Archive for March, 2013

Read my guest blog at the National Catholic Register

Monday, March 25th, 2013

Susan B. Anthony, standing, with Elizabeth Cady Stanton

Susan B. Anthony, standing, with Elizabeth Cady Stanton

 

 

For Women in History Month, the editors of the National Catholic Register invited me to write a guest blog about the early feminists and their views on abortion. The piece was just posted today. You can read it by clicking this link http://www.ncregister.com/blog/JMorana/who-were-the-early-feminists-in-the-u.s

If you like it, please Tweet, share and comment. It’s important to let people know the early feminists were pro-life, and that even today you can be a feminist and be pro-life. In fact, if you really care about women, you have to be pro-life!

 

 

Posted in Abortion, Feminists |
Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.

Abortion in Akron has an unlikely happy ending

Friday, March 15th, 2013

pregnant-woman[1]

A story in the Akron Beacon Journal today was ground-breaking in its honest depiction of what goes on behind closed doors at an abortion clinic.

Reporter Phil Trexler wrote:

Inside an Akron abortion clinic was not where Ariel Knights wanted to be.

But after much anguish, she found herself walking through those clinic doors, joining a sea of women filling dozens of chairs stacking the waiting room.

“Every seat was full. People were standing,” she said. “It was pretty much like a slaughterhouse; it was like OK, next, next.”

When her name was called that March morning a year ago, she walked into a cramped room and climbed onto a table, positioning her lower body above a trash bag. When the doctor finished, Knights, still woozy from being sedated, was handed her things and shown the door.

http://www.ohio.com/news/local/mother-delivers-healthy-baby-and-lawsuit-after-unsuccessful-abortion-1.381495

This clinic had such a callous disregard for women that staffers placed trash bags underneath their patients. Maybe this made for easier cleanup and allowed the slaughterhouse assembly line to proceed at a brisk pace. Or maybe the garbage bag was to dispose of the babies’ bodies.

But Ariel Knight’s baby never made it to the trash bag. After weeks of feeling sick after the abortion, the 22-year-old went to an emergency room and found out she was still pregnant.  Today she has a healthy baby girl, and a lawsuit pending against the abortionist.

This story tells so much painful truth about abortion that it’s hard to know where to start.

The conditions at the clinic were horrific, as they are at so many clinics across the country. The waiting room was standing room only. The patient was still woozy when she was handed her clothes and shown the door. Think about what Ms. Knights experienced the next time you read an abortion clinic advertisement touting “gentle compassionate care.”

But another important angle here is why Ms. Knights chose abortion in the first place: A doctor advised it. She has a uterine condition called “uterus didelphys” and said she was told by her doctor that the pregnancy could kill her.

Here’s what the esteemed Mayo Clinic says about the condition:

“In a female fetus, the uterus starts out as two small tubes. As the fetus develops, the tubes normally join to create one larger, hollow organ — the uterus. Sometimes, however, the tubes don’t join completely. Instead, each one develops into a separate structure. This condition is called double uterus (uterus didelphys). Double uterus is rare — and sometimes not even diagnosed. The percentage of women with a double uterus is likely higher in women with a history of miscarriage or premature birth. Treatment is needed only if a double uterus causes symptoms or complications, such as pelvic pain or repeated miscarriages.”

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/double-uterus/DS00821

I did some Internet research on uterus didelphys and found my way to a community forum maintained by women who have the disorder. Read what one mom wrote about her two pregnancies:

“In my case, I started seeing a high risk OB around 13 weeks in the first pregnancy and I saw one at 18 weeks this time around. They closely monitor the cervix and measure the baby routinely to make sure there are no growth restrictions/problems. Additionally, they will likely start doing regular non-stress tests in the late second or early third trimester to continue to monitor the baby as he or she grows.

