We have reached a point in this particular technology where there
is no possibility of denial of an act of destruction on the part of
the operator. It is before one's eyes. The sensations of dismemberment
flow through the forceps like an electric current.
Abortionist Warren Hern.
We feel it is necessary to encourage an all-out assault upon the
human endometrium [uterine lining] at this point in time.
Ronald J. Pion, M.D.
Anything is better than bringing an unwanted child into this
already-crowded world. Since the fetus is not a person, it has no rights
whatever and therefore should be considered as completely expendable by
pregnant women and by society. If it does have any rights, those rights
must always take a back seat to the rights of real live born
Since it is the woman who gets pregnant and suffers all of the
consequences of childbirth, men should have no say in decisions
regarding reproductive rights.
Besides, the fetus is a nonsentient organism incapable of feeling
pain during the various types of abortion procedures, so abortion is no
This chapter describes the grisly methods by which preborn children
are scalded, decapitated, and torn apart primarily for the sake of mere
convenience. No sane person would insist, after hearing these
descriptions, that any living creature could be subjected to such
torture and not feel pain.
Additionally, this chapter addresses some of the most unique and
controversial aspects of abortion, as listed below;
the disposal of fetal remains;
father's rights; and
the disreputable nature of abortionists.
For further information on the pain that preborn babies feel as they
are killed, see Chapter 75, "Preborns: Fetal Pain."
The Unique Aspects of Abortion.
Abortion is a completely unique surgical procedure, profoundly
different in many ways from ethical surgery, as shown in Figure 61-1.
COMPARISONS BETWEEN ELECTIVE ABORTION AND ETHICAL SURGICAL PROCEDURES
[A medium text size on your computer's 'view'
setting is recommended, otherwise, the tables may be discombobulated.]
Purpose of the Procedure
banned Required by
Often legally banned
Required by law
Often legally banned
Required by law
Required by law
Routine and extensive Almost
Cash or credit
On the operating table
10-15% performed on Surgeon
non-pregnant women if
Incinerator or garbage Humane
Required by law
1% - 10%
Varies; usually rare
Complications officially As required
Because it stands alone in its objectives, performance, and results,
abortion is bound to have numerous attributes that set it apart from
every other kind of surgery. The following paragraphs describe some of
Methods of Abortion.
It's difficult to pull apart a chicken when it is newly killed. You
have to cook it first, and then it comes apart very easily. It's the
same here [when doing a late-term abortion].
British late-term abortionist.
The Woman and Her Doctor?
One of the most pervasive arguments used by pro-aborts is that the
abortion decision must remain between "the woman and her
Any woman who has ever had an abortion knows that, in the vast
majority of cases, the first time she lays eyes on her abortionist is
when she has been 'prepped' and her feet are in the stirrups. As
abortion clinic chain owner Edward Allred acknowledges, "We try to
use the physician for his technical skill and reduce the one-to-one
relationship with the patient. We usually see the patient for the first
time on the operation table and then not again. More contact is just not
This quote reinforces the idea that the abortionist is a mere
technician, a person who is simply a small part of an impersonal,
efficient killing machine whose only purpose is to make its owners huge
Yet the abortionists and their willing toadies continue to insult the
intelligence of thinking people with statements like that of Planned
Parenthood: "Despite constant references to the "abortion
industry" by anti-abortion groups, it does not produce
Really? Ask Allred, Henry Morgentaler, or any of the other
abortionists who run chains of clinics that reap millions of dollars in
pure profits each year.
Or ask any pro-lifer who has picketed any abortionist's house,
invariably located in only the poshest neighborhood, boasting two or
three shining Mercedes, Jaguars, or BMWs in the driveway, with pampered
wives and (occasionally) children staring out of the frosted glass
windows across the manicured lawn at those disreputable anti-choicers
who are disturbing their serenity and peace, far from the
blood-spattered garbage cans and meat grinders and little ovens that
support them, that clothe them so expensively, that put such rich foods
on their table every night.
Yes, there will be a judgment day.
The following paragraphs describe the actual abortion procedures
performed by these well-paid technicians.
Also known as 'suction curettage,' this method is used in most
first-trimester abortions. The procedure begins with the dilatation of
the cervix. Then, a suction curette of the appropriate size, which
consists of a hollow tube with a knife-edged tip, is inserted into the
cervix and then into the uterus. A suction machine then tears the
developing baby apart and deposits the pieces into a bag. The
physician's assistant (invariably a woman) is usually stuck with the
loathsome task of assembling or checking body parts to insure a complete
Dilatation and Curettage (D&C).
Also known as 'sharp curettage,' this method is often used during the
first trimester. A sharp, knifelike curette is inserted into the uterus
and is used to scrape its walls. The baby is cut apart and its body
parts are removed and checked for completeness.
Unlike other abortion procedures, both curettage methods have an
alternative and entirely legitimate use. Curettage is often performed
after miscarriage to insure that the uterus is 'clean,' thereby avoiding
the infection that may result from the retention of necrotic tissue,
either from the baby or from the placenta.
However, it is vitally important to insure that a baby does not
remain in the uterus before this type of D&C is performed; several
instances have been reported where women have believed that they have
had miscarriages because they passed blood clots or tissues, and
sonograms have revealed that they were still pregnant. In some cases,
the woman actually lost a recognizable baby, but ultrasound revealed
that she was still pregnant with a twin. Ultrasound testing should
precede the D&C, or the woman risks an unintentional surgical
Dilatation and Evacuation (D&E).
This method is generally used during the first half of the second
trimester (13 to 20 weeks). The baby is torn apart by special forceps,
and the pieces are removed one by one. Larger babies must have their
heads crushed so the pieces can pass through the cervix. This method
involves the abortionist and staff manually crushing the baby requiring
considerable effort at times and makes the abortion more 'real' to them,
because upon assembling the parts of the poor little carcass, the staff
can see for themselves what they have done. Many nurses have 'burned
out' on this procedure and refuse to assist. Abortion-rights groups are
enthusiastic about the D&E method because, unlike other
second-trimester abortion methods such as saline and prostaglandin,
there is absolutely no chance that the baby will survive.
Abortionist Warren Hern, author of the how-to book Abortion
Practice, described the D&E method to the Association of Planned
Parenthood Physicians in San Diego in 1978 during a presentation
entitled "WHAT ABOUT US? Staff Reactions to the D&E
Procedure;" "We have reached a point in this particular
technology where there is no possibility of denial of an act of
destruction on the part of the operator. It is before one's eyes. The
sensations of dismemberment flow through the forceps like an electric
In his book, Hern also describes some of the more grisly aspects of
the D&E abortion; "The procedure changes significantly at 21
weeks because the fetal tissues become much more cohesive and difficult
to dismember ... A long curved Mayo scissors may be necessary to
decapitate and dismember the fetus."
Usually, the cervix must be dilated for one to three days before such
a procedure. The most popular method of cervical dilatation involves the
insertion of dried seaweed sticks called laminaria, which absorb fluids
and swell, thereby expanding the cervical diameter. Abortionists may
also dilate the cervix quickly with a series of stainless steel rods of
Abortion is a moneymaking business run by totally unscrupulous
people. They do not want any of their 'clients' to change their minds
once the laminaria are inserted. Therefore, many abortionists tell women
that they will die if the laminaria are removed.
Sidewalk counselors routinely hear this typical illogical
pro-abortion lie parroted by abortion mill clients who simply do not
know any better. The reply is simple: the abortionist must remove the
laminaria anyway before the abortion, and the woman won't die then
so this means that the seaweed can be removed at any time before the
abortion (by any emergency-room physician) without harm to the woman!
If a woman does have laminaria removed and does not go through
with the abortion, it is very important to have a doctor monitor the
pregnancy closely for signs of damage to the baby or the bag of waters.
Dilation and Extraction (D&X).
Anyone who was disgusted and shocked by the above description of the
dilation and evacuation (D&E) abortion procedure should read no
Abortionist Marvin Haskell has invented a new abortion procedure he
named dilition and extraction (D&X), because "... most surgeons
find dismemberment [i.e., D&E] at twenty weeks and beyond to be
difficult due to the toughness of fetal tissues at this stage of
Haskell, who boasted at a 1992 National Abortion Federation
conference that he has committed more than 700 of these late
second-trimester and third-trimester killings, describes his technique;
At this point, the right-handed surgeon slides the fingers of the
left had [sic] along the back of the fetus and "hooks" the
shoulders of the fetus with the index and ring fingers (palm down).
Next he slides the tip of the middle finger along the spine towards
the skill while applying traction to the shoulders and lower
extremities. The middle finger lifts and pushes the anterior cervical
lip out of the way.
While maintaining this tension, lifting the cervix and applying
traction to the shoulders with the fingers of the left hand, the
surgeon takes a pair of blunt curved Metzenbaum scissors in the right
hand. He carefully advances the tip, curved down, along the spine and
under his middle finger until he feels it contact the base of the
skull under the tip of his middle finger.
Reassessing proper placement of the closed scissors tip and safe
elevation of the cervix, the surgeon then forces the scissors into the
base of the skull or into the foramen magnum. Having safely entered
the skull, he spreads the scissors to enlarge the opening.
The surgeon removes the scissors and introduces a suction catheter
into this hole and evacuates the skull contents. With the catheter
still in place, he applies traction to the fetus, removing it
completely from the patient.
The foramen magnum is the large opening in the occipital bone
between the cranial cavity and the spinal canal.
Haskell goes on to say that this ghastly abortion procedure can be
used essentially all the way to birth; "The author is aware of one
other surgeon [J. McMahon] who uses a conceptually similar technique ...
Coupled with other refinements and a slower operating time, he performs
these procedures up to 32 weeks or more."
