Should Women Be Able to Sue Doctors for the Emotional Damage from Abortion?

It’s no secret that abortion can cause significant emotional damage to women who choose it.  But should women be able to sue their doctors if they experience emotional damage from an abortion?

Iowa State Senator Mark Chelgren thinks so and has introduced legislation that would do just that.

In an interview with Fox News, Sen. Chelgren explained the purpose of the bill.

“What we’re asking for is that individuals, doctors and clinics that make money off of women by giving them abortions are simply held accountable. That’s all this does. It protects women from people who would normally be trying to sell them something in a time when they are under the most stress that is kind of imaginable.”

The legislation allows a lawsuit regardless of how much time has passed since the abortion.

Despite the fact that emotional risks associated with abortion are well documented, no state currently has a law that specifically permits lawsuits for those harms.

Known side effects from abortion include regret, anger, guilt, shame, a sense of loneliness or isolation, loss of self confidence, insomnia or nightmares, relationship issues, suicidal thoughts and feelings, eating disordersdepression, and anxiety.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, AmericanPregnancy.org describes that the risk of side effects has a lot to do with the the mother’s beliefs about the baby.

“Those who believe it is not a baby until it is born have less of a chance of experiencing negative emotional consequences. However, those who believe it is a baby are more likely to experience negative emotional side effects.”

If passed, the legislation would likely create a deterrent to doctors performing abortions.

As a result, abortion industry advocates are describing the legislation as “anti-woman.”

Is this an appropriate way to limit the number of doctors willing to provide abortions? Comment below.

 

Klippert Bill Would Ban Sale, Use, Donation of Aborted Fetal Tissue

As the legislative session picks up steam, so does the ongoing debate over aborted fetal tissue in Washington State.

Yesterday, we wrote about a new effort in Congress to eliminate federal funding from entities that traffic in aborted fetal tissue.

The effort picked up steam in Washington State as well as Rep. Brad Klippert, from Kennewick, introduced House Bill 1243 to ban the sale, use, and donation of aborted fetal tissue.

The legislation comes on the heals of a Final Report by the Select Panel on Infant Lives, commissioned by the House of Representatives, which discovered that the largest bank of aborted fetal tissue in the United States was the Birth Defects Research Lab (BDRL) at the University of Washington.

According to the final report, BDRL has procured aborted fetal tissue from thirteen separate abortion providers in Washington State and distributed aborted fetal tissue to forty different entities around the country.

All of that would become illegal under the proposal.

In addition to banning the use of aborted fetal tissue, the legislation would also require the remains of an aborted baby “be decently buried, or cremated within a reasonable time after death.”

The legislation has thirteen co-sponsors in addition to Rep. Klippert.

The bill has been assigned to the House Health Care and Wellness Committee but has not yet been scheduled for a hearing.

You are encouraged to contact your legislators about this legislation through the Legislative Hotline at 1-800-562-6000 or email them by clicking here.

Who Else, Besides Planned Parenthood, Should Lose Federal Funding?

Planned Parenthood has received a lot of public scrutiny lately.  Even before the Center For Medical Progress released videos that revealed how intricately Planned Parenthood is involved in the trafficking of aborted baby parts, they were already the nation’s number one provider of abortions with a very troubling past.

President-elect Trump has promised to stop federal funding of Planned Parenthood, and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan said that effort is included in a critical reconciliation bill.

But Planned Parenthood isn’t the only entity deserving of losing its federal funds.

Last week we wrote about the Birth Defects Research Lab (BDRL) at the University of Washington and its refusal to cooperate with federal subpoenas.

Their refusal to cooperate with subpoenas or respond to public records requests means there are many things we do not know about the BDRL.

But the things we do know raise serious concerns about the wisdom of giving them federal tax dollars.

In response to the disturbing videos from the Center for Medical Progress, the House of Representatives created a Select Panel on Infant Lives to investigate whether baby body parts were being sold for a profit.

The Select Panel’s final report was released on December 30th. 