“My OB said he would be very happy if I made it to 32 weeks and thrilled if I made it to 36. I know these are early numbers, but when they are monitoring you and baby so closely, they can take all necessary measures to prepare baby for an earlier arrival if he or she decides to make one. In my case, the numbers were actually comical – I carried my first to 39 weeks and delivered by c-section. I had very few complications (a little pre-term labor at 34 and a half weeks, but fluids were enough to stop contractions and there was no progression). My high risk OB said if they had waited for me to go into labor on my own I probably would have carried 42 weeks!”

http://community.babycenter.com/post/a24704061/getting_pregnant_with_uterus_didelphys

When she wrote this post, this mother was 24 weeks into her second pregnancy and looking forward to a scheduled C-section at 39 weeks. She had found her way to a doctor who understands that when you are treating an expectant mother, there are two patients, not just one. It’s impossible to know all the details of Ms. Knights’ case or what exactly her doctor told her, but in general, physicians who scare women into abortions with dire warnings of imminent death are more concerned with a potential lawsuit than they are with their patients. These doctors have no concern for the unborn child.

I’ve said it before but it bears repeating: Women must choose their doctors with care. A pro-life doctor never would have sent that young woman to an abortion mill. In my book, “Recall Abortion,” Dr. John Bruchalski of the Tepeyac Family Center in Virginia said that pro-life physicians “never pit the life of the mother against the life of the child. … What we do with mothers at risk is practice good medicine. We monitor her, in the hospital or even in intensive care if we need to. We deliver the baby when we have to.”

Ms. Knights admitted to the reporter that she doesn’t like to think about the fact that she tried to abort her daughter. She’s lucky. Women who successfully abort their children never stop thinking about what they’ve lost.

 

If you want to know more about the shoddy practices of the abortion industry, and the cowardice of so much of the medical community, go to RecallAbortion.com

Posted in Abortion, Abortion Complications, Health Care | 1 Comment »
Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.

Arkansas abortion ban is good policy, but it could be better

Friday, March 8th, 2013

perinatal_hands[1]

 

The Arkansas Legislature took a ground-breaking step this week when it enacted a ban on abortions beyond 12 weeks, the point at which a heartbeat is detectable. Legislators had to override the veto of Gov. Mike Beebe to get the law on the books. Pro-abort groups have vowed to challenge the constitutionality of the new law in court, so second and third-trimester babies are not safe yet in Arkansas.

But even if this law survives all challenges, it leaves some later-term babies at risk: Those who were conceived in rape, those whose mothers’ lives could be imperiled through carrying to term, and those with serious fetal anomalies.

These exceptions are tacked onto just about every piece of abortion legislation because even some pro-lifers believe abortion in these circumstances is unavoidable. I’m here to tell you that is not the case.

Let’s take a look at rape. The numbers of rape-related pregnancies in the United States are hard to pin down, but the best estimate is that between 25,000 and 30,000 women become pregnant through rape every year (that number likely will fall, as women treated in hospitals after rape are often given morning  after contraception – but that’s a subject for another time). About half of the women who become pregnant through rape give birth to their children and the other half abort. Many of those who choose abortion later come to regret it.  Irene van der Wende, a regional coordinator for the Silent No More Awareness Campaign in the Netherlands, was conceived when her mother was raped and then became pregnant through rape herself. She aborted her child, and immediately knew she had made a mistake.

“I could have grown to love my child just as my mother loved me,” she said. “Life is not about how we were conceived.”

Women who choose life for their babies are never sorry they did.

Here’s something else to consider about rape and parenting. When a woman chooses to have her baby, the rapist can claim parental rights. Even more outrageous: Many states have streamlined the process for terminating a rapist’s parental rights when the mother makes an adoption plan, but women who keep their babies find very little similar protection in the law. Also, federal funds – which cannot be used to pay for abortion – can be used to abort a child conceived in rape. These children begin their lives in the womb with fewer rights than anyone else!