Dry medical terminology cannot begin to lend a true cast of horror to
the truly Satanic nature of this type of killing. In layman's terms,
D&X means that the abortionist has a problem. He wants to do an
abortion on a preborn baby of seven or eight months gestation, which has
an 80 percent chance of being viable. Since the baby is probably viable,
he is faced with the prospect of the "dreaded complication" a
live, crying newborn baby. Therefore, he must make sure the baby dies
before it is fully delivered.
He uses forceps to twist one of the baby's legs and pull it out
through the birth canal, which tears muscles and breaks bones and must
cause the baby unspeakable agony, since even pro-aborts acknowledge that
seven-month and eight-month preborn babies definitely are capable of
feeling pain. Then he punctures the back of the baby's head with sharp
scissors and spreads the blades, tearing a massive hole in the soft part
of the baby's skull. Finally, he vacuums out the baby's brains
and then completes the delivery in just a few seconds.
If any pro-abortionist dares deny that third-trimester abortions
actually occur, or if he tries to cover up the horrors of abortion, a
pro-lifer should simply describe the D&X procedure in graphic
detail. This description will shock and disgust any audience (no matter
how 'pro-choice') and will put the pro-abortionist at a distinct
disadvantage in any debate. How can anyone possibly defend naked
butchery like this?
Note that the above description was taken from a paper presented at a
National Abortion Federation conference. The author was recommending
it to his richly-dressed and urbane audience, many of whom would
presumably 'give it a try' when killing third-trimester babies.
Also known as the 'saline solution method' or the 'amnio abortion,'
this procedure is used for second trimester and early third trimester
abortions, but is becoming less popular due to possible complications to
A salt solution is injected into the amniotic fluid. The baby
breathes and swallows this concentration and dies painfully over a
period of hours from salt poisoning, dehydration, brain hemorrhage, and
convulsions. The baby's skin is often burned off by the solution, and
delivery occurs 24 to 48 hours after the baby dies. The skin of the
babies is either completely burned or turned a cherry-red color, which
is why some abortionists and nurses refer to them as "candy-apple
Dr. Russell Sacco drily observed that "If the abortion is well
done, we don't have to watch the baby die. So we inject a salt solution.
The result is like putting salt on a slug, but we don't have to watch
About 50,000 abortions per year are performed with this method or
with prostaglandins, according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute.
Anyone who insists that this procedure is painless to the baby is
obviously either insane or completely out of touch with reality. Mothers
who have undergone saline abortions invariably report feeling the baby's
movements increase to a desperate frenzy as its skin and mucous
membranes are scalded and it dies in unspeakable agony. Women who have
had previous babies and have undergone the prostaglandin amnio abortion
describe their dead preborn as "babies" and say that the
physical pain of their experience was worse than prolonged
These heartbreaking testimonies are commonly dismissed by
pro-abortionists as "fantasies."
Another reason the salt poisoning method has become less popular is
that sometimes it results in the so-called "dreaded
complication" a hardy baby who survives the torture. Therefore,
abortionists now generally use hysterotomy or a modified D&E
procedure that guarantees the baby's death. The D&E involves
surgically cutting off one or more parts of the baby to insure that it
dies of shock and exsanguination (bleeding).
During a salt poisoning abortion, all the (usually male) abortionist
generally has to do is infuse the deadly solution. The (usually female)
nurses are left to deal with live abortions, dead babies, and hysterical
Writer Judith P. Bourne noted the utter disregard for late-term
killers for their nurses when she remarked that "A complaint I hear
more than once from nurses in California was of physicians who performed
saline injections with more advanced pregnancies and then went home or
to their offices, leaving the nurse alone to cope with delivering a
large or well-developed fetus. These nurses experienced not only
emotional conflict about the abortion, but also anger at having been put
in that position by a physician who did not even consult them."
It is not surprising that the mostly-male abortionists leave the
mostly-female nurses to clean up after them. This is the same type of
sexism condemned by Neofeminists and attributed to Roman Catholic and
fundamentalist husbands who allegedly 'oppress' their wives, but the
pro-aborts don't seem to make the connection.
One medical writer not only described the nurses' grisly chore, but
cut to the heart of one of abortion's great unexplained paradoxes;
"Nurses. The experience of participating in any abortion procedure
goes directly against the medical emphasis on the preservation of life.
On the gynecology hospital floor, amnio abortions are viewed by the
nurses as the most upsetting experiences which occur and a symbol of
abandonment by the medical staff. The ward nurses' comments speak
clearly to the point of being left to cope with an upset patient who
delivers late at night ... The nurses found the physical contact with
the fetus particularly difficult; it reminded them of the
"preemies" just down the hall and made them uncomfortable
about their own potential future pregnancies."
This method is used during the late second trimester and third
trimester. A prostaglandin hormone is injected into the uterine muscle,
which then begins contractions to expel the baby in an
artificially-induced and extremely violent premature labor. The
contractions induced by this method are usually sufficiently strong to
crush the baby to death before it is delivered.
This method is falling out of favor because it is not uncommon for
babies to be born alive. In such cases, the doctor must clandestinely
kill the baby or risk a so-called "wrongful life" situation
and possible legal action and adverse publicity.
This is simply a Cesarean section performed during the last trimester
of pregnancy. The mother's abdomen is surgically opened and the baby is
The helpless baby is then either left to die or is killed by the
doctor or nurse. According to Planned Parenthood's Alan Guttmacher
Institute, about 1,000 hysterotomies are currently performed every year
in this country.
At about 16 weeks, ultrasound imagery is used to pinpoint the
location of the baby so that a long needle may be guided into its heart.
The abortionist injects a fluid which causes an immediate heart attack
in the little preborn baby, and he dies. This method is most commonly
used for "pregnancy reduction" abortions, which are described
in more detail later in this chapter.
Abortifacient herbs have been used by women desiring to kill their
preborn children for thousands of years. The 'semi-underground press'
has distributed a number of books on this subject over the last fifty
The reason that these methods are not more popular is that they have
numerous profound and severe side effects, and are abysmally ineffective
at killing preborn children. And, of course, abortion is now legal,
although several women's groups are reopening experimentation with
abortifacient herbs, or 'herbal birth control' as a hedge in case
abortion is once again criminalized.
Virtually anything can be an abortifacient if taken in great enough
doses. Some side effects listed by the Neofeminist press include
destruction of muscle and connective tissue leading to bruising and loss
of muscle tone, blindness, nerve damage, and even death.
This is another pro-abortion Newspeak word that substitutes for early
abortion. The procedure basically consists of semi-trained women using a
homemade contraption constructed of Mason jars, aquarium tubing, corks,
and syringes to abort themselves if they suspect that they may be
pregnant. The same process can be used to shorten the menstrual period
from several days to several minutes.
The primary non-medical purposes of 'menstrual extraction' (ME) are;
ME allows abortionists to circumvent clauses that include the
statement "woman known to be pregnant," and thus allows them
to avoid liability. This aspect of ME will become more significant as
states move to outlaw abortion.
ME insulates women from knowing whether or not they are
pregnant. They may suspect that they are pregnant, but ME
allows them to remain in ignorance, and therefore lets the mechanism
of self-denial operate.
For obvious reasons, 'menstrual extraction' is primarily used in
areas of the world where abortion is illegal. The complication rate for
untrained or semi-trained women aborting themselves with a home-made
suction apparatus can be extremely high. However, this didn't stop women
in the "Jane" illegal abortion network from performing 12,000
abortions during the period 1969 to 1973, nor did it stop the Federation
of Feminist Women's Health Centers from peddling the same crude
apparatus after the Supreme Court's 1989 Webster decision until
they were stopped from doing so by the U.S. Food and Drug
Two writers for the virulently pro-abortion Pathfinder Fund reveal
the true self-deceiving logic behind menstrual extraction procedures;
"Today, a woman faced with a possible but unconfirmed and unwanted
pregnancy can walk into a health services clinic or doctor's office and
often within twenty minutes have her endometrial lining extracted ...
and since menstrual extraction can be performed before a positive
pregnancy test is obtainable, it is hard to prove that menstrual
induction is an abortion procedure."
The Abortion Pill.
A safe, efficient, and private abortion pill is every Neofeminist's
dream. Unfortunately for them, it does not exist, and most likely never
The RU-486 early abortion pill has serious side effects, has a very
limited range of use, and is just as costly as a surgical abortion, and
is now being used ruthlessly by certain developing nations for outright
coercive population control purposes.
For detailed information on the various types of abortion pills, see
A mere 0.01 percent of all abortions, only about 100-200
procedures, are performed each year after 24 weeks of pregnancy.
'Religious' Coalition for Abortion Rights.
When dealing with third-trimester abortions, the anti-life mentality
is uncompromising and absolutist for two very good reasons;
(1) the anti-lifer strives to be free of God and actually is
striving (whether consciously or unconsciously) to transform himself
into a 'little God.' To admit that any anti-life practice is inhumane
or unethical would be to admit fault and culpability. This and other
strange characteristics of the anti-life mentality are described in
Chapter 2 of Volume I.
(2) the Neofeminists are acutely and properly aware of the
principle of "reverse incrementalism;" that is, they are
compelled to defend these most reprehensible abortions, because if
they 'lose' abortion for the third trimester and for sex selection,
for example, they will surely 'lose' abortion in other categories as
well (perhaps this phenomenon could be called the 'slippery
Many or most pro-abortionists will deny that third-trimester
abortions even exist. However, Census Bureau statistics, which
themselves are based upon Alan Guttmacher Institute figures, show that
about one percent of all abortions are performed in the third
Some pro-abortionists actually claim with a straight face that no
abortions whatever take place after the 24th week. From their
point of view, this is a true statement. All they do is merely define
all third-trimester abortions as something other than 'abortions,' as if
this will make the atrocity simply disappear. This is done for two
reasons: to assuage their own consciences, and to hoodwink a public that
is all to ready to accept the lie so the public's conscience
remains dulled. Robert Hall explains to us how this neat little semantic
trick is performed; "There is no doubt in my mind that these
[mongoloid] pregnancies should be and will be terminated; but there is
no logical reason why these terminations, if carried out beyond the
twentieth week, need be called 'abortions' ... I think we can live with
a 20-week definition if later interruptions are performed for
humanitarian reasons under a different semantic label."
