News & Articles

Pro-Abortion Lawsuit Falsely Claims Killing Babies in Abortions is Medically Necessary

A new pro-abortion falsely claims that killing babies in abortions is medically necessary.
Pro-Abortion Lawsuit Falsely Claims Killing Babies in Abortions is Medically Necessary

A new pro-abortion falsely claims that killing babies in abortions is medically necessary. The pro-abortion suit, filed by the radically pro-abortion Center for Reproductive Rights, claims women in multiple states were denied abortions that they needed for medical reasons.

Here’s more:

Women in Idaho, Oklahoma and Tennessee filed legal actions against their states over abortion bans, saying they were denied abortions despite having dangerous pregnancy complications.

Four women in Idaho — Jennifer Adkins, Jillaine St. Michel, Kayla Smith and Rebecca Vincen-Brown — and abortion providers filed a suit against the state, Gov. Brad Little, attorney general and the state’s board of medicine, claiming the state’s ban has “sown confusion, fear and chaos among the medical community, resulting in grave harms to pregnant patients whose health and safety hang in the balance across the state,” according to a copy of the lawsuit shared with ABC News.

Three women in Tennessee — Nicole Blackmon, Allyson Phillips and Kaitlyn Dulon — and abortion providers filed a suit against the state, attorney general and the state board of medical examiners, claiming they and others were denied “necessary and potentially life-saving medical care” because physicians “fear the penalties imposed by that ban,” according to the lawsuit.

Jaci Statton filed an administrative complaint with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services against a hospital in Oklahoma, claiming she was not provided with an abortion that was a “necessary stabilizing treatment” for her partial molar pregnancy.

The lawsuit has multiple problems.

First, abortion is never medically necessary.

Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

One of the most common defenses of abortion is the claim that in some cases, abortion is medically necessary. Lately, Americans have been hearing this claim in defense of a laws that allow abortions through all nine months of pregnancy. But that claim is based on faulty assumptions about the options available to women who face life-threatening pregnancy complications. The truth, known to thousands of OB-GYNs worldwide, is that there is no situation in which an abortion is medically necessary.

Over a thousand OB-GYNs and maternal healthcare experts joined together to affirm this reality in the Dublin Declaration, which states: “As experienced practitioners and researchers in obstetrics and gynecology, we affirm that direct abortion – the purposeful destruction of the unborn child — is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman. We uphold that there is a fundamental difference between abortion, and necessary medical treatments that are carried out to save the life of the mother, even if such treatment results in the loss of life of her unborn child. We confirm that the prohibition of abortion does not affect, in any way, the availability of optimal care to pregnant women.”

Dr. Roger Marshall, also a member of Congress, confirmed this is the case.

“To this day, I can’t think of a single scenario where I thought a late-term abortion would help to improve a woman’s mental health,” Marshall wrote in a Monday op-ed published by Fox News. “Contrary to the pro-abortion movement, regardless of the mother’s underlying medical health, I never saw the scenario where we had to choose between a mom’s life and a baby,” Marshall wrote.

Marshall is an obstetrician who has delivered more than 5,000 babies in Western Kansas over 25 years. He also served as an OB-GYN at a state mental health hospital and prison.

Pregnant women face much higher risks for uterine perforation and life-threatening hemorrhaging during late-term abortions, according to Marshall. The procedures also pose a high risk of infection, permanent scarring and infertility, according to the doctor.

“Point blank, late-term abortions are unsafe and are more dangerous than naturally occurring childbirth in almost any situation,” Marshall wrote.

Secondly, the pro-life laws this new lawsuit challenges already allow emergency medical care for pregnant women. 

Each of these states permits abortion in those rare and heartbreaking circumstances when it is necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman. Physicians can make this determination based on their “reasonable medical judgment,” a standard very common in the medical profession and used for any case involving medical malpractice litigation.

Meanwhile, abortion advocates are spreading the dangerous lie that life-saving care is not or may not be permitted in these states, leading to provider confusion and poor outcomes for women.

But instead of holding doctors accountable for not providing full medical care in these extremely rare circumstances, abortion activists are targeting the pro-life laws themselves because they want to legalize abortions.

Visitor Comments (0)

Be the first to post a comment.

Discuss On Facebook