled for TV Guide. ‘And as I’m coming out of Cindy Crawford’s driveway, my wife calls me.’ She gave him the devastating news that the son they were expecting was stillborn.”

Hanish is the first to admit that the movie couple–Maggie and Aaron (played by Minnie Driver and Paul Adelstein)–are much more interesting than he and his wife, Kiley. So there are twists and turns that are added to the movie (what they are, is not elaborated on in the interviews I read).

But the basics are the same in real life and in “Return to Zero.” A ridiculously prosperous power couple deliriously happy about the approaching birth of their baby. Out of the blue—and this can be the way it happens, unfortunately—Maggie has some bleeding and goes in for a routine sonogram, thinking nothing much of it. Setting the stage for the ensuing estrangement, Aaron is too busy with work to accompany her to the doctor.

Maggie quickly picks up that something is wrong and when the doctor come in and maneuvers the ultrasound to no avail, he tell Maggie her baby is dead. She is utterly devastated and utterly alone.

When Aaron arrives, they listen to a woman whose insensitivity to their loss is so over the top you are sure it had to be made up. Who would ask a couple who had lost a baby just hours before —a baby still in Maggie’s womb—if they had thought about whether they wanted the baby cremated or buried? According to Hanish, that’s what happened, an experience he described to TV Guide’s Stephen Battaglio was as  “macabre.”

Her loss would have been tremendous regardless, but her closest friend is also pregnant and delivers not so long afterwards. Maggie is inconsolable and slips into depression. Aaron slips into an affair and after a weekend at Las Vegas brings them together momentarily, Maggie wants a divorce.

Then she discovers she is pregnant again.

Again, this is a Lifetime channel movie, so you would expect Aaron’s father to be the biggest jerk on the face of the planet and Maggie’s mother to be seemingly almost as blind as Aaron’s dad. What saves the marriage and elevates the movie is the kindness and compassion of Dr. Claire Holden (Connie Nielsen) whom Maggie eventually learns had experienced a stillbirth of her own.

The subtext is (in my opinion) that Maggie, understandably, believes no one can understand the gravity of her loss, including her husband. She holds onto that conviction until she discovers that Dr. Holden can and does.

Less than close to her mother, Maggie wants to feel the same way about her, only to discover that her mother had experienced a miscarriage. It’s not the same, Maggie retorts, and, of course, in one sense, it isn’t. But her mother will have none of that. While it took place earlier in her pregnancy, that was a loss, too!

I skipped over a scene at the hospital on purpose. Maggie decides to induce labor and deliver her stillborn baby. She and Aaron decide to take photos of their baby and WITH their baby. That is what Hanish and his wife had done as well.

Hanish initially thought that idea was also “macabre” but then changed his mind. “We took some photos,” he told Battaglio. “And one of the most cherished things that we have is this one photo that we have of our son.”

Battaglio says Hanish hopes the movie “will bring greater understanding to parents of stillborn children and perhaps some solace to those who have lived through such a tragedy.” He said he is prepared to become a spokesperson “on an issue many find too wrenching to share.”

“I had friends tell me I was crazy — they said ‘you shouldn’t be doing this. You had a career doing commercials and now you’re writing the saddest movie ever,’” he says.

But while the subject is terribly sad—few things are worse than losing a baby so close to birth—“Return to Zero” also reminds us of the importance of community, of people who’ve gone through tragedies being able to share their experiences, especially the pain and heartache.

Dr. Holden deftly walks around Maggie’s determination to have her second baby, never hinting that there could/should be any other decision, even though she and Aaron are about to divorce. Maggie’s decision not to abort no doubt will annoy the usual suspects who would tell her she is foolish.

But that baby not only restores their marriage, it teaches her husband that he has no more important role than being a husband and father, which angers his own father to whom the only thing that matters in life is work. And pro-lifers will notice (where others might not) that when the occasion arises, Maggie reminds people that this is her second baby.

A beautiful, touching movie about the value of unborn life, “Return to Zeroreminds us that even the little ones who are lost along the way are precious, invaluable, and members of our family.

Please join those who are following me on Twitter at twitter.com/daveha. Send your comments to daveandrusko@gmail.com.

Last Toledo Abortion Clinic Ordered CLOSED

Last Toledo Abortion Clinic Ordered CLOSED

By now, many of you have read the great news that Capital Care Network of Toledo has moved one step closer to closure! Moments ago, we sent out a press release detailing yesterday’s ruling that the last abortion clinic in Toledo be closed. Please find the story from the Dispatch and the story from the Bladecopied below.