Along with fifteen recommendations for criminal charges for Planned Parenthood and related entities, the Select Panel’s final report identified the BDRL at UW as the largest bank of aborted fetal tissue in America.

They have received aborted fetal tissue from thirteen different entities around the country (though all but one are in Washington State) and they have provided aborted fetal tissue to more than forty entities throughout the world.

They are also funded by federal tax dollars. In 2015, they received a $600,000 grant from the National Institute for Health to fund general operations.

In addition, the doctors who work at the Birth Defects Research Lab are also abortionists who perform abortions at some of the same abortion clinics that provide the BDRL with aborted fetal tissue.  Others BDRL doctors have focused their research on abortion.

When the Select Panel subpoenaed documents from the BDRL, the documents they provided concealed much of the information the Panel was actually requesting. They described UW’s cooperation with their subpoena in this way:

“The invoices either do not specify what clinic services are involved or, when they apparently elaborate on the nature of such services, those elaborations are redacted—rendering it impossible for the Panel to conduct a forensic analysis of UW’s financial arrangements with clinics. UW’s incomplete production raises more questions than it answers and demonstrates the need for further investigation” [1]

Setting aside the nature of the work taking place at the BDRL, there is something people of every political persuasion should be able to agree upon.

Entities subject to public records laws that do not want the public to know what they are doing should not be funded by the taxpayers. If you want to do something privately, do not ask for public money to do it.

Regardless, there is simply no good reason tax dollars should ever be used to fund those who traffic in aborted baby parts.

The Hyde Amendment is a federal law prohibiting the use of federal funds for abortion.  It is a recognition of the fact that hundreds of millions of Americans do not want their money being used to pay for abortions.

Since we have the decency to honor the Hyde Amendment, why would we require federal tax dollars to be used to fund the dissection of aborted babies?

But what about the lost opportunity to cure diseases? Significantly, the Select Panel’s Final Report noted that there is more than enough tissue from babies who die naturally through miscarriage to support all current research.

Selling the parts of aborted babies isn’t necessary for science and it isn’t something civilized people do.  Moreover, entities that refuse to allow the public to inspect their activities should not be funded by the public.

Last week I was in Washington DC discussing the appropriateness of tax dollars being used to fund the BDRL and others who traffic in aborted body parts.  For the most part, Congress was unaware that this was happening and they were universally unaware of how hard the BDRL is working to keep their publicly funded work from being seen by the public.

But when they learned, they were as concerned as you are.

While there is a great deal of sympathy, that will translate into action when the public demonstrates it matters to them.  That’s why they need to hear from you on this issue.

To contact your U.S. Representative about this issue click here.

For contact information for your U.S. Senators click here.

Additionally, proposed just today in Olympia, House Bill 1243 would prohibit the sale, donation, or use of aborted fetal body parts in Washington State.  Please contact your legislators here to share your thought on that legislation.

[1] Select Panel on Infant Lives Final Report pg. 259-260

UW BDRL Refuses to Cooperate Despite Congressional Subpoena

Planned Parenthood affiliates and related organizations profited from the sale of aborted baby parts, according to a congressional report released last week.

The 418-page report, released by the House Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives, concludes a year-long investigation into the gruesome and oftentimes illegal practices of the abortion industry. The Panel’s report will likely have resounding implications for Washington State relative to Attorney General Ferguson’s review of Planned Parenthood in 2015 and the University of Washington’s relationship with Planned Parenthood.

Here are three important takeaways from the report, which can be read here:

  1. Criminal Referrals

The Panel made 15 criminal referrals to law enforcement officials, recommending criminal charges against Planned Parenthood affiliates and other organizations, including Stem Express, a tissue procurement company that made 2,800 percent profit on baby brains.

The report documents the illegal behavior of abortion providers, tissue procurement companies, and medical researchers by detailing how the abortion industry profits from the sale of aborted fetal tissue, changes abortion procedures to maintain the monetary value of profitable aborted baby parts, and violates laws protecting the safety and privacy of patients.

