Peter Baklinski

‘We were blessed to have met them’: Parents of preemie triplets find meaning in the unthinkable

Peter Baklinski
Peter Baklinski
Image

ROCKWOOD, Ontario, 8 January, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The doctor performing the ultrasound had a strange look on his face. The newly married couple braced themselves for what they were sure would be terrible news.

“Now, don’t scream,” he said in measured tones. “One. Two. Three…Triplets!”

Jason and Marie Taylor, both in their 30s, had married only four months ago, in May 2012. They were eager to start a family from the moment they fell in love, but they decided to do their relationship “God’s way”, saving sex till both had promised the other ‘I do’.

It was an ongoing joke in the extended family that if Marie was going to “catch up” with the number of children her married sisters had, then she and Jason would have to have twins and triplets.

One month after wedding bells, the couple was delighted to discover that they were pregnant. Now at 11 weeks, they were excited to see their ‘little one’ - or little ones, as it turned out - through the medical magic of ultrasound.

Jason and Marie were ecstatic at the news of triplets. Jason ‘high-fived’ Marie, who was lying on the observation bed.

“We were just really, really excited,” Jason told LifeSiteNews in an exclusive interview from their home last week.

The couple’s next immediate thought was: “Oh my goodness, what are we going to do with so many babies…we only have a limited number of arms.”

The ultrasound revealed that there were two girls and a boy. The proud parents named them Bernadette, Christine, and Adam.

At a subsequent visit, doctors spoke to the parents about “selective reduction,” but the couple would hear none of it. Even though Marie was a trained nurse and knew that doctors would ask this question, it stung her to hear someone so unconcernedly offer to “kill one or two of my children.”

“That was really upsetting to us both since we so eagerly anticipated our children,” said Jason.

Click “like” if you are PRO-LIFE!

The couple began to prepare themselves and their house for the new arrivals, expected in February 2013. Three little cribs were purchased and tenderly placed in the upstairs bedroom.

Marie’s belly grew, and grew, and grew some more.

Every night before falling asleep beside his wife, Jason would lean over and talk to his unborn children. “Hey Adam, hey Bernadette, hey Christina, I’m looking forward to meeting you. I love you guys!” Before leaving for work he would say to them: “Look after your mommy!”

The unthinkable

But Marie’s body was beginning to have trouble adapting to the demands of the three thriving lives inside of her. She experienced massive headaches as well as heart palpitations and chest pains if she overexerted herself. She was troubled with severe acid reflux. One day, while in the midst of writing wedding thank-you cards at the kitchen table, she suddenly blacked-out. When she came to, she managed to phone Jason for help.

Despite Marie’s health struggles, a November 13 ultrasound revealed that Marie and her babies were doing quite well. At 22 weeks, Marie was measuring more like a pregnant woman at 35 weeks.

But the day after the ultrasound, Marie started experiencing “sharp little pains” across her abdomen that became increasingly regular. That evening, the couple decided to head for the hospital to see what was going on.

Arriving at the hospital, the couple was incredulous when doctors told Marie that she was four centimeters dilated and that labour had begun. The young couple clung to the hope that doctors could do something to prevent labour from developing further while still keeping the babies safe.

But labour progressed further. Doctors broke the news that the babies were on their way.

At 22 weeks, the tiny triplets didn’t have much of a chance. Not only was their gestational development delayed because they were triplets, but their little lungs hadn’t developed enough for them to breathe. As a nurse, Marie knew that ventilation efforts on underdeveloped lungs could explode the lungs, causing immediate death. Doctors told the parents that when born, the babies would not benefit from medical intervention.

As Jason stood by his wife’s side, witnessing the unthinkable nightmare that was unfolding before his eyes, he suddenly realized that he had been giving all his attention to Marie. He realized that his unborn children were probably just as frightened by what was happening as he and Marie were. The young father leaned over and chokingly comforted his children with the loving words he had spoken so often. “Hey, I love you guys…I’m looking forward to meeting you…”

The parents prepared to greet their children and spend as much time with them as they could.

The triplets were born in the early hours of November 15, each weighing between 360 to 450 grams, less than a pound each.

“They came out, full of life, and moving around,” said Jason. “I kept on hoping that they might be the only triplets born at 22 weeks to ever survive, but they faded quickly.”

Despite the deep sorrow of having to let their children go, the parents were nonetheless taken aback by how perfectly formed their little children were, with perfect little noses, tiny toes, dainty fingers and finger nails, and most of all, beautifully lovable faces.

“We held them. We had time to study them, and we really felt like we got to know them a bit,” Jason said.