 

Many of you, like us, have been following the closure of this clinic for many months. Many have been praying for its closure for years. And now it’s on the cusp of being closed once and for all.

 

Please know that Ohio Right to Life is at the front of advocating for the closure of this clinic. As Mike says in both stories from the Columbus Dispatch and the Toledo Blade, the decision to close down CCN puts women’s health and safety ahead of politics.

 

We are eager to see CCN held accountable for operating illegally for the last year. Most importantly, we are eager to see lives saved in Northwest Ohio!

 

While we anticipate that CCN will make an appeal to remain open, we will continue to point out the absurdity of letting this clinic operate outside of Ohio law and ensure that it is closed once and for all.

 

With you for Life,

Katie McCann

 

Katherine McCann

Public Relations Manager

Ohio Right to Life

88 East Broad Street, Suite 620

Columbus, Ohio 43215

614/547-0099, ext. 304

www.ohiolife.org

 

Toledo’s last abortion clinic moves step closer to closure

Toledo’s only remaining abortion clinic moved a step closer to being shut down by the state yesterday.

An Ohio Department of Health hearing examiner ruled that the Capital Care Network’s facility cannot use the University of Michigan hospital 52 miles away for its legally required transfer agreement with a “local” hospital. The decision unveiled yesterday to revoke the clinic’s license upheld two decisions by former Health Director Ted Wymyslo and now will be considered by Lance D. Himes, the department’s acting director.

Read the Ohio Department of Health decision (PDF)

“We applaud the hearing examiner’s decision, which puts women’s health and patient safety ahead of politics,” said Michael Gonidakis, executive director of Ohio Right to Life. “No state regulator or reasonable person would permit an out-of-state hospital to contract with an Ohio abortion clinic to provide backup services. It’s absurd that this abortion clinic would even make such a request. Sadly, it appears that the clinic will put profits ahead of patient safety and attempt to delay and stall through litigation.”

Kellie Copeland, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Ohio, called the health department’s action part of a “regulatory witch hunt.”

“This ruling is no surprise, given that (Gov. John) Kasich wrote these regulations to close abortion clinics,” she said. “Transfer agreements have nothing to do with patient safety. The real threat to women’s health will come if Kasich succeeds in closing the last abortion clinic in Toledo, because women will still need access to abortion in Toledo and could resort to drastic measures.”

Besides failing the legal requirement for a “local” hospital, the clinic’s pact with the medical center in Ann Arbor, Mich., is illegal under Ohio law “because it does not specify an appropriate procedure for the safe and immediate transfer of patients from the facility to a local hospital when medical care, beyond the care that can be provided at the ambulatory-care facility, is necessary, including when emergency situations occur or medical complications arise,” hearing examiner William J. Kepko said.

Clinic officials said the Jan. 20 agreement with the University of Michigan hospital would require them to use medical helicopters based about an hour away in Licking County.

Transfer agreements are required of all ambulatory surgical facilities, not just abortion clinics. The Capital Care facility had an agreement with the University of Toledo hospital, but public hospitals were barred from entering into such pacts under a law signed last year by Kasich. After the Toledo hospital ended its contract last summer, the abortion clinic operated for nearly six months without any transfer agreement.

Toledo’s other abortion clinic, the Center for Choice, closed its doors last year because it could not come up with a valid transfer agreement after operating without one for more than three years.

drowland@dispatch.com

 

TOLEDO FACILITY

Abortion provider’s Mich. deal not local

6/17/2014

BY JIM PROVANCE BLADE

COLUMBUS BUREAU CHIEF

 

COLUMBUS — A state hearing examiner has recommended that Toledo’s last

abortion provider, Capital Care Network, be closed because it lacks a valid

emergency-care agreement with a local hospital as required by Ohio law.

William J. Kepko, the hearing examiner for the Ohio Department of Health, wrote in a

decision released by the Department of Health on Monday that the state’s decision to

revoke the clinic’s license as an ambulatory surgical center was valid.

The final decision now lies with the interim director, Lance Himes, who served as legal counsel to the former director, Dr. Ted

Wymyslo, when he issued his original license revocation order on Aug. 2, 2013.

“Capital Care’s written transfer agreement with the University of Michigan on behalf of the University of Michigan Health System,

located in the state of Michigan, 52 miles from Capital Care, is not a local hospital as required by [state law],” Mr. Kepko wrote.