Most pro-aborts will shrug and say that one percent is a very small
percentage. But one percent of 1.6 million is 16,000 third-trimester
abortions per year. In light of the fact that fifty percent of all
babies are viable with medical help at the beginning of the third
trimester, we see that about eight thousand viable babies are put to
death in this country each year (the current age of fetal viability
is discussed in Chapter 72, "Preborn: Fetal Development)."
The very fact that pro-aborts feel that one percent is a "very
small percentage" shows that they really couldn't care less about
the killing of viable babies. One way to highlight this extreme stance
is to ask the pro-abort if he would think that one percent of all Blacks
being lynched in South Africa would be a "very small
percentage," and therefore allowable.
Although there are very few abortuaries that kill preborn babies past
the 24th week, these few mills commit the vast majority of such grisly
procedures. Some abortuaries advertise for abortion well into the third
trimester in the Yellow Pages. Atlanta's Midtown Hospital, which does
abortions to 26 weeks and beyond, is a typical example.
A lot of attention was focused on the notorious Wichita
third-trimester killer, George Tiller, during Operation Rescue's 1991
"Summer of Mercy." It is significant that 6,000 pro-aborts
held a counter-rally in Wichita during OR's rescues. Their ardent
support for third-trimester abortions was displayed by a plane towing a
banner that read "WE LOVE YOU, DR. TILLER!"
Tiller admitted that he profits hugely from such barbaric procedures
when he complained in an editorial in a Kansas newspaper that
Sometime in the next legislative session, bills may be introduced
to prevent third-trimester abortions for fetal indications. Please
call or write your newly elected officials at the state and local
levels. Let them know that this option must be preserved for women and
families with a damaged fetus ... [Neonatal units] do not guarantee
good kids. There are very damaged, very dead, very vegetable-like kids
who come out of these neonatal care units.
The "Dreaded Complication."
Occasionally third-trimester abortions result in what doctors
commonly call "the dreaded complication:" a live, crying,
Abortionist Enrique Gerbi of Detroit Memorial hospital performed an
abortion in October 1984 which resulted in the live birth of a 29-week
girl. He essentially shrugged and said that "It happens all the
time. This is not the first time, and it won't be the last. It happens
all the time."
Dr. David A. Grimes, veteran Planned Parenthood abortionist,
estimates that from 500 to 3,000 babies survive prostaglandin and
hysterotomy abortions every year.
Such "botched abortions" can lead to a curious breed of
litigation: the "wrongful life" lawsuit. "Wrongful
life" suits are filed on behalf of a child alleging that he should
have been aborted. "Wrongful birth" suits are filed by parents
that claim that their child should have been aborted. Such
litigation has literally inverted the traditional legal theory of
"wrongful death" to create the "anti-tort" of
Whatever the terminology, the very existence of the term
"wrongful life" indicates just how far down the slippery slope
our legal system has already plunged.
Judith Hole and Ellen Levine's book Rebirth of Feminism neatly
summarizes the radical Neofeminist's attitude towards third-trimester
abortions. Note carefully that this same logic is used to justify all
abortions, even those committed for convenience, for any reason or for
no reason at all. Such a statement could even be used to justify
infanticide. The original logic used by the Neofeminists has simply been
extended to cover the disposal of viable babies:
... any woman who wishes to terminate a late pregnancy
undoubtedly has a very good reason and should have the right to do so.
In addition, they [radical Neofeminists] argue that the concepts of
"quickening" and "viability" are based on
religious doctrine and ancient myths about when "life"
begins. Any woman who believes in them will not seek an abortion
beyond the time dictated by her beliefs. All women, however, should
not be required to follow one doctrine.
Obviously, the identical argument could be used to support
infanticide or the killing of inconvenient toddlers.
The Massachusetts Experience.
In 1989, anti-life Massachusetts legislators pushed a so-called
"Prochoice Amendment" to their state's Constitution. In order
to make this Amendment more palatable to many of their colleagues,
sponsors wrote that third-trimester abortions would only be allowed to
save the life of the mother.
Incredibly, Neofeminists strongly condemned this exception on the
grounds that third-trimester abortions should be available for
convenience reasons (i.e., economics, to avoid embarrassment, etc.).
Some of the statements by the local radical press in opposition to
this Amendment outlined this extreme position. Marlene Fried baldly
summed up the basic Neofeminist position in the simplest possible terms
as she claimed that "The most basic aspect of abortion rights [is]
a woman's right to decide, at any point in pregnancy, for any
reason." And the Revolutionary Communist Party insisted that
"There are many different reasons why women get abortions. And they
are all valid."
The most revealing opposition to the "Prochoice Amendment"
was generated by the Reproductive Rights Network of Boston (R2N2). This
organization stated that;
The Reproductive Rights Network of Boston believes that it [the 'Prochoice'
Amendment to the Massachusetts Constitution] dangerously narrows
reproductive rights, and undermines the very movement we're trying to
build, by limiting abortion rights to the first 24 weeks of pregnancy
... This represents an alarming compromise of the basic feminist
principle that abortion is fundamentally a woman's choice ...
Restrictions in late abortion also uphold a disturbing concept that
has gotten play in the media and the legislature: that there are
morally reprehensible abortions ... Our priority now must be to expand
the notion of reproductive rights and to strengthen our message. This
is certainly not the time to voluntarily shrink our own demands.
Stubblefield Strikes Out.
In 1985, prominent abortion supporter Dr. Philip Stubblefield, past
president of the National Abortion Federation, suggested lowering the
upper limit on abortions to 22 weeks. He was certainly not at all
concerned about the agony inflicted upon viable babies; he simply wanted
to take one small step towards cleaning up the abortionist's filthy
However, Stubblefield was shouted down when he formally presented his
proposal to other leading pro-aborts. Abortion lawyer Janet Benshoof of
the American Civil Liberties Union demanded that there be no
upper gestational age limit, stating as fact that abortion on demand
"... is a precondition for all other legal and constitutional
guarantees of women's equality."
Despite his questionable motivations for banning third-trimester
abortions, Stubblefield appears to be unique among hard-core
abortionists. Dr. Frank Chernak summarized the callous opinion of other
late-term abortionists toward third-trimester killing in the New
England Journal of Medicine; "Prenatal death does not
constitute a harm, nor does the prenatal termination of the fetus' life
through induced abortion constitute an injury."
One of the many undesirable ethical situations that fertility drugs
and in-vitro fertilization (IVF) have created is a 'need' for
'pregnancy reduction' abortions. During such a procedure, the woman is
deemed to be carrying too many unborn babies, and the abortionist
selectively kills one or more of them.
The United States Congress' Committee on Small Business found that
many unregulated IVF enterprises deliberately implant an excessive
number of embryos during transfer procedures just to increase their
chances of success; "IVF success rates are so discouraging that
there are some centers trying to do better in terms of creating babies
by using multiple [embryo] implants. It shows at the forty-one [leading]
centers there were an average of three embryos used. Some centers use
more than that. When they do, they sometimes create multiple
pregnancies, three, four, five, or six babies.
Then they use fetal reduction, which is killing some fetuses to
preserve the health of the mother and to help the other fetuses
survive. That is a serious procedure. But because of the lack of
pressure to standardize, routinize, and assure quality in the centers
out there, we have this kind of dubious activity going on out
The usual scenario develops when an infertile woman receives
fertility drugs and then is found to be carrying so many babies that the
doctor claims that her life or theirs may be endangered.
This is not always the case. In one instance, a doctor told a woman
that her five babies would all die, but she chose to carry them all to
term. They were all born healthy, and the entire family was the subject
of a recent People Magazine cover story.
As always, abortionists lean on the 'hard case' argument. Some women
seem to think that twins are too many, and abortionists agree
with them. So the 'mother's health' argument, in general, doesn't hold
up when you can 'reduce' twins to one child with a sort of abominable
reverse 'Sophie's choice.' In other words, the mother is not selecting
which of two children will live, but which will die.
In fact, most pregnancy reductions are carried out to kill one of a
set of twins. Even in such apparently simple cases, 'pregnancy
reduction' is an abysmal failure at delivering its intended result. A
recent medical journal article stated that; "The first six twin
pregnancies to undergo selective termination at Mount Sinai Hospital
'worked out very badly,' with the unintended miscarriage of four
unaffected fetuses as well as the six targeted for abortion. These first
attempts involved the use of exsanguination [draining all of the blood
from the unborn babies] or injection of saline or an air embolism [to
cause heart attacks in the preborn babies], Dr. Berkowitz
As with all immoral and cowardly acts of murder, Newspeak is required
to insulate the 'doctors' and the 'mothers' from the reality of what
they are actually doing. The term 'pregnancy reduction' is a case in
point. Others go even further in their self-deceptive language. Dr.
Seymour Romney suggests that the 'roulette killing' of some of the
babies in a multiple pregnancy be called "enhanced survival of
multifetal pregnancies," or ESMP for short.
The 'pregnancy reduction' procedure has been in use for more than a
decade now and is now generally standardized. A needle is inserted
through the mother's abdominal wall into her uterus and potassium
chloride is injected into the hearts of the 'surplus' babies at random.
They die and are reabsorbed by the mother's body.