By now, extended family had arrived at the hospital to support Jason and Marie and to help bid farewell to the three children. A nurse took the babies’ footprints. The children were fitted with little hats and wrapped in coloured garments.

For Marie, it was an impossible mix of emotions: “We just held the babies. We cried. We looked at them. We studied them. We talked to them. We baptized them. And…we loved them.”

Bernadette, Adam, and Christine were loved, respected, and cherished for every moment of their short four-hour lives.

Searching for meaning

Immediately after their children’s passing, Jason and Marie wondered what should be done with the remains. They wondered if the hospital would let them have the bodies.

Marie’s father came to the rescue: “Of course we must give them a proper funeral,” he said. “They lived a life, just like anybody else. They were born, they were baptized, they lived, and they died.”

Marie’s brother built a little wooden casket with three crosses on the top. The children who had grown, lived, and died together, would now be laid in their final resting place together.

Jeff Gunnarson of Campaign Life Coalition attended the funeral service. He told LifeSiteNews that he was “deeply moved” to hear Jason’s graveside testimony about the life of his children, adding that there was hardly a dry eye in the crowd.

“Jason explained to the people gathered that his children’s lives were precious,” he said. “He mentioned his daughters’ dainty fingernails and the beautiful curve of his boy’s tiny chin. He said that even at such a young age, each child already showed distinct personality traits. He conveyed that each had its own unique unrepeatable life.”

“Believe me, anyone in that crowd with a hint of indifference to the value of a baby’s life at 22-weeks would have left that service re-thinking a pro-choice position. Jason conveyed just how wonderfully-made are these little human children of God. He was able to see in this serious, sad, yet profound moment of burying his beloved children a pro-life ray of hope that brought tears to our eyes and made us grateful to have witnessed so great a love.”

A Testimony to Life

Like any parents who have had to bury their children, Jason and Marie find themselves asking “why”. On blacker days, they find themselves prayerfully wrestling with God, asking him why he allowed this pain, this grief, this suffering, this loss.

Marie’s worst moment was waking up in the middle of the night directly after her loss. As the preceding nightmarish events crashed heavily upon her, she suddenly realized that she no longer was pregnant. “I really felt the despair when I asked myself how could anything good possibly come out of this,” she said.

The parents found themselves turning to their faith, seeking answers to difficult questions.

“We don’t know why we didn’t get to keep them,” said Marie, “but for whatever reason, God allowed them to be taken from us. We have faith that they are now in heaven reaching down trying to pull the two of us to heaven to be with them. We believe that we have three little angels up there who are interceding for us, so that we will get there someday too.”

Instead of focusing on their loss, the parents decided to focus on their blessings. “If anything, these babies are a testament to life. That’s what they have to be. That’s what we have to make this,” said Marie.

Despite their pain and loss, the parents would never wish their children’s lives away. They know that pain and loss do not have the final word.

The triplets have already made a difference in the lives of all who knew about them. Neighbors came together to support Jason and Marie. Family members saw through their petty differences and found common ground. Faith in God and family ties were strengthened. Cold hearts were thawed.

“Somehow it changes a heart just to see their lives,” said Jason.

Jason and Marie’s “hope and prayer” is that sharing their experience might “encourage” others who face difficult life choices.

They have put together a moving video tribute in memory of their triplets. The parents wrote and recorded an uplifting and heartfelt song that accompanies their story, which is told through photos and texts. The YouTube video has already received close to 3500 views.

“Hopefully our babies lives can make a difference somehow, even if it’s just giving strength and affirmation to people currently in the pro-life movement,” said Jason.

Gunnarson called the Taylor’s testimony “courageous and amazing,” saying that they showed the world that bringing 22-week babies into the world, even if they are not able to live for more than a few hours, is the “natural, healthy, and loving thing to do”.

“They named them, they baptized them, and most importantly,” he said, “they loved them.”

For Jason and Marie, their children will forever remain a treasured memory. Anyone who listens to their story will hear them say: “We were blessed to have met them.”

Click “like” if you are PRO-LIFE!

See Footsteps - In Memory of our Triplets on Youtube.


Advertisement
Featured Image
A Nazi extermination camp. Pete Baklinski / LifeSiteNews
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete

Imagine the outrage if anti-Semites were crowdsourcing for gas chambers

Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete
By Pete Baklinski
Image
A Nazi oven where the gassed victims were destroyed by fire. Pete Baklinski / LifeSiteNews
Image
Empty canisters of the poison used by Nazis to exterminate the prisoners. Pete Baklinski / LifeSiteNews
Image
Syringe for Manual Vacuum Aspiration abortion AbortionInstruments.com
Image
Uterine Currette AbortionInstruments.com
Image

Imagine the outrage if the Nazis had used online crowdsourcing to pay for the instruments and equipment used to eradicate Jews, gypsies, the handicapped, and other population groups — labeled “undesirable” — in their large industrialized World War II extermination facilities. 