“Over the last year, the Select Panel’s relentless fact-finding investigation has laid bare the grisly reality of an abortion industry that is driven by profit, unconcerned by matters of basic ethics and, too often, non-compliant with the few laws we have to protect the safety of women and their unborn children,” said Congresswoman Diane Black, a member of the Panel. “The findings of this panel should incense all people of conscience.”

  1. UW’s Business Relationship with Planned Parenthood and Attorney General Ferguson’s Seemingly Incomplete 2015 Review of Planned Parenthood

Eight pages of the report detail the questionable activities of the University of Washington’s Birth Defects Research Laboratory (UWBDRL), the nation’s largest fetal tissue bank that often acts as a middleman between abortion clinics and medical researchers. UWBDRL secures aborted fetal tissue from Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics in Washington State, which it then sells to other medical researchers across the nation.

This section of the report validates concerns raised by the Family Policy Institute of Washington in late-2015 about UWBDRL and Attorney General Bob Ferguson’s investigation of Planned Parenthood affiliates.

Following the conclusion of Ferguson’s review of abortion providers, which claimed that Washington abortion providers had not engaged in illegal activity, FPIW filed a public records request to obtain documents and written communications relevant to the review.

FPIW’s examination of the documents appeared to indicate that the attorney general’s review was incomplete, especially concerning the relationship between Planned Parenthood affiliates and UWBDRL.

Most concerning from FPIW’s perspective was an email exchange between Deputy Attorney General Paige Dietrich and Ian Goodhew, Government Relations Director at the University of Washington.

This correspondence, quoted verbatim in the Panel’s report, details Dietrich’s request for business agreements between Planned Parenthood and UWBDRL as part of the then-ongoing attorney general review. Goodhew responded to this request by seeking assurances that “[the attorney general’s office] will hold those confidential and not share with anyone without consent?” After Goodhew had voiced his concerns about the agreements going public, Dietrich rescinded her request, replying, “I don’t think we’ll need copies of the agreements.”

After discovering this exchange, FPIW filed a public records request to obtain the business agreement.

But after months of foot-dragging by UWBDRL, who repeatedly delayed releasing the documents, Planned Parenthood eventually filed a lawsuit against FPIW to prevent the release of the business agreement. That lawsuit is currently playing out in a federal court.

Astonishingly, UWBDRL failed to provide the business agreement to the Panel’s congressional investigators, despite congressional subpoenas and a court preliminary injunction enabling the university to provide the House committee with the business agreement.

The congressional report concluded that “UW’s incomplete production raises more questions than it answers and demonstrates the need for further investigation.”

The report also details the failures of Ferguson’s 2015 review. It claims Ferguson’s office made conclusions “without apparently conducting” a forensic analysis of UW’s practices. The report asserts the attorney general’s inquiry “apparently ended without an examination of an agreement between UW” and Planned Parenthood clinics.

That congressional investigators reached many of the same conclusions as FPIW serves only to further vindicate FPIW’s concerns about the attorney general’s review and the relationship between UWBDRL and state abortion clinics.

  1. UW’s Close Relationship with Abortion Clinics

The Panel’s report identifies a cozy relationship between UW faculty and staff and Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics.

Several UW faculty members perform abortions at Planned Parenthood and Cedar River abortion clinics, and the former medical director for Planned Parenthood of Greater Washington and Northern Idaho now serves as a UW clinical associate professor.

The University of Washington also places medical students at outside abortion clinics, including some that perform abortions well into the second trimester.

Furthermore, the University of Washington provides abortions through its family planning program at the UW Medical Center.

 

 

Stop Using Religion to Justify Your Abortion

America is not and should not be a secular society, but we do have a secular government. The idea of theocracy is horrifying to nearly all Americans on all sides of every political divide; as well it should be. Theocracy strips citizens of freedom and often of their decency.

Because of this, convincing the public that your political opposition is advocating laws which are theocratic in nature is the easiest way to win the battle of ideas. This is exactly what the abortion lobby has done.