Two doctors described the procedure in the New England Journal of
Using ultra-sound to locate each fetus, the doctors would insert a
needle into the chest cavity of the most accessible fetus and place
the needle tip directly into the heart of the baby. Potassium chloride
was then injected into the heart and the heart was viewed on the
ultrasound screen until it stopped beating. Even at 9 weeks, 3 of the
12 fetuses selected for elimination presented problems. The heart
continued to beat and the procedure had to be repeated.
Other 'doctors' described how they killed two of five babies in a
slightly different procedure; "At ten weeks gestation, a reduction
in the number of embryos was performed at the Clamart Clinic in Paris.
Guided by real-time ultrasonography and under abdominal local anesthesia
(lidocaine 1 percent), ten milliliters of amniotic fluid from each of
the two sacs was aspirated [drawn out] through a ten centimeter long,
21-gauge needle. The tip of the needle was then directed into the
thoracic [chest] cavity of the fetus and a mixture of 1 milliliter of
dolosal and 3 milliliters of xylocaine was injected. The needle was left
in place for up to ten minutes until cessation of cardiac activity was
seen. If the initial injection was unsuccessful, it was repeated after
The Psychological Impacts.
It would seem logical that the babies who are lucky enough to avoid
the random 'death needle' may suffer extensively from 'survivor
syndrome' when they grow up if they find out about their narrow escape.
This syndrome is typically found in children whose parents chose to
abort siblings. How much stronger will the 'survivor syndrome' be in
children who escape death by mere millimeters, children who, just by
chance, are still alive?
And what of the mother? The vast majority of women who undergo embryo
transfer or IVF have been infertile for an extended period of time and
spend an average of $11,000 for their assisted reproduction procedures.
They obviously want a baby in the worst possible way.
So, after she experiences the intense joy of realizing that she is
finally pregnant, she is then told that she has too many babies. She has
to lie on her back for at least twenty minutes while a needle pierces
her abdomen and womb and injects poison into one or more of her baby's
hearts. Some of her children will die because of the off-chance that
their existence may compromise the health of her other children.
What must this do to these poor mothers?
Disposal of Fetal Remains.
A fetus is nothing! You won't get me to say I'm sorry for the
fetus. Abortion is much more important than the life of a child that
Abortionist Howard I. Diamond.
Pro-abortionists consider living preborn babies to be utterly
worthless. Therefore, it is not at all surprising that they should find
it morally acceptable to perform repulsive experiments upon them,
dispose of them in landfills along with dead animals, ransack their
organs, and even make them into paperweights and works of 'art.'
Pam Crosby, Clinical Coordinator at Prince George's Reproductive
Health Services, showed the repulsive and utter indifference of
experienced killers towards their helpless victims when she described
how her clinic dumped second-trimester babies in its trash; 'For the
most part it [fetal remains] is thrown out like in many doctors'
offices. If you had a wart removed or whatever (chuckle) you could make
Babies = Garbage.
It is very important to the pro-abortionists to deny any vestige of
humanity to the preborn, no matter how trivial. To allow them a decent
and humane burial would be to admit that maybe the preborn should
be accorded some dignity, and that maybe they do have intrinsic
Marvin R. Weisberg operated a pathology laboratory in Santa Monica.
His business went bankrupt, and a huge metal storage container in his
backyard was repossessed as a result. A crane could not lift the box, so
it was opened. It was crammed with 17,000 aborted babies weighing a
total of three and a half tons. Weisberg also had 400 aborted babies
stored in his house. 42 of these weighed five or more pounds.
Local pro-life activists offered to bury the babies in a dignified
and humane manner, but the American Civil Liberties Union and the
Feminist Women's Health Centers filed suit to stop the burial, because,
as they alleged, the preborn babies were only "unwanted biological
tissue," and such burial would, of course, "violate the
separation of Church and State."
In Wichita and in other cities, pro-lifers have discovered aborted
preborn babies as large as six pounds (full-term) being burned as
garbage along with dead dogs, cats, and birds thrown out by local Humane
Such atrocities are becoming rare. An Austrian company manufactures
tiny stainless-steel ovens that incinerate the corpses of the dead
aborted babies cleanly and efficiently. More than half of its sales are
to abortuaries in the United States.
Does anyone out there feel a chill wind from the past anymore?
Nazi doctors performed repulsive experiments upon concentration camp
inmates during World War II. This 'research' included severing women's
breasts (while they were still alive) in order to measure their fat
content, immersing men in frigid water until they died in order to test
the insulating capacity of flight suits, and injecting various poisons
and viruses into victims.
Those possessing the Nazi mentality have had another half-century to
refine their atrocities. Their helpless victims are now the preborn
children of our country. Some of the experiments that abortionists
perform on these babies are so repulsive that they seem to be almost
An anesthetist at Pittsburgh's Magee Women's Hospital described
before the Pennsylvania Abortion Commission how third-trimester babies
were deliberately aborted alive and then packed in ice for shipment to
laboratories. She said that "It was repulsive to watch live fetuses
being packed in ice while still moving and trying to breathe, then being
rushed to a laboratory."
A Stanford doctor also testified that experiments included
"slicing open the rib cage of a still-living human fetus in order
to observe the heart action."
Other experiments have included severing the heads of preborn babies
to measure gas flow across membranes and deliberately keeping late-term
aborted preborn babies alive as long as possible in pressurized vessels
for the purpose of researching extracorporeal gestation.
For more information on fetal experimentation and fetal organ
harvesting, see Chapters 73 and 74, respectively.
Dead Babies As Art.
It may seem impossible to believe, but some warped and twisted minds
consider the sad little carcasses of aborted preborn babies suitable
objects for jewelry and artwork for public display.
During the second half of the 1980s, several 'artists'
"created" earrings and other forms of adornment that featured
small preborn babies encased in plastic or plexiglass. These
"works" were widely praised by art critics.
In 1989, the "Helms Degenerate Art Show/Protest" at New
York City's Black and White in Color gallery received a symbolic $500
National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) subgrant from "Artist
Space." This show featured Shawn Eichman's "Alchemy
Cabinet," which displayed her own dismembered second-trimester
aborted baby next to the obligatory twisted, bloody wire coat hanger.
Eichman (no relation to Adolf) proudly described her display as
"Degenerate with a capital 'D.'"[37,38]
These displays were vigorously defended by the Art Establishment
because all of the artists were pro-abortion and were transmitting a
Neoliberal message. After Eichman's 'work' drew a barrage of protests,
National Council on the Arts member Jacob Neusner proposed that the NEA
adopt language prohibiting the funding of works of art that
"utilize and part of an actual human embryo or fetus."
He was laughed at, and his proposal was defeated by the lopsided
score of 10 to 2. Three council members privately said to him that
"You can make beautiful earrings out of pieces of
Of course, if aborted babies are in good condition, they can be very
aesthetically pleasing. What better conversation piece to have on one's
desk than a perfect little preborn child?
In 1976, investigators discovered that a Chicago biological supply
firm was supplying bodies and organs of preborn aborted babies as
paperweights. They charged $90 for the brain of a preborn $70 for a set
of its lungs, and $60 for its intestines. An encased baby foot went for
$70 and the complete 10-week baby cost $97.80.
All reputable [abortion] clinics do their best to obtain a truly
informed consent, and to refer patients needing further counseling to
an appropriate community agency. Most clinics refuse service to those
they believe are not informed and have not made a decision or who will
feel exploited at some later date.
It seems unlikely that a woman will obtain adequate counsel and
support from the attending physician at an abortion clinic ...
Justice Potter Stewart, concurring opinion
in Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth, 428 U.S.
52, 91 (1976).
The Big Lie.
One of the most persistent lies of the pro-abortionists is their very
labeling of themselves as 'pro-choice.'
The word 'choice' implies a decision made without undue pressure and
with all pertinent facts available for inspection.
However, the pro-abortionists fanatically resist any attempts to tell
women about their preborn babies. Pro-life sidewalk counselors are
assaulted, blocked, and sued in attempts to keep them from giving any
information to women entering abortuaries. 'Doctors' and 'counselors'
are instructed in manuals to deceive patients and to refuse to discuss
the preborn baby. And Planned Parenthood and their detestable ilk battle
any initiative or legislation requiring informed consent.
Finally, the gaze of the entire pro-abortion movement seems to be
directed away from what they are doing. Arch-abortionist Warren Hern
displays this deep denial when he wrote that "Television
interviews, in particular, should focus on the public issue involved
(right to confidential and professional medical care, freedom of choice,
and so forth) and not on the specific details of the abortion
Some quotes by these 'anti-choice fanatics' against informed consent
for women are shown in Figure 61-2.
STATEMENTS BY PRO-ABORTIONISTS OPPOSING INFORMED CONSENT
Vital signs should be observed regularly, and a Doppler [for
listening to the fetal heartbeat] inaudible to the patient should be
used at intervals to determine the presence or absence of fetal heart
tones ... This [informed consent] is a controversial area, but most
professionals in the field feel that it is not advisable for patients
to view the products of conception, to be told the sex of the fetus,
or to be informed of a multiple pregnancy.
Abortionist Warren Hern. Abortion
Practice. 1984, J.B. Lippincott Company, pages 145 and 304.
Sonography in connection with induced abortion may have
psychological hazards. Seeing a blown-up, moving image of the embryo
she is carrying can be distressing to a woman who is about to undergo
an abortion, Dr. Sally Faith Dorfman noted. She stressed that the
screen should be turned away from the patient. Staff members may also
be affected by sonographic images and may need opportunities for
venting their feelings and reconfirming their priorities, Dr. Dorfman
Obstetrics and Gynecology News
editorial, February 15-28, 1986.