Imagine if they posted a plea online stating: “We need to raise $85,000 to buy Zyklon B gas, to maintain the gas chambers, and to provide a full range of services to complete the ‘final solution.’”

People would be more than outraged. They would be sickened, disgusted, horrified. Humanitarian organizations would fly into high gear to do everything in their power to stop what everyone would agree was madness. Governments would issue the strongest condemnations.

Civilized persons would agree: No class of persons should ever be targeted for extermination, no matter what the reason. Everyone would tear the euphemistic language of “final solution” to shreds, knowing that it really means the hideous crime of annihilating a class of people through clinical, efficient, and state-approved methods of destruction. 

But crowdsourcing to pay for the instruments and equipment to exterminate human beings is exactly what one group in New Brunswick is doing.

Reproductive Justice NB has just finished raising more than $100,000 to lease the Morgentaler abortion facility in Fredericton, NB, which is about to close over finances. They’re now asking the public for “support and enthusiasm” to move forward with what they call “phase 2” of their goal.

“For a further $85,000 we can potentially buy all the equipment currently located at the clinic; equipment that is required to provide a full range of reproductive health services,” the group states on its Facebook page.

But what are the instruments and equipment used in a surgical abortion to destroy the pre-born child? It depends how old the child is. 

A Manual Vacuum Aspiration abortion uses a syringe-like instrument that creates suction to break apart and suck the baby up. It’s used to abort a child from 6 weeks to 12 weeks of age. Abortionist Martin Haskell has said the baby’s heart is often still beating as it’s sucked down the tube into the collection jar.

For older babies up to 16 weeks there is the Dilation and Curettage (D&C) abortion method. A Uterine Currette has one sharp side for cutting the pre-born child into pieces. The other side is used to scrape the uterus to remove the placenta. The baby’s remains are often removed by a vacuum.

For babies past 16 weeks there is the Dilation and Evacuation (D&E) abortion method, which uses forceps to crush, grasp, and pull the baby’s body apart before extraction. If the baby’s head is too large, it must be crushed before it can be removed.

For babies past 20 weeks, there is the Dilation and Extraction (D&X) abortion method. Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist uses forceps to partially deliver the baby until his or her head becomes visible. With the head often too big to pass through the cervix, the abortionist punctures the skull, sucks out the brains to collapse the skull, and delivers the dead baby.

Other equipment employed to kill the pre-born would include chemicals such as Methotrexate, Misoprostol, and saline injections. Standard office equipment would include such items as a gynecologist chair, oxygen equipment, and a heart monitor.

“It’s a bargain we don’t want to miss but we need your help,” writes the abortion group.

People should be absolutely outraged that a group is raising funds to purchase the instruments of death used to destroy a class of people called the pre-born. Citizens and human rights activists should be demanding the organizers be brought to justice. Politicians should be issuing condemnations with the most hard-hitting language.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Everyone should be tearing to shreds the euphemistic language of “reproductive health services,” knowing that it in part stands for the hideous crime of annihilating a class of people through clinical, efficient, and state-approved methods of destruction that include dismemberment, decapitation, and disembowelment.

There’s a saying about people not being able to perceive the error of their day. This was generally true of many in Hitler’s Germany who uncritically subscribed to his eugenics-driven ideology in which certain people were viewed as sub-human. And it’s generally true of many in Canada today who uncritically subscribe to the ideology of ‘choice’ in which the pre-born are viewed as sub-human.

It’s time for all of us to wake-up and see the youngest members of the human family are being brutally exterminated by abortion. They need our help. We must stand up for them and end this injustice.

Let us arise!


Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Paul Wilson

The antidote to coercive population control

Paul Wilson
By Paul Wilson

The primary tenet of population control is simple: using contraception and abortifacients, families can “control” when their reproductive systems work and when they don’t – hence the endless cries that women “should have control over their own bodies” in the name of reproductive health.

However, in much of the world, the glittering rhetoric of fertility control gives way to the reality of control of the poorest citizens by their governments or large corporations. Governments and foreign aid organizations routinely foist contraception on women in developing countries. In many cases, any pretense of consent is steamrolled – men and women are forcibly sterilized by governments seeking to thin their citizens’ numbers.  (And this “helping women achieve their ‘ideal family size’” only goes one way – there is no government support for families that actually want more children.)

In countries where medical conditions are subpar and standards of care and oversight are low, the contraceptive chemicals population control proponents push have a plethora of nasty side effects – including permanent sterilization. So much for control over fertility; more accurately, the goal appears to be the elimination of fertility altogether.