The talking points of Planned Parenthood and NARAL have been wholly mainstreamed by the education system, Hollywood, and the news media.  Their claim is that pro-life individuals seek to impose their religious views on the parents of a preborn child. Abortion supporters are the freedom fighters and pro-lifers are the theocrats. This could not possibly be further from the truth. In fact, the opposite is true.

In a debate with a pro-abortion individual, you will hear the following arguments:

“The child isn’t human until he or she can survive on their own.”

“The child isn’t human until he or she can feel pain.”

“The child isn’t human until he or she has brain activity.”

“The child isn’t human until he or she goes through the birth canal.”

“The child isn’t human until a few months after birth.”

These beliefs are all well and good for an individual to hold. This is a free country. But it’s important not to mistake these claims for science and instead call them what they are: philosophy and religion.

It is a scientific reality that conception was the beginning of all of our lives. The child, even in the earliest stages, meets every scientific requirement for being human (full set of human DNA) and every scientific requirement for being alive (metabolism and growth). It is objective fact that we have all been human and alive since the moment we were conceived.  Anything added to the discussion beyond these basic truths is either religion or philosophy.

If one wishes to ascribe to a different set of beliefs from what science tells us about the pre-born, that’s fine. But you can’t impose that arbitrary, unscientific belief system on another human being in order to take their life away. No one may use their personal philosophy or religion to legally strip the human nature from someone who is scientifically human.

The pro-life position is not one of religious legalism. It is one of science and of basic human decency. One does not have to appeal to a higher power to say, “Hey, don’t dismember that preborn child.” It should be clear to everyone with a functioning conscience and a shred of attachment to scientific reality that dismembering a preborn child is terrifyingly immoral.

The pro-abortion position is one that requires a denial of scientific realities and a silencing of the conscience. It is a movement of dehumanization and violence. And despite its advocates accusing everyone else of being the religious legalists, the pro-abortion position is one of violently imposing arbitrary belief systems on innocent human beings, in violation of every rule of pluralism and tolerance.

James Silberman is a guest contributor to the FPIW Blog. He is a pro-life activist from Gig Harbor, WA, and a student at Whitworth University.

What’s Next for the Abortion Industry?

Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry are facing some major challenges after the November election, including the revelation that groups in several states, including the University of Washington, have indeed been profiting from the sale of fetal body parts.

Listen to today’s podcast here:

After Fetal Brains Sold by UW, FPIW Files Public Records Request in Indiana

FPIW filed a public records request with Indiana University (IU) on Thursday morning, seeking information related to IU’s relationship with the University of Washington Birth Defects Research Laboratory (UWBDRL).

Earlier this week, FPIW learned that UWBDRL sold aborted baby brains to Indiana University on at least two separate occasions dating back to 2013.

screen-shot-2016-12-02-at-8-28-30-am

Public records recovered in Indiana show an invoice from UWBDRL charging Indiana University for two aborted fetal brains.

Some critics have questioned whether UWBDRL may have violated federal human trafficking laws that prohibit the sale of fetal tissue.  But this development is especially concerning considering the outstanding questions about UWBDRL’s business arrangement with Planned Parenthood clinics in Washington State.

You can read FPIW’s public records request letter here.


FPIW is being sued by Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry following the filing of a public records request with the University of Washington. We must know what financial arrangements UW has with Planned Parenthood, and we won’t stop until the people get the answers they are entitled to.  We’re in this battle. Will you fight alongside us?

 

 

BREAKING NEWS: UW Sold Fetal Brains to Indiana University, Still Blocking Release of Public Records

The University of Washington’s Birth Defects Research Laboratory (UWBDRL) sold brains from aborted babies for $200 each to Indiana University, according to an invoice recently uncovered by Indiana Right to Life.

The invoice, dated July 25, 2013, records the sale of two shipments of brain tissue.

screen-shot-2016-12-02-at-8-28-30-am

The Birth Defects Research Laboratory at the University of Washington often acted as a middleman between abortion clinics and medical researchers, securing aborted fetal tissue from Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics in Washington State that it then sold to other medical researchers across the nation.