Another set of questions involves the opposition. Has your audience
seen anti-abortion propaganda? Are you debating a Right-to-Lifer? Is
the opposition bringing slides or pictures? Try to insist that they
not be allowed to ... Find out if your opposition is bringing
audio-visuals. Try to insist that you will only speak if they do not
... Explain that you are equally repulsed by the [pro-life] photos,
that you are human and love children and babies as much as anyone else
... The pictures they [the audience] have seen must be discredited.
They have been magnified so much as to remove the facts from
scientific perspective. Really, in early stages, the fetus is smaller
than a fingernail, can fit into a walnut shell, and is much like
menstrual flow to the naked eye. We would be repulsed by a magnified
picture of an eyeball in formaldehyde also.
Looseleaf booklet entitled "Organizing
for Action." Prepared by Vicki Z. Kaplan for the National Abortion
Rights Action League. 51 pages, 1974. See especially page 24,
"Organizing a Speakers Bureau," and pages 29 and 32,
"Introduction to Debating."
Health care professionals bear a responsibility for communicating
realistic information about abortion to women in their care. They
should assume responsibility for dispelling old wives' tales about the
harmful effects of the procedure. Informed consent is a necessary
ingredient of care, but as with any other procedure, the individual
client and her characteristics should be evaluated before deciding
just what is informed consent. Communicating information can be
punitive or supportive.
E. Dorsey Smith. Abortion and Health Care
Ethics. Quoted in Mary K. Culp's review on page 7 of the October 24,
1985 National Right to Life News.
Their Kind of Informed Consent.
Notice that the last quote in Figure 61-2 shows that 'informed
consent' can be anything that a 'counselor' or abortionist wants
it to be. The pro-abort version of 'informed consent' certainly never
includes information on fetal development, because such data would, of
course, be "punitive." Notice also that any information on the
physical or psychological harm of abortion is dismissed out of hand as
"old wives' tales" (a sexist and exploitative term if ever
there was one)!
Smith goes on to admit that the majority of nurses are pro-life
(because of their "Catholic background," the bigot
conjectures), and recommends that any nurse in the obstetrics-gynecology
field who is pro-life would best serve everyone's interests by getting
out of nursing!
Keep the Public Ignorant as Well.
It is not only pro-abortion individuals who resist informed consent;
well-known pro-abort organizations are leading the charge to suppress
information on abortion not only in the clinics, but in the public arena
This is a good tactical move on the part of the pro-abortionists.
They always tell us that the majority should rule in our
"pluralistic society," but conveniently ignore the fact that a
comprehensive nationwide Newsweek poll showed that a whopping 88%
of the American public supports women seeking abortions being
"counseled on the dangers and on alternatives to abortion."
Only 9 percent disagreed.
At the October 1989 annual conference of the National Abortion Rights
Action League, pollster Harrison Hickman stated in a workshop entitled
'Framing and Selling the Pro-Choice Message' that "Probably nothing
has been as damaging to our cause as technological advances that show
pictures of the fetus."
Dr. Vincent Rue is the country's leading expert on post-abortion
syndrome and is Executive Director of the Sir Thomas More Marriage and
Family Center, based in Downey, California. According to him, Planned
Parenthood successfully pressured the publishers Harper & Row into
canceling Dr. Anne Speckhard's book Psycho-Social Stress Following
The abortionists are correct, of course. If the public ever gets wind
of just how blatant their lies and killing are, abortion will be a thing
of the past.
Human Life of Washington (the state Right to Life affiliate) placed a
series of ads on Washington Transit Authority busses. These ads
consisted of a photograph of a 17-week old unborn baby swimming in its
mother's womb with the caption "ENJOY LIFE. GOOD THINGS COME IN
SMALL PACKAGES." The objective of the ads was not to stop
abortions, but to warn the public about the effects of alcohol syndrome,
substance abuse, and diet on fetal development.
The Reproductive Rights Task Force of the Seattle Chapter of the
National Organization for Women (NOW) immediately initiated a telephone
campaign directed against Washington Transit, claiming that the photos
and ads were, in NOW's lofty opinion, "too graphic." The
Washington Transit Authority quickly broke its contract with Human Life
and obediently pulled the ads.
A NOW spokeswoman explained that "NOW works to promote and
protect the human rights of women. It is in keeping with the work that
we do that we protest advertising the intent of which is harmful to the
health and well-being of women, and which deprives women of their full
rights as human beings."
When asked how the advertising was "harmful to the health and
well-being of women," and how it "deprives women of their full
rights as human beings," the NOW people refused to answer.
In other words, NOW does not even want the public to know basic facts
about human reproduction, because the sight of a healthy unborn baby
might make some women change their minds about abortion!
No Pictures, Please.
Color photographs of beautiful living preborn babies are anathema to
pro-abortionists. They label the use of such photos in debates
"disgusting" and "exploitative." Naturally, a
pro-life debater can embarrass his opponent by asking just how such a
photo is "disgusting" or "exploitative."
Many pro-aborts, after having been thrashed in a series of debates,
simply refuse to debate pro-lifers any more. Others will not debate if
any graphics are used by pro-lifers. This is all part of the desire to
keep the public ignorant.
Abortionist Warren Hern writes that "In Colorado, the pro-choice
community has decided after some period of disagreement and discussion
to refuse all invitations to debate.
On the other hand, schools make frequent requests to present both
sides of the abortion issue to students ... If the sponsors want both
sides presented, however, the presentations must be made on different
occasions. We insist that visual aid materials not be presented by
The pro-abortionists say that those who do not agree with them should
remain neutral and uncommitted on the issue. However, in reality, the
anti-life mentality demands that everyone support its viewpoint
wholeheartedly. The reasons for this are subtle but understandable. The
anti-life personality must never be confronted with accusations of
wrongdoing which would breach the thin veneer of self-denial and cause
the person to go through the painful process of self-examination.
No Pro-Life Doctors.
Pro-aborts would like to see all pro-life doctors lose their
licenses. If this sounds ludicrous, consider the situation which now
exists in Great Britain.
The British National Health Service does not allow gynecologists to
refuse to perform abortions, and conscience clauses are unheard of under
the socialized medical system. One doctor was advised that "There
is no room for Catholics in this part of the National Health
The same state of affairs used to exist in this country. With the
eager backing of every pro-abortion group in the country, many medical
schools used to grill prospective applicants on their views and then
refuse admission to all candidates who dared express any opposition to
or uneasiness about abortion. Many obstetrics-gynecology graduates were
refused residencies for the same reason.
Studies performed by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare
(HEW) and by Eugene F. Diamond, M.D., found that two-thirds of all
medical schools either asked their applicants about their views on
abortion (which has absolutely nothing to do with academic
accomplishments or competence), or admitted that the subject was
broached during interviews. Some school interviewers stated that an
applicant's opposition to abortion would be a negative factor on his
record. Fully one-sixth of the schools said that opposition to abortion
by students created insurmountable "administrative
difficulties" that would be considered when it was time to award
slots in new medical school classes. One paper revealed the reason for
this bias; "Studies have shown that students who come in contact
with women seeking abortions learn the proper medical techniques and are
more likely, later in their careers, to have tolerant attitudes about
abortion and to be willing to perform the procedure."
For years, the Residency Review Committee of the American Board of
Obstetrics and Gynecology held that a doctor had to know abortion
procedures in order to be considered "competent and safe," and
the Council on Resident Education in Obstetrics and Gynecology (CREOG)
listed abortion as a skill that all doctors should learn and practice.
Finally, Senator Richard S. Schweiker (R-Pa.) introduced S.784 in
February of 1977 and, in November of the same year, an attachment to
S.2159, the 'Conscience Clause' of the Public Programs Act of 1973
amendments, in order to correct medical school bias against pro-lifers.
Of course, pro-abortion groups still contest the right of physicians
to not perform abortions. All pro-abortion groups oppose medical
'conscience clauses' for doctors and nurses. The so-called 1990
"Freedom of Choice Act," sponsored by virtually all
pro-abortion United States Congressmen and Senators, would have
specifically banned all conscience clauses.
This idiocy commonly occurs at the state level as well. In March
1991, pro-abort Maryland legislators passed a law that repealed the
state's 24-year old conscience clause and mandated that hospitals that
do not make abortion referrals (including Catholic hospitals) will no
longer be protected by insurance. Pro-lifers accurately tagged this law
the "Abortion Industry Protection Act of 1991." The only
restriction in this law is a parental-notification clause, which can be
overridden if the abortionist decides the minor is mature enough to make
her own decision. Obviously, in the eyes of an abortionist, all
minors are mature enough to make such a decision. After all, there's
money to be made!
Many pro-aborts have gone so far as to claim that any pro-life
medical professional is, by definition, incompetent and must immediately
get out of medical practice!
How's that for 'freedom of choice?'
Perhaps sensing that the war on individual conscience clauses would
be a tough battle, the pro-aborts have turned their attention to
pro-life medical institutions.
In late 1990, United States District Court Judge Herbert Murray ruled
that the Catholic St. Agnes Hospital of Baltimore would lose its
accreditation as an obstetrics and gynecology teaching facility if it
did not teach its residents how to abort and sterilize.
Maryland has a conscience clause, but Judge Murray simply dismissed
it as "irrelevant."
St. Agnes is one of 41 Catholic hospitals in the United States with
obstetrics/gynecology residency programs. Acceptance to the St. Agnes
residency program requires adherence to its pro-life philosophy.
The litigation began 1986 when the Accreditation Council for Graduate
Medical Education (ACGME) withdrew the hospital's accreditation for
program "deficiencies." St. Agnes sued the ACGME, but Judge
Murray ruled that the ACGME move was "justified" because of
its "compelling interest in satisfactory physician
In other words, Judge Murray was stating that, if you are a pro-life
doctor who doesn't perform abortions, you are by definition
improperly educated and incompetent! The implications of this bizarre
ruling are almost unlimited.
The basic human [abortion] right necessarily involved would be
destroyed if a husband could insist that the child be born ... It is
impossible to give him [the husband] a veto over his wife's abortion,
if her constitutional rights respecting childbirth are to be
effective, and such power is also utterly inconsistent with our
emerging concepts of fundamental women's rights in general.
Nancy F. Wechsler.
Pro-abortionists are the most sexist creatures on earth. They seek to
deny men any input whatever regarding the decision on whether or not to
become a father. The Neofeminists constantly blubber about their
"reproductive rights" while simultaneously ignoring the same
rights for men.
At the same time the Neofeminists viciously defend this glaring
double standard, they wonder why men do not respect them and support
their demands for full equality.
The reaction of Louise Tyrer, vice-president of medical affairs at
Planned Parenthood, was typical of the utter callousness that
pro-abortionists show towards any rights other than their own; "But
it doesn't matter how much men scream and holler that they are being
left out [of the abortion decision]. There are some things that they are
never going to be able to experience fully. I say, 'tough
luck.'" And Marjorie Reiley Maguire and Daniel C. Maguire,
members of the bogus religious group 'Catholics' for a Free Choice,
counsel that "Nor is [abortion] a question of the man's rights. You
have no moral obligation to consult him or to consider his desire that
you continue the pregnancy."
The Danforth Decision.
The United States Supreme Court ruled on father's rights in its Planned
Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth decision of July 7, 1976.
Among other findings, the Court held that any requirement that a
husband or parent be informed about a wife's or minor's abortion is
This decision stripped fathers of any legal right whatever to protect
their own preborn children. The father therefore has less of a right to
protect his own child than abortion referral agents have to
arrange its death, the abortionists to kill it, or the State to declare
his slightest opposition unconstitutional and punishable. His
relationship to his own child is deemed much less important than his
relationship to a piece of property say a car stereo.
On the other hand, the Danforth decision enforced
"mandatory fatherhood" for those men who did not want a
child. In summary, a father has literally no voice whatever in the
decision to have or not have a child. And this glaring and hurtful
inequality is ignored by the same Neofeminists who are demanding
In his dissent, Justice Byron White stated that "It is truly
surprising that the majority finds in the United States Constitution, as
it must in order to justify the result it reaches, a rule that the State
must assign a greater value to a mother's decision to cut off a
potential human life by abortion than to a father's decision to let it
mature into a live child."
The Conn Decision.
In this allegedly "advanced" American society, with its
ridiculously inverted values, the almighty State has mandated that a
father's right to protect his own preborn children takes a back seat to
a woman's literally unlimited right to abortion even if the reason given
is profoundly trivial.
The Conn v. Conn case was the first pure 'father's rights'
litigation brought to the attention of the Supreme Court of the United
States, and decisively demonstrated that fathers have no rights whatever
regarding their preborn children.
In this court case, James Bopp of National Right to Life represented
Erin Andrew Conn of Elkhart, Indiana, who won a court order in June 1988
barring his wife, six weeks pregnant, from having an abortion. She
defied the court injunction and the wishes of the father of her preborn
child and obtained an abortion with the help of the American Civil
Liberties Union. Her lawyer, Richard A. Waples of the Indiana ACLU,
stated in legal papers that "she did what she had to do to protect
both her physical and emotional health." Sounds like a pretty
serious reason to get an abortion, doesn't it?
In reality, court documents showed that she had the abortion because
she had planned a trip to the beach and wanted to look good in her new
A state appeals court eventually overturned the ruling of the trial
court, and the Indiana Supreme Court upheld the appeals court ruling. A
dissenting judge mused that "At least up to now, no right has been
determined to be absolute."
On November 14, 1988, the United States Supreme Court unanimously
refused to hear Bopp's appeal of the appeals court, and therefore
essentially agreed that a father has no rights or claim whatsoever to
his unborn child. It is really not surprising that the Supreme Court
refused to hear this appeal, because even it is constrained by its own
prior rulings, in particular the Danforth decision. For
pro-abortionists, every case is a "hard case" even this one.
When challenged about the trivial nature of such abortions, pro-aborts
will either duck the question or stupidly assert that a woman's
self-image is much more important than the life of her child.
According to a national poll, more than half of all fathers including
married men are not even told that their child has been
Public Opinion Polls on Father's Rights.
Pro-abortionists love to quote heavily-doctored public opinion polls
that 'show' that 75 percent (80 percent, 88 percent, pick a number that
sounds good) of all American adults think that abortion should remain
legal. They bring up these polls in order to paint pro-lifers as a tiny
(but always 'vocal') minority who should be ignored by the public. They
also point to the polls to shore up their assertion that the 'majority'
should rule and abortion should remain legal.
Naturally, pro-aborts ignore public opinion polls that go against
The most well-documented and well-known poll on national abortion
attitudes was performed by the Boston Globe and WBZ-TV on March
27-29, 1989. Two questions addressed spousal rights regarding abortion;
RESULTS OF POLL QUESTIONS ON SPOUSAL RIGHTS
QUESTION: "In this case, do you
think it should be legal or illegal for a woman to obtain an
"Mother wants abortion
but father wants
"Father wants abortion
but mother wants
This extensive poll clearly shows that three-quarters of the American
public wants each spouse to have essentially a "veto power"
over the abortion decision. Yet pro-abortionists still insist that the
pro-life view is a "minority position" that should be ignored
by the general public. As always with selfish pro-aborts, their own
rights are paramount, and the rights of everyone else take a distant
For information on how lying pro-abortionists conduct phony public
opinion polls and doctor other polls to reflect their own viewpoints,
see Chapter 76, "Public Opinion Polls on Abortion."
Impacts on Fathers and Relationships.
While Neofeminists demand total control over the abortion decision,
they callously disregard the feelings and needs of men, whom they lock
out of the process with grim determination. And while they demand that
men be more 'sensitive' and 'caring,' they mandate that men may have no
say in the decision regarding whether or not their own child lives.
This selfish hypocrisy can only lead to anger and hurt on the part of
men and a subsequent tremendous strain on relationships.
Researcher Arthur Shostak surveyed 1,000 men waiting in abortion
mills while their girlfriends and wives were being aborted. He tallied
and analyzed their responses to his questions on their feelings and
concluded the following;
42% of the boyfriends had offered to marry the woman;
25% of those who did not offer to marry the woman offered child
Most of the men, regardless of their feelings toward abortion,
pay the costs of the abortion 'procedure;'
39% of the men believed that life began at conception or when the
system began to function; and
26% believed that the abortion was the "killing of a
Shostak's study, not surprisingly, found a vast range of emotions
among the men. They feared for the women's health, felt guilty about the
abortion or the pregnancy, felt self-doubt, and also anguish and pain
over the loss of their children and over the entire abortion
Just as childbirth is not a trivial issue for a woman, abortion is
not a trivial issue for a man. University of Maryland psychologist
Arnold Medvene says that "Abortion is one of the major death
experiences that men go through. It resurrects very important, very
primitive issues, memories, and feelings."
When men are purposely and systematically shut out of such an
important decision, they (being men) must take some kind of action
to relieve their frustrations. Clinical studies have shown that men
become angry when they are purposely omitted from an important decision
that involves their own family, and they feel deceived and manipulated.
The man may not show his anger at the time of the abortion, but it will
eventually express itself through "hooking," a process of
reacting angrily to a situation that he associates with the
abortion. In other words, he may feel strong emotions when he sees a
child that is the same age as his aborted child would have been, or when
he sees a pregnant mother. This kind of reaction is remarkably similar
to those of women suffering from post-abortion syndrome (PAS).
Most commonly, however, a man reacts to an abortion that was
committed over his objections by dumping his wife or girlfriend. One
study showed that three-fourths of the relationships between married and
unmarried couples fell apart within one month of the
One organization that compiles information on father's rights and
engages in litigation that is intended to reverse the current
atrociously biases state of affairs is Fathers for Life, whose address
and telephone numbers are listed below.
Father's Rights Legal Services Association
3623 Douglas Avenue
Des Moines, Iowa 50310
Telephone: (515) 277-8789
The Disreputable Nature of
Abortionists are the pariahs of our society they dispose of unwanted
human beings, a filthy and repulsive business that is nevertheless
looked upon by society as a necessary and vital public service by those
people who believe abortion should remain legal for just the exceptions
"rape, incest and me."
Abortionists are generally looked down upon by their more talented
and principled peers. Many abortionists are mere technicians, performing
only abortions that even Neofeminists believe can be done safely and
efficiently by lay people. Their days are spent steeped in death,
performing the same simple procedure over and over again, until they
become virtual mechanisms, without feelings, morals, or spirit.
It is not surprising that these people are dredged from the bottom of
medical school classes, get into medicine just to make money, and commit
violent crimes with alarming frequency.
Check Your Consciences at the Door, Please.
Through history, doctors have committed the most grisly atrocities
imaginable. But they do not just decide one day to violate the laws of
nature and of man; they must first go through the process of gradually
deadening their consciences to the point where they can justify or
rationalize any violent, perverted or unnatural act. Nazi abortionist
Josef Mengele (The "Angel of Death") and his fellow mass
murderers went through this process, and modern-day abortionists have
described it as well.
Writer Magda Denes quotes a doctor who has managed to deaden his own
conscience to the point where nothing affects him any more not even
You have to become a bit schizophrenic. In one room you encourage
the patient that the slight irregularity of the fetal heart is not
important, everything is going well, she is going to have a nice baby,
and then you shut the door and go into the next room and assure
another patient on whom you just did a saline abortion that it's fine
if the heart is already irregular, she has nothing to worry about, she
is not going to have a live baby. I mean you definitely have to make a
180-degree turn, but somehow it evolved in my own mind gradually, and
I have no trouble now making the switch ...