There is a method for regulating fertility that doesn’t involve chemicals, cannot be co-opted or manipulated, and requires the mutual consent of the partners in order to work effectively. This method is Natural Family Planning (NFP).

Natural Family Planning is a method in which a woman tracks her natural indicators (such as her period, her temperature, cervical mucus, etc.) to identify when she is fertile. Having identified fertile days, couples can then choose whether or not to have sex during those days--abstaining if they wish to postpone pregnancy, or engaging in sex if pregnancy is desired.

Of course, the population control crowd, fixated on forcing the West’s vision of limitless bacchanalia through protective rubber and magical chemicals upon the rest of the world, loathes NFP. They deliberately confuse NFP with the older “rhythm method,” and cite statistics from the media’s favorite “research institute” (the Guttmacher Institute, named for a former director of Planned Parenthood) claiming that NFP has a 25% failure rate with “typical use.” Even the World Health Organization, in their several hundred page publication, “Family Planning: A Global Handbook for Providers,” admits that the basal body temperature method (a natural method) has a less than 1% failure rate—a success rate much higher than male condoms, female condoms, diaphragms, cervical caps or spermicides.

Ironically, the methods which they ignore – natural methods – grant true control over one’s fertility – helping couples both to avoid pregnancy or (horror of horrors!) to have children, with no government intervention required and no choices infringed upon.

The legitimacy of natural methods blows the cover on population controllers’ pretext to help women. Instead, it reveals their push for contraceptives and sterilizations for what they are—an attempt to control the fertility of others. 

Reprinted with permission from the Population Research Institute.


Advertisement
Featured Image
United Nations headquarters in New York Shutterstock.com
Rebecca Oas, Ph.D.

New development goals shut out abortion rights

Rebecca Oas, Ph.D.
By Rebecca Oas Ph.D.

Co-authored by Stefano Gennarini, J.D.

A two week marathon negotiation over the world’s development priorities through 2030 ended at U.N. headquarters on Saturday with abortion rights shut out once again.

When the co-chairs’ gavel finally fell Saturday afternoon to signal the adoption of a new set of development goals, delegates broke out in applause. The applause was more a sigh of relief that a final round of negotiations lasting twenty-eight hours had come to its end than a sign of approval for the new goals.

Last-minute changes and blanket assurances ushered the way for the chairman to present his version of the document delivered with an implicit “take it or leave it.”

Aside from familiar divisions between poor and wealthy countries, the proposed development agenda that delegates have mulled over for nearly two years remains unwieldy and unmarketable, with 17 goals and 169 targets on everything from ending poverty and hunger, to universal health coverage, economic development, and climate change.

Once again hotly contested social issues were responsible for keeping delegates up all night. The outcome was a compromise.

Abortion advocates were perhaps the most frustrated. They engaged in a multi-year lobbying campaign for new terminology to advance abortion rights, with little to show for their efforts. The new term “sexual and reproductive health and rights,” which has been associated with abortion on demand, as well as special new rights for individuals who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual or transsexual (LGBT), did not get traction, even with 58 countries expressing support.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Despite this notable omission, countries with laws protecting unborn children were disappointed at the continued use of the term “reproductive rights,” which is not in the Rio+20 agreement from 2012 that called for the new goals. The term is seen as inappropriate in an agenda about outcomes and results rather than normative changes on sensitive subjects.

Even so, “reproductive rights” is tempered by a reference to the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development, which recognizes that abortion is a matter to be dealt with in national legislation. It generally casts abortion in a bad light and does not recognize it as a right. The new terminology that failed was an attempt to leave the 1994 agreement behind in order to reframe abortion as a human rights issue.

Sexual and reproductive health was one of a handful of subjects that held up agreement in the final hours of negotiations. The failure to get the new terminology in the goals prompted the United States and European countries to insist on having a second target about sexual and reproductive health. They also failed to include “comprehensive sexuality education” in the goals because of concerns over sex education programs that emphasize risk reduction rather than risk avoidance.

The same countries failed to delete the only reference to “the family” in the whole document. Unable to insert any direct reference to LGBT rights at the United Nations, they are concentrating their efforts on diluting or eliminating the longstanding U.N. definition of the family. They argue “the family” is a “monolithic” term that excludes other households. Delegates from Mexico, Colombia and Peru, supporters of LGBT rights, asked that the only reference to the family be “suppressed.”

The proposed goals are not the final word on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). They will be submitted to the General Assembly, whose task is to elaborate a post-2015 development agenda to replace the Millennium Development Goals next year.

Reprinted with permission from C-FAM.org.


Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook