by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli

• Kansans for Life calls out the media for biased reporting on the cost of defending pro-life laws in Kansas – with headlines like “$1.2 million paid in attorney fees to defend anti-abortion laws.” Maybe if the abortion lobby didn’t continue bringing the lawsuits, the state – which is continually winning, by the way – wouldn’t have to pay any attorney fees. Problem solved, eh?

• Abstinence Clearinghouse says “children as young as ten-years old have been given a contraceptive implant by the National Health Service, regardless of the fact that they are under the age of consent.” And going beyond this, the NHS doesn’t even have to tell the 10-year-old’s parents – because fifth-graders are so very mature, apparently:
  

  If you’re under 16 and want contraception, the doctor, nurse or pharmacist won’t tell your parents (or carer) as long as they believe you fully understand the information you’re given, and your decisions.

Hmm. To what other drugs or medical procedures does this apply, I wonder? UK parents, take note. “Free” government services may come at the price of you not being told about something that can damage your child’s health.

• Bound4Life features an interview with Dr. Michael New, whose “unimpeachable research: interpreting data on the number of abortions, abortion rates, and the effectiveness of pro-life advocacy to save lives” is well respected in the academic and pro-life communities.
• The Vine recaps the chilling cases of doctors deciding that infants and children with disabilities no longer need to live. In some cases, lifesaving treatment is withheld, and in others, it is removed, along with hydration and nutrition.

• Big Blue Wave says Ottawa abortionist Dr. Michel Ronald Prevost (pictured right) has resigned after being found “incompetent in his practice of obstetrics and gynecology”:
  

  “He displayed a lack of judgment and patients were exposed to harm or injury in his failure to properly screen patients for medical terminations, in his failure to calculate doses of Methotrexate on the basis of his patients’ respective body surface areas, and in his failure to follow up with patients, including when he was aware that patients had on-going gestations after the administration of Methotrexate,” the decision said. “In the cases of ongoing gestations, the patients’ fetuses were exposed to risk of harm, in that they were exposed to Methotrexate and Misoprostol.”

[Photos via sheknows.com and cbc.ca]