‘Hey, he’s trying to live, help him!’: Horror as pro-choice pastor witnesses baby born alive after abortion
Note: This is part 4 of a series about how babies are born alive during abortion procedures:
Part I: ‘This baby is alive!’: the heartbreaking story of Baby Hope
Part II: ‘That’s not a baby. That’s an abortion!’: clinic workers describe babies born alive
Part III: ‘This is so hard. Oh, God, it’s so hard!’: nurses tell of aborted babies born alive
April 24, 2013 (LiveActionNews.org) - On April 12, Live Action posted an article on nurses in neonatal care units who were forced to stand helplessly by and watch while babies born alive after abortions died without medical care. On April 11, Live Action had published another article quoting abortion clinic workers discussing similar cases where the baby never made it out of the clinic. It had a number of quotes like this one, from a clinic worker who was interviewed by pro-choice author Magda Denes:
There was one week when there were two live births in the same week. And just, you know, there’s this baby crying on the floor while all these women are in the process of trying to deal with their feelings about aborting their babies. One survived for a while.
[Interviewer] how did the mothers react who gave birth to the live babies?
Well. This one, she didn’t talk much. The mother delivered when there was no one there and there was some period when the mother was holding the baby. And it was grabbing onto her.… She was extremely upset by this whole thing. (1)
There have been other cases where people not connected to the medical community have been allowed to witness abortions and have seen babies born alive.
Pastor Zolton Phillips III worked for the Clergy Advisory Counsel to the Virginia League for Planned Parenthood in the early 1970s. He was active in the fight to legalize abortion and lobbied against pro-life laws. He described himself as being “an advocate for abortion.”
After being involved in the pro-choice movement for a number of years, Phillips was given the opportunity to witness abortion procedures. He was shocked at what he saw. The first abortion he witnessed in the Planned Parenthood clinic was a suction abortion in the first trimester. He describes his horror at seeing a fully formed hand caught in the gauze bag covering the jar that collected the aborted baby parts. He then saw two other suction abortions. The fourth abortion that he saw, a late-term abortion, was even more disturbing:
After the saline abortion, the baby was born alive. Shocked, I appealed to the nurse saying, “Hey, he’s trying to live, help him!” She replied, “I can’t because they’ve signed the papers that he’s dead.”
A saline abortion is performed by injecting a poisonous saline solution into the amniotic fluid that surrounds a second- or third-trimester baby. The caustic saline solution burns the baby’s skin and lungs as she breathes in the amniotic fluid, poisoning her and killing her over the course of several hours. The mother then goes through labor and “gives birth” to the dead baby. This abortion technique has been abandoned by most abortionists because it resulted in so many live births and because it is dangerous to the mother. A similar technique that is now used in late second- and third-trimester abortions consists of injecting a poison called digoxin into the heart of the unborn baby, stopping it over a period of time. Some abortionists, however, inject digoxin into the amniotic fluid, and this causes the baby to die slowly, again over the course of several hours. The effect on the baby is similar to that of the saline abortion.
Pastor Phillips was so horrified by the abortions that he witnessed that he reconsidered his pro-choice position. After contemplation, prayer, and Bible study, he converted to the pro-life cause and eventually became the president of Presbyterians for Life.
Click "like" if you want to end abortion!
Dr. Martin Haskell is a well-known abortionist who practices in Cincinnati, Ohio. He was instrumental in popularizing the partial-birth abortion procedure. You can read a paper he wrote on partial-birth abortions here.
On September 21, 1989, University of Cincinnati student Yvonne Brower, who was doing a term paper on abortion, was allowed to witness one of the Dr. Haskell’s late-term D&E abortions (see more information about this type of abortion here). According to an article published in the National Review (2), she witnessed the baby being born alive. Brower contacted the police.
She stated that by 11 o’clock she had already observed two “D&E” three-day procedures on two patients. She stated on the third patient, however, the abortion was different …. The patient’s water was already broken and she spontaneously gave birth prematurely before the proper D&E procedure could be done. She stated that the baby was delivered feet first very quickly through the birth canal. The head was on its way out when Dr. Haskell reached over and got his scissors and snipped the right side of the baby’s common carotid artery.
But this failed to kill the baby. The police report went on:
The complainant stated that the baby was still moving when she looked at it once again …. it was breathing shallow breaths, as was evidenced by the chest moving up and down. She stated that she could also observe the baby’s hand having slow, controlled, muscular movements, unlike the short jerky twitchy motions she had seen and learned to expect when the baby was already dead before it came out of the birth canal.
Dr. Haskell denied that the baby had been born alive. In an article in the Dayton Daily News, he said:
It came out very quickly after I put the scissors up in the cervical canal and pierced the skull and spread the scissors apart. It popped right on out …. the previous two, I had to use the suction to collapse the skull.”
The police investigation went nowhere; it came down to Brower’s word against the abortionist’s. No charges were ever filed despite her eyewitness account.
People who are not in the medical field do not often witness abortions. Sometimes reporters are given permission to observe at abortion clinics, but most clinics have strict policies against allowing visitors in the actual operating room. One abortionist, Dr. Albert Hodari (now retired), said in a lecture at Wayne State University that he had a firm policy of not allowing the boyfriends or husbands of patients to watch the procedures because of their extreme reactions.
Unsurprisingly, abortion providers do not want strangers to see what they are doing. One has to wonder if these reports of babies born alive are only the tip of the iceberg. How many babies are born alive after abortions and disposed of without the public ever knowing?
1. Magda Denes, PhD. In Necessity and Sorrow: Life and Death in an Abortion Hospital (New York: Basic Books inc 1976) 79
2. Michael R. Heaphy “Dismemberment & Choice” National Review;11/2/1992, Vol. 44 Issue 21, p44
Sarah Terzo is a pro-life author and creator of the clinicquotes.com website. She is a member of Secular Pro-Life and Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians. This article reprinted with permission from LiveActionNews.org.
‘Little miracles’: Mom gives birth to naturally-conceived quintuplets after refusing ‘selective reduction’
AUSTRALIA, February 5, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) -- A 26-year-old Australian mom has given birth to five healthy babies, all conceived naturally, after refusing the doctor’s advice that she must abort three of them in order to give the remaining two a better chance at life.
“After my initial ultrasound I was told I could consider the selection method to give 2 babies the best chance in life,” wrote mom Kim Tucci in a Facebook post last September.
“I watched a YouTube video on the procedure and I cried. I could never do that! Was I selfish for not giving two the chance of 100% survival? All I knew is that I already love them and that every heart beat I heard I connect with them more. For me life starts when a heart starts beating and all I know for sure is that I will do whatever it takes to bring them into this world healthy,” she wrote.
Last Thursday Kim and her husband Vaughn welcomed the five new members into their family — one boy and four girls —increasing the number of their children from 3 to 8. The babies were born at 30 weeks, 10 weeks early, due to insufficient space in Kim’s womb. They weighed on average about 2.5 pounds.
The quintuplets’ story began last March, after Kim and Vaughn had been trying for six months to conceive just one more child for their family. Due to health complications, Kim wondered if she would ever become a mother again.
After what she thought was an extra long cycle, she decided to take a pregnancy test.
“I was feeling tired and a little nauseated and thought I would take a pregnancy test just to get the ‘what if’ out of my head. To my shock and utter excitement it was positive,” she wrote on a Facebook post.
The parents got the shock of their lives when doctors confirmed in an ultrasound examination that there was not one baby, but five.
“After a long wait for the ultrasound we finally went in. The sonographer told me there were multiple gestational sacks, but she could only see a heart beat in two. I was so excited! Twins!”
“I was moved to another machine for a clearer view and had the head doctor come in and double check the findings. She started to count, one, two, three, four, five. Did i hear that correctly? Five? My legs start to shake uncontrollably and all i can do is laugh. The sonographer then told me the term for five is ‘quintuplets,’” Kim wrote.
Even though Kim began to feel stretched to the limit with all those human lives growing inside her, she chose to focus on her babies, and not herself, referring to them as “my five little miracles.”
“It's getting harder as each day passes to push through the pain, every part of my body aches and sleeping is becoming very painful. No amount of pillows are helping support my back and belly. Sometimes I get so upset that I just want to throw my hands up and give in.”
“Sometimes my pelvis becomes so stiff I can barely walk and my hips feel like they are grinding away constantly. I'm finding it hard to eat as I basically have no room left in my stomach, and the way it is positioned it's pushed all the way back with the babies leaning against it.”
“My skin on my belly is so stretched its painful and hot to touch. It literally feels like I have hives! No amount of cream helps relieve the discomfort. I have a lot of stretch marks now. Dealing with such a huge change in my body is hard.”
“Is it all worth it? Yes!!!! I will keep pushing through,” she wrote in one Facebook post days before the babies were born.
The newborns' names are Keith, Ali, Penelope, Tiffany, and Beatrix. They were born at King Edward Memorial Hospital in Subiaco, Western Australia. Mother and babies are reported to be doing well.
UN rights chief tells Catholic countries to legalize abortion over Zika virus: bishops and cardinal react
GENEVA, February 5, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) -- The United Nations, following the lead of international abortion activists, is now urging Latin American countries hit by the mosquito-borne Zika virus to lift restrictions on abortion for pregnant women who have contacted the virus and whose pre-born children may be at risk for birth defects, including having smaller than normal heads.