Let’s look at fetal anomalies. In our culture that stresses convenience for all, we have convinced ourselves that babies with serious defects or life-limiting illnesses should not be allowed the dignity of a birth and a life, no matter how short or compromised or inconvenient. We have come to look at abortion in these cases as the humane choice. But the loving choice would be for parents facing these kinds of desperately sad situations to seek out a pro-life doctor and a perinatal hospice program, like those pioneered by Dr. Bryon Calhoun. If these babies could choose, do you think they would select a brutal death by forceps or a brief life surrounded by family and love and warmth? Abortion is never the loving choice.

Abortion to save a mother’s life is never necessary. Women do face life-endangering situations during pregnancy, but doctors who are committed to treating two patients do everything they can to save them both, with great success. Dr. Calhoun offers sage advice to other physicians: “Just be a doctor and treat two patients, the mother and her unborn child.”

When I started writing my book, “Recall Abortion,” I expected to have a struggle in trying to defend the lives of babies conceived in rape, those facing serious health challenges, and those whose very lives in utero are threatening their mothers. I knew that abortion is never the right choice, but I worried that the arguments of those who advocate for abortion in these instances would be hard to refute. But my research and my interviews with those on the front lines showed me that the argument for life is an easy one to make, without exception.

If you would like to read my book, now available in print and electronic editions, please go to RecallAbortion.com. While you’re there, please sign the petition and help get this terrible product called abortion off the market.

Posted in Abortion, Abortion Complications, Health Care, Pro-life, Silent No More Awareness, Women's Health |
Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.

Story of a surrogate who chose life illustrates how far we have fallen

Wednesday, March 6th, 2013

8Cell3DayEmbryo[1]

 

Still don’t believe that abortion and reproductive technology are flip sides of the same demonic coin?

Then consider this story that began in Connecticut and wound up in an unnamed location in Michigan:

A family with three IVF children and a desire for a fourth thawed out their two remaining frozen embryos – conceived with donor eggs — and had them implanted in a surrogate, who would be paid $22,000 to bear them a child. One of the frozen eggs took. The surrogate signed a contract that stipulated she would have an abortion if there was a serious fetal anomaly, but when an ultrasound halfway through her pregnancy showed that as possibility, she insisted she would not abort.

Lawyers were hired. Breach of contract was charged. The surrogate uprooted her own two kids and fled to Michigan, where surrogacy laws are not recognized. The “birth parents” offered her $10,000 to abort. She said she would do it for $15,000 but immediately changed her mind. Then the “birth parents” said they would accept their parental rights and would, as soon as the baby was born, abandon her as a ward of the state of Connecticut.

But the baby was born in Michigan and the surrogate found an adoptive family willing to provide a loving home to a little girl with serious heart problems, an uncertain future, and a cleft lip that somehow manages an infectious smile. The “birth parents” seemed to have had a change of heart and are now marginally involved in the life of the little girl who is being publicly identified as S.

To be sure, there is grace in this tale. A woman’s fierce determination to choose life. The big love of a family willing to add another special-needs child to their blended family. And a little girl who is teaching everyone who knows her a lesson in how life finds a way if we let it.

This is what her adoptive mother told CNN reporter Elizabeth Cohen:

“S. wakes up every single morning with an infectious smile. She greets her world with a constant sense of enthusiasm. Ultimately, we hold onto a faith that in providing S. with love, opportunity, encouragement, she will be the one to show us what is possible for her life and what she is capable of achieving.”

The legal wrangling continues, but baby S. is safe and loved and that’s what most important.

But there isblame aplenty in this story. The birth parents were wrong to have hired a surrogate in the first place. The surrogate was wrong to rent out her womb and for considering an abortion for money, even if just for an instant. We are wrong as a society to have allowed this macabre manipulation of conception.

While people are busy debating if the surrogate was within her rights to choose life for the child in her womb, we are missing a bigger issue. A child’s life was lost – the second frozen embryo implanted in the surrogate’s womb. No one seems to be mourning the loss of this tiny human, but as I wrote about in my book, “Recall Abortion,” that frozen embryo is a victim of our callousness towards life.

When we turn to IVF and surrogacy, we are treating our own bodies like incubators and our children like commodities. We go along with  “selectively reducing” multiple babies in the womb down to a manageable singleton. We destroy frozen embryos or use them for research every day, even though each one is a unique individual whose inalienable right to life is the same as yours and mine. We insist that abortion right up to the day of delivery is necessary and right.

Life has become disposable, literally. For that, we are all to blame.

***

To read more about this and why we should take the abortion procedure off the market go to www.RecallAbortion.com  to order Janet Morana’s new book.  Also available for your Nook or Kindle.

Posted in Abortion, IVF, Selective Reduction |
Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.

New study shows sharp spike in breast cancer in young women since 1973

Friday, March 1st, 2013

Journal-American-Medical-Association[1]Authors of a new study that shows a dramatic increase in aggressive breast cancer in young women say they can’t identify a cause.

The study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) looked at data from 1973 to 2009 and found that the incidence of “distant disease” – which means breast cancer that spread to the bones, brain, lungs or elsewhere – increased from 1.53 women per 100,000 in 1976 to 2.90 in 2009. The increase doesn’t seem that startling by itself, but take into account that there are 62 million women of child-bearing age in the U.S. and the math becomes hard to ignore.

What could be behind this increase in breast cancer for young women? What changed in 1973 that might be a contributing factor?

Two things.

In 1972, in Eisenstadt vs. Baird, the U.S. Supreme Court made it legal for unmarried people to use contraceptives. The birth control pill already had been on the market for over a decade, and its use among young women began to grow exponentially. More than 12 million women in the U.S. currently swallow the Pill to prevent pregnancy, cure acne, relieve menstrual cramps and for a host of other reasons.

In 1999 oral contraceptives were identified as Class 1 carcinogens by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, an arm of the World Health Organization.  Following a 2005 review, the designation did not change.  Therefore, young women who have been taking the Pill for years, even decades, have been ingesting a cancer-causing agent every day. Might this be a factor in the spike in breast cancer diagnoses?

A year later, the Supreme Court made abortion in the United States legal throughout pregnancy. Today and every day, more than 3,000 women in the United States will end their pregnancies through abortion and the vast majority belongs to the demographic group identified in the JAMA study.

It was long ago accepted as gospel truth that abortion has no link to breast cancer.  That “fact” is repeated in the mainstream media over and over, as if it’s indisputable and without controversy. The reason has nothing to do with health and everything to do with the fact that in this country, no one dare speak ill of abortion.

But some breast surgeons are willing to speak the truth about the abortion breast cancer link and the Pill’s influence on breast cancer rates. In both cases, it’s all about the estrogen. An increased exposure to estrogen increases breast cancer risk, and no one disputes that. But according to Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, a breast cancer surgeon in practice since 1984, government health organizations and the mainstream media somehow manage to overlook  70 studies about induced abortion and breast cancer performed all over the world. Fifty-five of these studies show a positive correlation between abortion and breast cancer, and of those, 33 show a statistically significant increase in breast cancer risk. (Go to www.bcpinstitute.org to learn more). Dr. Lanfranchi points out that many of the studies were performed in countries where abortion is part of public policy and information on it is readily available. In the United States, any attempt to collect information on abortion becomes a political and ideological battle. Currently, states submit abortion data voluntarily. California, the state with the most abortions, keeps its information to itself.

The new JAMA study showing dramatic increases in the deadliest cancers has to be a wake-up call to the American medical establishment. We can no longer bury our heads in the sand to avoid seeing the links between abortion, hormonal contraception and breast cancer.  Women’s lives are at stake.

Posted in Abortion, Abortion Complications, Breast Cancer, Cancer, Contraception, Health Care |
Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.