Denes also shows us that some people not only support and facilitate
abortion, they have descended to the appalling state where they get
almost sexually excited when discussing late-term killings. Denes quotes
social worker Dora Greenwald; "It's a really interesting thing that
is happening. It's fascinating, when you can think about it clinically
and not get involved in the babies, or the people ... Several times I
saw really beautiful things happen, I mean it's physically beautiful.
Sometimes you can see the vagina opening up and the entire thing coming
out at once ... It's a really interesting thing, and it got me very
Crimes By Abortionists.
El Paso abortionist Raymond Showery was convicted of murder in 1976
for drowning a baby who survived one of his abortions and was sentenced
to 15 years in prison. Miami abortionist Hipolito Barreiro was arrested
and charged with manslaughter after he killed four women in four years.
Fort Lauderdale abortionist Theodore Lehrer handcuffed his wife, tied
her to a table, raped her, and then forcibly aborted her. Buffalo
abortionist Barnett Slepian attacked pro-lifers with a baseball bat for
the heinous offense of singing Christmas carols outside his home.
Indianapolis abortionist Pravin Thakkar aborted three of his
girlfriends without their knowledge or consent. One of the babies he
murdered was 8 months old. He was sent to federal prison for 16 years.
Boston abortionist Kenneth Edelin bungled a late-term abortion and
strangled the baby to cover up his incompetence. His conviction was
overturned by an appeals court and today he is Chairman of the Board of
the Planned Parenthood Federation of America and has narrated Planned
Parenthood videos aimed at teenagers. He also became chairman of the
National Abortion Rights Action League Medical Advisory Committee
shortly after he had killed the baby.
The list of the incredible violence committed by these white-coated
thugs goes on and on and on. And yet, the pro-aborts, like good little
robots, continue to vigorously defend them and attempt to muddy the
water by hypocritically calling pro-lifers 'violent.'
For a list of more than 100 major cases of murder, attempted murder,
manslaughter, rape, forced abortion, robbery, kidnapping, infanticide,
and other serious crimes committed by abortionists and pro-aborts, see
Chapter 19 of Volume I, "Anti-Life Violence."
Britain is Infested Too.
One of the prime indicators of the abortionist's hideous reputation
is that it is the same all over the world. They are by nature violent
liars and murderers, because their unholy father Satan has been a liar
and a murderer from the beginning.
A major British newspaper clearly identified the effect that free and
easy abortion is having on Britain's medical profession;
The drastic increase in the number of abortions is having a
corrosive effect on Britain's doctors. The law has allowed
unscrupulous medical men to amass huge sums, bringing general
discredit on the profession. Undesirable students, says the Royal
College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, are specialising in the
subject because they see fortunes to be made.
References: Methodology and Aspects of Abortion.
 Abortionist Warren Hern, addressing the Association of Planned
Parenthood Physicians at their 1978 convention in San Diego.
Presentation entitled "WHAT ABOUT US? Staff Reactions to the
D&E Procedure." Quoted in The Advocate (publication of
Advocates for Life Ministries, Portland, Oregon), March 1986, page 15.
 Ronald J. Pion, M.D., Alan J. Wabrek, M.D., and William B.
Wilson, Jr., M.D. "Innovative Methods in the Prevention of the Need
for Abortion." Sarah Lewit (Editor). Abortion Techniques and
Services: Proceedings of the Conference, New York, N.Y., June 3-5, 1971.
Amsterdam: Excerpta Medica, 1972.
 British abortionist describing a new late-term abortion
procedure. Quoted in HLI Reports, June 1986, and in "Just
Another Piece of Meat?" ALL About Issues, August-September
1986, pages 51 and 52. The umbilical cord is cut on the first day, and,
after the preborn baby dies and begins to decay, the abortionist pulls
 Abortionist Edward Allred, quoted in The San Diego Union,
October 12, 1980. Also quoted in Anthony Perry. "Doctor's Abortion
Business Is Lucrative." ALL About Issues, December
1980, pages 10, 14, and 15.
 "Let's Tell the Truth About Abortion." Pamphlet
distributed by Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood. 1985, 22 pages. Fight
Back Press, Post Office Box 61421, Denver, Colorado 80206. Pages 9 and
 Warren Hern, M.D. Abortion Practice. 1984, J.B. Lippincott
Company, pages 154, 323, and 325.
 Martin Haskell, M.D. "Dilatation and Extraction for Late
Second Trimester Abortion." Contained in National Abortion
Federation. Second Trimester Abortion: From Every Angle.
"Fall Risk Management Seminar, September 13-14, 1992, Dallas,
Texas. Presentations, Bibliography & Related Materials." 1992.
 Russell Sacco, M.D., quoted in James Long. "Infants Aborted
Alive: Officials Wink at Laws." The Oregon Journal, March
14, 1982, pages 4 and 5.
 Nancy B. Kaltreider, Sadja Goldsmith, and Alan J. Margolis.
"The Impact of Midtrimester Abortion Techniques on Patients and
Staff." American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology,
September 15, 1979, pages 255 to 238.
 Judith P. Bourne. "Health Professionals' Attitudes About
Abortion." Sarah Lewit (Editor). Abortion Techniques and
Services: Proceedings of the Conference, New York, N.Y., June 3-5, 1971.
Amsterdam: Excerpta Medica, 1972.
 Holtrop and Waife. Uterine Aspiration Techniques in Family
Planning (Second Edition). The Pathfinder Fund, 1979.
 Alan Guttmacher Institute figures, quoted by Richard D. Glasow,
Ph.D. "Abortion Statistics Paint Grim Picture." National
Right to Life News, May 28, 1987, pages 5 and 16.
 'Religious' Coalition for Abortion Rights. "Words of
Choice." 24-page propaganda booklet, 1991, Washington, D.C., page
 United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
Reference Book and Guide to Sources, Statistical Abstract of the
United States. 1990 (110th edition). Washington, DC: United States
Government Printing Office.
 Robert E. Hall, M.D. "Time Limitation in Induced
Abortion." In Sarah Lewit (Editor). Abortion Techniques and
Services: Proceedings of the Conference, New York, N.Y., June 3-5, 1971.
Amsterdam: Excerpta Medica, 1972.
 Steve Otto. "Choice Supporters Rally, Assail Operation
Rescue." People's Daily World, August 31, 1991, page 7.
 George R. Tiller. "Don't Prohibit Third Trimester
Abortions." Letter to The Hays [Kansas] Daily News, January
6, 1989, page 4. Also see Tiller's quote in Michael Martinez.
"Late-Term Abortions at Clinic Draw Clients, Foes From Many
States." Washington Post, August 22, 1987, page A5.
 Leslie Bond. "Another Abortion Survivor at Detroit Memorial
Hospital." National Right to Life News, July 31, 1986, page
 David A. Grimes. "Second-Trimester Abortions in the United
States." Alan Guttmacher Institute, Family Planning Perspectives,
 Lisa Andrusko. "A Fact of Life: Is Abortion Legal Only in
the First Three Months of Pregnancy?" National Right to Life
News, January 23, 1986, page 1.
 Judith Hole and Ellen Levine. Rebirth of Feminism.
Quadrangle Books: New York, 1971. Page 288.
 Marlene Fried. "Pro-Choice Agendas After Webster."
Against the Current, November/December 1989, page 20.
 "Women Are Not Incubators!: The Assault on Abortion
Rights." Revolutionary Communist Party of the United States, Revolutionary
Worker, November 6, 1989. Also distributed as a special reprint
booklet, page 6.
 Reproductive Rights Network of Boston. "R2N2 Opposes
Coalition's Amendment." Sojourner: The Women's Forum, April
1990, page 8.
 Richard D. Glasow, Ph.D. "Public Revulsion to Late
Abortions Worries Pro-Abortionists." National Right to Life News,
November 21, 1985, pages 5 and 9.
 Frank Chernak, et al., "When is Termination of
Pregnancy During the Third Trimester Morally Justified?" New
England Journal of Medicine. Volume 310, No. 8, page 502.
 Committee on Small Business. Consumer Protection Issues
Involved in In Vitro Fertilization Clinics." Washington,
D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1988. Pages 26 and 27.
 "Selective Abortion in Multiple Gestation." Obstetrics
and Gynecology News, August 1-14, 1989.
 As quoted in Debra Evans. Without Moral Limits: Women,
Reproduction, and the New Medical Technology. Westchester, Illinois:
Crossway Books, 1989. Page 116.
 "Selective Abortion, AKA Pregnancy Reduction." New
England Journal of Medicine, April 21, 1988. Also see R.L.
Berkowitz, L. Lynch, U. Chitkara, I.A. Wilkins, K.E. Mehalek, and E.
Alvarez. "Selective Reduction of Multifetal Pregnancies in the
First Trimester." New England Journal of Medicine, April 21,
1988, pages 1,043 to 1,047.
 Rene Frydman et al. "Reduction of the Number of
Embryos in a Multiple Pregnancy: From Quintuplet to Triplet." Fertility
and Sterility, August 1987, pages 326 and 327.
 Abortionist Howard I. Diamond of Beth Israel Medical Center.
Quoted in Norma Rosen. "Between Guilt and Gratification: Abortion
Doctors Reveal Their Feelings." New York Times Magazine,
April 17, 1977, page 78.
 Pam Crosby, Clinical Coordinator at Prince George's Reproductive
Health Services, on the clinic dumping second-trimester babies in their
trash. Quoted in Debra Braun. "Bodies of Aborted Babies Thrown in
Trash at Maryland Clinic." National Right to Life News,
December 8, 1983, page 5.