Some critics have questioned whether UWBDRL violated federal human trafficking laws that prohibit the sale of fetal tissue.

The recently released invoice showing UWBDRL’s sale of aborted fetal tissue to Indiana University is concerning, especially since there are questions still remaining about UWBDRL’s business arrangement with Planned Parenthood clinics in Washington State.

When Zach Freeman, FPIW’s Communications Director, filed a public records request soliciting the business agreement between Planned Parenthood and UWBDRL, Planned Parenthood sued, effectively delaying the release of the business agreement indefinitely.

Without the business agreement, which is not being made public because of Planned Parenthood’s ongoing federal lawsuit, we cannot know whether UWBDRL engaged in illegally selling aborted fetal tissue. Since UWBDRL is a public entity, the public deserves to know the extent of UWBDRL’s relationship with Planned Parenthood, as well as whether any laws regarding trafficking aborted fetal tissue were violated.

Click here to contribute to the legal fund.

Trump Taps Rep. Tom Price, Pro-Life Doctor, for HHS Secretary

President-elect Donald Trump has selected pro-life champion Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) to run the Department of Health and Human Services.

Price, a physician, is a known opponent of Obamacare, signaling the incoming administration’s intention of following through with its campaign promise to “repeal and replace.”

“Some Republicans have attacked the Affordable Care Act without proposing an alternative,” reported the New York Times. “Mr. Price, by contrast, has introduced bills offering a detailed, comprehensive replacement plan in every Congress since 2009, when Democrats started work on the legislation.”

Price’s piece of legislation, the Empowering Patients First Act, would repeal and replace Obamacare and create tax credits for the purchase of individual and family health insurance policies.  If passed, it would also create new incentives for people to contribute to health savings accounts, offer grants to states to subsidize insurance for “high-risk populations,” and promote competition by allowing insurers to sell policies across state lines.  His legislation also provides explicit protections for religious freedom and rights of conscience related to the practice of abortion and the dispensing of abortion-inducing drugs.

As an added bonus, Price has consistently — 100% of the time — voted to Defund Planned Parenthood.  He is an outspoken critic of abortion, calling it a “barbaric” practice.

Planned Parenthood and pro-choice advocacy group NARAL seems concerned by the selection as well:

Price has been strong on all of FPIW’s issues in Congress, stating after the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage that it was “not only a sad day for marriage, but a further judicial destruction of our entire system of checks and balances.”

Price must be confirmed by the incoming U.S. Senate next year before taking over the Department.  And of course, if confirmed, he would no longer be a member of Congress, meaning that his legislation would have to be picked up by another member of Congress. But with conservative majorities in the House and Senate, and a clear priority for the incoming Trump Administration to repeal and replace Obamacare, we don’t expect finding legislative sponsors to be an issue.

We’ll keep you updated through the confirmation process.  Follow us on Facebook and Twitter!

Congress Intervenes in Lawsuit Against FPIW, Daleiden

Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit against FPIW may have just entered a new frontier.

In a letter sent on Election Day, House Select Investigative Panel Chairwoman Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) asked Judge James L. Robart to clarify why the records, which Congress requested after the abortion industry sued FPIW and David Daleiden to keep them sealed, have not yet been released under the subpoena.

You can read the letter here.

To date, the University of Washington has declined to produce the records for Congress, despite this legally-binding subpoena. Judge Robart’s temporary restraining order (TRO), they claim, prevents them from doing so.

If Judge Robart is forced to amend his TRO to clarify that the records in question may not be withheld from Congress, the records, by law, must be released to Congress by the University of Washington.

This is a step in the right direction for holding Planned Parenthood — and now the University of Washington — accountable to the public.  We’ll keep you up-to-date as the case progresses.

If you want to invest in FPIW’s efforts to defeat Planned Parenthood in court, you can contribute to the legal fund.