The UN human rights office said today that it is not enough for South American countries to urge women to postpone pregnancy without also offering them abortion as a final solution.
“How can they ask these women not to become pregnant, but not offer… the possibility to stop their pregnancies?” UN spokeswoman Cecile Pouilly told reporters.
UN human rights chief Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein said that governments should make available contraception and abortion services.
“Laws and policies that restrict (women’s) access to these services must be urgently reviewed in line with human rights obligations in order to ensure the right to health for all in practice,” he said.
But Brazil’s bishops strongly asserted yesterday that efforts should be made to eradicate the virus, not the people who may be infected by it.
The disease is “no justification whatsoever to promote abortion,” they said in a statement, adding that it is not morally acceptable to promote abortion “in the cases of microcephaly, as, unfortunately, some groups are proposing to the Supreme Federal Court, in a total lack of respect for the gift of life.”
Honduras Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga has also come out strongly against the notion of “therapeutic abortions” as a response to the problem. Unlike Brazil where abortion is legal in the case of rape or health of the mother, abortion remains entirely illegal in Honduras.
“We should never talk about ‘therapeutic’ abortion,” the cardinal said in a homily at a February 3 Mass in Suyap. “Therapeutic abortion doesn’t exist. Therapeutic means curing, and abortion cures nothing. It takes innocent lives,” he said.
While the World Health Organization (WHO) declared an international public health emergency February 1 on account of concerns over the virus, critics have pointed out, however, that not one death as resulted from the virus. Even on WHO’s own website the virus is described in mild terms.
“It causes mild fever and rash. Other symptoms include muscle pain, joint pain, headache, pain behind the eyes and conjunctivitis. Zika virus disease is usually mild, with symptoms lasting only a few days,” the website states. “To date, there have been no reported deaths associated with Zika virus,” it added.
Critics suspect that the crisis is being manipulated to advance an anti-human agenda on the pre-born.
“Is Zika, actually, a hideous virus that threatens to spread uncontrollably across the world creating an army of disabled children with tiny heads and low IQ’s? Or might this be a willful misinterpretation of the scarce data to manipulate public opinion and legislatures?” wrote pro-life critic Mei-Li Garcia earlier this week.
“It becomes very clear that the publicity surrounding this story has a very little to do with medicine and a lot to do with a convenient crisis that is being used by those pushing for the legalization of abortion around the world,” she wrote.
Hillary’s litmus test for Supreme Court picks: They must ‘preserve Roe v. Wade’
DERRY, NH, February 5, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) - Hillary Clinton has a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees - several, in fact. At a Democratic event on Wednesday, Clinton unveiled her criteria in selecting a judge for the nation's highest court.
“I do have a litmus test, I have a bunch of litmus tests," she said.
"We’ve got to make sure to preserve Roe v. Wade, not let it be nibbled away or repealed,” she said.
That echoes her recent call to arms speech before Planned Parenthood last month, when she stated that taxpayers must fund abortion-on-demand in order to uphold the "right" of choice.
“We have to preserve marriage equality,” Clinton said, referring to last summer's Obergefell v. Hodges case, a 5-4 ruling that redefined marriage nationwide. “We have to go further to end discrimination against the LGBT community."
Her views differentiate her from the Republican front runners. Ted Cruz has called the court's marriage ruling "fundamentally illegitimate," and Donald Trump told Fox News Sunday this week that he would "be very strong on putting certain judges on the bench that I think maybe could change things." Marco Rubio has said he won't "concede" the issue to the one-vote majority.
All Republican presidential hopefuls say they are pro-life and will defund Planned Parenthood.
Her husband, Bill Clinton, raised the makeup of the Supreme Court early last month in New Hampshire, saying it receives "almost no attention" as a campaign issue.
On Wednesday, Hillary said "the next president could get as many as three appointments. It’s one of the many reasons why we can’t turn the White House over to the Republicans again.”
Clinton said her judicial appointees must also reverse the Citizens United ruling on campaign finance and oppose a recent decision striking down a portion of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. In 2013's Shelby County v. Holder, justices struck down Section 4(b) of the act, which said that certain states and jurisdictions had to obtain permission from the federal government before changing their voting laws.
At one time, most politicians frowned upon any "litmus test" for judicial nominees, emphasizing the independence of the third branch of government. "I don't believe in litmus tests," Jeb Bush told Chuck Todd last November.
But with the rise of an activist judiciary in the middle of the 20th century, constitutionalists have sought to rein in the power of the bench.