 Syndicated columnist Nick Thimmesch. "Bizarre Cases of
Abortions Gone Awry." St. Louis Globe-Democrat, June 19-20,
1982, page 5.
 Leslie Bond. "16,500 Aborted Babies Buried, But Without
Religious Services." National Right to Life News, September
26, 1985, page 6.
 Dave Andrusko. "Fetal Bodies Incinerates Along With Animal
Remains in Wichita, Kansas." National Right to Life News,
August 18, 1983, pages 1 and 11.
 "American Liberty Upside Down Aborted Fetus As Art is
Censored." ALL About Issues, February 1984, pages 28 and 29.
 "Some Praise 'Fetus Earrings:' NEA Council Defeats
Commonsense Reforms Inside Washington." Action News
(Pro-Life Action League, Chicago), December 1990/January 1991, page 15.
 William Brennan. The Abortion Holocaust. St. Louis: Landmark
Press, 1983. Pages 77 and 78.
 Ann McDaniel. "The Future of Abortion." Newsweek
Magazine, July 17, 1989, pages 14 to 27.
 Human Life of Washington State. Human Life News, January/
February 1990, page 1.
 Charles Isenhart. "Experts Discuss Impact of 'Post-Abortion
Syndrome.'" National Catholic Register, June 24, 1990, pages
1 and 9.
 "Pro-Life Ad Pulled From Seattle Buses." Portland,
Oregon Catholic Sentinel. November 3, 1989, page 22.
 Living World, Volume 5, Number 2, page 28.
 "The New Scandal: Doctor on the Make." London Daily
Express, January 12, 1973.
 Eugene F. Diamond, M.D. "Do the Medical Schools
Discriminate Against Anti-Abortion Applicants?" Linacre
Quarterly, February 1976. Also see Doug Harbrecht. "School Bias
on Abortion Attacked In Bill." The Pittsburgh Press,
November 5, 1977, page 18. Also see news release from the office of
Senator Richard S. Schweiker (R-Pa.), dated Friday, November 4, 1977,
entitled "Pro-Life Med Students Would Be Protected Under Schweiker
 Barbara L. Lindheim and Maureen A. Cotterill. "Training in
Induced Abortion By Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency Programs."
Alan Guttmacher Institute, Family Planning Perspectives,
January/February 1978, pages 24 to 28.
 "Maryland Bans the Pro-Life Conscience With New Law." Our
Sunday Visitor, March 10, 1991, page 17.
 One example of such a demand may be found in Marc D. Stern's
article "Abortion Conscience Clauses," in the November 1975
edition of the Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems, pages
571 to 627. Further information on pro-abortion opposition to
'conscience clauses' can be found in Germain Grisez and Joseph M. Boyle,
Jr. "The Liberty to Stand Aloof." The Human Life Review,
Winter 1979, pages 80 to 88, and Jonas Robitscher. "How
Psychiatrists Usurp Authority: Abortion and the Draft." The
Human Life Review, Summer 1981, pages 24 to 41.
 Jack Fowler. "Prolife Hospital Faces Sanctions." National
Catholic Register, February 3, 1991. Pages 1 and 9.
 Nancy F. Wechsler. "Consent Parents, Husbands And on Behalf
of Incompetents." Sarah Lewit (Editor). Abortion Techniques and
Services: Proceedings of the Conference, New York, N.Y., June 3-5, 1971.
Amsterdam: Excerpta Medica, 1972.
 Quoted in John Leo. "Sharing the Pain of Abortion." Time
Magazine, September 26, 1983, page 78. For more information on men's
role in abortion, see the book by Arthur Shostak, Gary McLouth and Lynn
Seng. Men and Abortion: Lessons, Losses, and Love. Praeger
 Marjorie Reiley Maguire and Daniel C. Maguire. "Abortion: A
Guide to Making Ethical Decisions." 'Catholics' for a Free Choice,
 In re Unborn Baby H., No. 84C01 8804JP185, slip opinion
at 1-2 (Vigo County, Indiana Circuit Court, April 8, 1988). Also see
"Woman Defies Court, Father, Aborts Child." Washington
Times, April 15, 1988.
 Marie Shelton. "Abortion Often Causes Guilt, Regret, Poll
Finds." Sacramento Bee, March 19, 1989, page A7.
 Arthur B. Shostak. "Abortion as Fatherhood Glimpsed: Clinic
Waiting Room Males as [Former] Expectant Fathers." Presented to the
Eastern Sociological Society Meeting in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in
March of 1985, page 4.
 Tamar Jacoby. "Doesn't a Man Have Any Say?" Newsweek
Magazine, May 23, 1988, pages 74 and 75.
 Jane Steinhauser, M.D. "Abortion's Impact on the Father and
Familial Relationships." Presented at a conference entitled Healing
Visions II, the Second National Conference on Post Abortion Counseling,
at the University of Notre Dame, on July 20, 1987.
 Vincent M. Rue, Ph.D. "Forgotten Fathers: Men and
Abortion." Life Cycle Books, Post office Box 792, Lewiston, New
York 14092-1792. 1986.
 Dora Greenwald, MSW, and John Szenes, M.D., quoted by Magda
Denes. "Performing Abortions." Commentary, October
1976, pages 33 to 37. A truly frightening and profoundly sickening
article by a doctor who observes and describes in graphic detail a
number of saline abortions and their results. She acknowledges that
abortion is killing, but a type of "necessary" killing.
 Edelin is listed as chairman of the National Abortion Rights
Action League Medical Advisory Committee in a 1978 NARAL
fundraising/propaganda letter entitled "Your Town Could Be Next
..." Also see "Ppersonalities." Communique, March
1, 1991, page 4, by the American Life League. Leslie Bond.
"Abortionist Charged for Aborting Wife Against Her Will." National
Right to Life News, June 23, 1988, page 9. Paul Likoudis.
"Buffalo Abortionist Attacks Pro-Lifers with Baseball Bat." The
Wanderer, December 15, 1988, page 1. Ken Kusmer. "Abortions
Cost Doctor 16 Years." The Oregonian, August 1, 1991.
Further Reading: Methodology and Aspects of Abortion.
Magda Denes. In Necessity and Sorrow: Life and Death in an
New York: Basic Books, 1976. Reviewed by Jenny Westberg. This book
portrays a sad, ugly, and gruesome (but true) picture of the abortion
industry. This is not a book for the faint-hearted. Incredibly,
the author remained pro-abortion after writing it, which shows how
deeply some people can deceive themselves and ignore reality. David
Reardon, in his work Aborted Women: Silent No More, speculated
that Denes wrote this book in order to numb herself to the awful reality
of her own abortion.
Eugene F. Diamond, M.D. This Curette for Hire.
Order from: Life Issues Bookshelf, Sun Life, Thaxton, Virginia
24174, telephone: (703) 586-4898. The author discusses the deterioration
of medical ethics and the critical role of the doctor in all anti-life
activities: abortion, fetal experimentation, sterilization, euthanasia,
infanticide, sex therapy, and more.
Louise Kapp Howe. Moments on Maple Avenue: The Reality of
New York: Macmillan, 1984. Reviewed by Jenny Westberg. The title's
claim that this book presents the "reality of abortion" is
either naive or deliberately dishonest. The book gives an
Alice-in-Wonderland view of the industry. The abortionists wear white
hats; the counselors fairly ooze compassion and understanding; and the
patients undergo quick and easy "procedures," none of which
results in a dead baby. And everyone lives happily ever after,
especially the aborted women. This book is recommended for science
Jonathan B. Imber. Abortion and the Private Practice of
New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986. 164 pages. Reviewed by
William May in the November 6, 1986 issue of National Right to Life
News. This fascinating book not only describes in detail the various
methods of abortion, but interviews in detail 25 of the 26 ob/gyn
doctors who serve a middle-sized Northeastern city. Some of these
doctors do not do abortions, some do, and some used to, but stopped for
various reasons. The attitudes and details of daily living of each of
these doctors, and their interactions with other doctors who do not
share their views regarding abortion, make interesting reading.
Making Health Care Decisions: A Report on the Ethical and Legal
Implications of Informed Consent in the Patient-Practitioner
Volume 1: Report. Serial Number 040-000-00459-9, 1982, 208
pages. Volume 3: Appendices, Studies on the Foundations of Informed
Consent. Serial Number 040-000-00469-6, 1982, 257 pages. Order by
mail from Superintendent of Documents, United States Government Printing
Office, Washington, DC 20402, or by telephone from (202) 783-3238.
Bernard Nathanson, M.D. The Silent Scream.
Order from: Life Issues Bookshelf, Sun Life, Thaxton, Virginia
24174, telephone: (703) 586-4898. This is the book form of the film that
provoked an international scream of protest and a futile pro-abort
effort to discredit and censor it. The book, like the film, describes a
suction abortion from the baby's point of view. The book also includes
pro-abortion rebuttals to Nathanson's film The Silent Scream and
the answers to those rebuttals.
E. Dorsey Smith. Abortion: Health Care Ethics.
Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1982. 241 pages. Reviewed by Mary Kay Culp
on pages 7 and 15 of the October 24, 1985 issue of National Right to
Life News. Among other gems, this rabidly pro-abortion nurse writes
that informed consent is punitive, and that all pro-life nurses should
get out of obstetrics/gynecology, regardless of their level of
Wrongful Life: Birth as the Result of Negligence, January 1970
Through September 1988.
Includes 627 citations to selected English and foreign language
publications. Serial Number 817-004-00018-1, 1988, 33 pages. Order by
mail from Superintendent of Documents, United States Government Printing
Office, Washington, DC 20402, or by telephone from (202) 783-3238.
© American Life League BBS 1-703-659-7111
This is a chapter of the Pro-Life Activist's Encyclopedia,
published by American Life League.