“The use of the 30-minute availability rule by the Director of the Ohio Department of Health when evaluating Capital Care’s

transfer agreement with UMHS is reasonable and consistent with [state law], requiring the transfer agreement to be with a local

hospital.”

The clinic’s Cincinnati attorney, Jennifer Branch, could not be reached for comment. But she has already indicated an appeal would

be filed should Mr. Himes agree with the recommendation and again issue an order revoking Capital Care’s operating license.

She used the March hearing before Mr. Kepko to lay the groundwork for a constitutional challenge.

The two-year state budget passed last year cemented in law what had previously been an administrative rule within the health

department requiring ambulatory surgical centers to have agreements with hospitals to transfer patients if complications arise.

Lawmakers then went a step further by requiring that agreement to be with a “local” hospital without defining what that meant.

The University of Toledo Medical Center chose not to renew its agreement with Capital Care as of July 31, 2013. The budget later

prohibited public hospitals like UTMC, the former Medical College of Ohio, from entering into such agreements.

The clinic struggled for months to find someone willing to take its place before inking a deal with UMHS. The agreement with the

Ann Harbor hospital, however, stated it would not be responsible for transportation of patients.

The clinic’s owner, Terrie Hubbard, testified that in a true emergency she would call 911 to have the patient transferred to a Toledo

hospital, which would have to treat the patient under federal law regardless of whether a transfer agreement was in place.

In the event of a complication not considered life-threatening, Ms. Hubbard said she would hire a helicopter to fly the patient to

Ann Arbor.

Mr. Kepko found that to be unreliable and determined, in his decision time-stamped on Thursday, that the clinic has been without a

valid transfer agreement for nearly a year.

“This ruling is no surprise given that [Gov. John] Kasich wrote these regulations to close abortion clinics,” said Kellie Copeland,

NARAL Ohio executive director. “The transfer agreements don’t have anything to do with patient safety. They have everything to

do with closing abortion clinics.

“The real tragedy is if they are successful in closing the last abortion clinic in Toledo,” she said. “Women still need access to

abortion, and women may resort to drastic measures.”

Ohio Right to Life President Mike Gonidakis, who worked to have the transfer agreement language added to the state budget,

applauded what he characterized as a “common-sense” decision.

“We believe this decision puts women’s health and safety ahead of politics, concluding that a hospital in another state does not

meet the requirements that our state requires,” he said. “It would have been a first-of-a-kind decision if he’d ruled otherwise.”

He noted, however, that the clinic is likely to remain open for some time as the appeal works its way through the federal courts.

Contact Jim Provance at: jprovance@theblade.com or 614-221-0496.

Censoring Studies on Abortion and Breast Cancer: How Science and Free Speech are Stifled

NRL News Today

Censoring Studies on Abortion and Breast Cancer: How Science and Free Speech are Stifled

By Mary L. Davenport, M.D.

Editor’s note. This appeared at Reproductive Research Audit.  What follows first is RRA’s introduction to Dr. Davenport’s essay.

no_abortion_talkreReproductive Research Audit covers studies that address the most controversial topics in reproductive health research, including the long-disputed (but recently affirmed) link between induced abortion and preterm birth, the contested link between induced abortion and breast cancer (ABC link), and the suppression of studies that suggest abortion may contribute to problems in mental health. RRA covers these topics not just in spite of widespread hostility toward researchers and suppression of these findings, but due to the fact that such persecution and censorship is contrary to standards of scientific discourse and intellectual honesty. Today RRA welcomes this guest post from Dr. Mary Davenport who not only expands upon research in these areas but offers her personal account of such censorship in the medical community. This information is even more timely in light of this most recent study that found a 2.8 fold increase in breast cancer risk in relation to induced abortion. RRA is grateful to Dr. Davenport for sharing her article which first appeared at The American Thinker.

In the U.S. we are used to abortion advocates claiming that the risk of elective abortion is relatively trivial, and major medical organizations denying any link between abortion and breast cancer. Now a powerful new study from China published [in February] by Yubei Huang and colleagues suggests otherwise. The article, a meta-analysis pooling 36 studies from 14 provinces in China, showed that abortion increased the risk of breast cancer by 44% with at least one abortion, and 76% with at least two abortions and 89% with at least three abortions.

This new article is another example of the recent excellent scholarship on abortion in peer-reviewed journals coming out of the People’s Republic. There is no bigger data base than China, where there are an average of 8.2 million pregnancy terminations every year, and 40 abortions for every 100 live births. Chinese researchers and physicians are unencumbered by abortion politics, and do not cover up data showing long term effects of induced abortion, as do their U.S. counterparts in governmental, professional and consumer organizations.

Huang’s study shows an even stronger increase than the 30% higher risk found in the 1996 meta-analysis by Joel Brind and colleagues on abortion as an independent risk factor for breast cancer. The Brind meta-analysis, combining the results of 23 studies, gave a more complete view than any single study. But even though it was the most comprehensive study on the topic at the time, it was disregarded by establishment medical groups.

Brind, a professor of biology and endocrinology at Baruch College, is not unique in having experienced censorship of his findings for the past two decades, including at the notorious National Cancer Institute (NCI) workshop on “Early reproductive events and breast cancer” in 2003. This important workshop was manipulated by its chairperson NCI epidemiologist Louise Brinton to suppress critical information on the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link. The main speaker on abortion and breast cancer, Leslie Bernstein, who had never published on this topic, openly said, “I would never be a proponent of going around and telling them (women) that having babies is the way to reduce your risk,” even though it has been an established fact, conceded by abortion proponents that this is true.

This workshop was designed to influence subsequent governmental policy, academic scholarship, physicians, and popular perception of the topic, and succeeded in doing so. It also influenced the individual life trajectories of many women who were led to believe, falsely, that an abortion decision would not have an impact on their future breast cancer risk. Because there is a lag time between abortion and the appearance of breast cancer, the effect of an abortion is not immediate for an individual. And abortion is only one of a number of factors influencing breast cancer risk, such as family history, use of hormones, and age at first childbirth. The majority of women who have breast cancer have never had an abortion. Nonetheless, there will be some women who develop breast cancer and die from it, impacted by the failure to inform them of the ABC link, or its dismissal by establishment medical and consumer groups such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Susan G. Komen Foundation. This is an ethical breach of huge proportions.

The new Chinese meta-analysis not only concerns the ABC link on an individual level, but also confirms the observation of statistician Patrick Carroll, who predicted the rise in breast cancer in several European countries following legalization of abortion. Again, because of the lag time between abortion and the appearance of breast cancer, the link is not immediately apparent. Carroll’s work is important because he finds that not only is induced abortion an independent risk factor for breast cancer (separate from such factors as late child-bearing) but that it is the best predictive factor for forecasting a nation’s future breast cancer rates. Nations such as China, with traditionally low breast cancer rates, are now seeing an increase, many years following their legalization of abortion.

Unfortunately, the ABC link is not unique in suffering a systematic cover-up by ideologically-driven medical organizations intent on suppressing information about complications of abortion. Preterm birth is the leading cause of neonatal death, in the taking the lives of hundreds of thousands of infants annually, with a cost of 26 billion dollars in the U.S. alone. It has risen 20% between 1990-2006. It causes cerebral palsy, long-term intellectual and visual handicaps, and much suffering. There are 135 studies from diverse locations world-wide that link abortion and preterm birth.The relationship is most pronounced with multiple abortions, and very premature infants born before 28 weeks gestation, the “million dollar babies” that spend months in neonatal intensive care units. Preterm birth disproportionately affects African Americans.

Yet the medical community, WHO, and the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) have long ignored this association in their official publications and task forces to combat the problem. Another big cover-up involves the psychological consequences of abortion, especially suicide, which are inadequately acknowledged by mainstream groups because they conflict with the propaganda-driven view of abortion as a health “benefit.”

This year I was personally prevented from delivering a paper at a conference at the last minute, along with two other women physicians presenting papers on abortion complications, at the MWIA (Medical Women’s International Association) in Seoul, South Korea. These were academically sound presentations on maternal mortality, psychological issues, and preterm birth that had been accepted months earlier. Shelley Ross, the Secretary-General of the organization personally barged into an interview with Korean journalists to attempt to prevent us from speaking to them, almost causing a fist fight. In a press release regarding this incident, she claimed that the presentations threatened a woman’s reproductive rights, and further asserted that “the evidence is overwhelming and undisputable that a woman’s control over her reproductive health is linked to…the health of women and children.” But if she is talking about abortion, it is obvious that breast cancer and suicide do not improve the health of women, and preterm birth and abortion obviously do not improve the health of a woman’s future children or the aborted babies.

It is a disgrace that a more honest discourse about difficult medical topics can be found in the People’s Republic of China than in the USA. The censorship of medical journals, prevention of conference presentations, denial of grant money and faculty promotions, and self-censorship of honest scholars in academic medicine who want to tell the truth but feel they cannot, impoverishes us, and should not be tolerated.