[Jill Stanek]

March 14, 2008
Obama, Wright, and the Christ Hospital connection

obama%20wright.jpgWith all the attention the last couple of days on Barack Obama's racist and anti-American pastor, Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright, Jr., this is an opportune time to review Wright's connection to Christ Hospital.

I first wrote about this in a WND column over a year ago: Did Wright influence Obama to oppose IL's Born Alive Infant Protection Act?


  • Obama has been a member of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago since 1988.

  • Obama calls TUCC's pastor, Wright, a spiritual advisor. Wright was the first person Obama thanked in his 2004 U. S. Senate victory speech, along with "fellow Trinitarians." The name of Obama's book, Audacity of Hope, comes from a line he said he heard Wright make in a sermon.

  • From 1986 to 1989, Wright served on the board of directors of Evangelical Health Systems, Christ Hospital's parent company. In 1995, EHS merged to create Advocate Health Care, controlled jointly by the United Church of Christ and Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, both pro-abortion.

  • TUCC is a member of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice.

  • In 1999, I discovered babies were being aborted alive at Christ Hospital. I testified before a Congressional committee in 2000 and 2001. I was fired in 2001. Obama opposed IL's Born Alive Infant Protection Act in 2001, 2002, and 2003.

  • Christ Hospital's CEO throughout that time, Carole Schneider, was a UCC member.

  • One prominent Advocate board member then and now is Rev. Dr. Ozzie Smith, Jr., a former associate pastor at TUCC under Wright.

  • TUCC was listed in 2004 as the U.S.'s largest UCC church. Advocate is the largest nonprofit healthcare provider in Chicago. A crossroads of power and money.

  • Speaking of crossroads, TUCC is located only 5 miles from Christ Hospital (click to enlarge map).

    I would like to hear Barack Obama answer under oath whether Wright or any UCC big wig ever lobbied - whoops, I mean "counseled" - him to oppose the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

    [Photo of Obama and Wright courtesy of Fox News]


    March 5, 2008
    Breaking news: Movement on Hialeah abortion/murder case

    breaking.jpgStory backdrop 1st (see sources here, here, and here for corroboration):

    On July 20, 2006, a baby was allegedly aborted alive at A Gyn Diagnostic Center in Hialeah, FL.

    At least 2 witnesses saw clinic owner Belkis Gonzalez (pictured below left) cut the potentially viable (~23 weeks gestation) baby's cord and put the baby in a biohazard bag with bleach inside.

    An anonymous caller tipped off police, who searched the scene but could not find the dead baby. Nine days later the source called again, saying workers put the baby on the mill's roof before the search but had now retrieved it. Police recovered the decomposed baby. The DNA matched her mother's.

    belkis.bmpThe Miami-Dade medical examiner, however, ruled the death "natural," due to "extreme prematurity," since no one could know exactly why she died. (This showed gross prejudice. If someone put a plastic bag with bleach inside over the head of a 94-year-old woman who was dying anyway, would the bagger still not be credited with murder?)

    The mother, who experienced a change of heart at her baby's delivery, hired the Thomas More Society, a pro-life law firm, to pursue a civil case. After a long delay, prosecutors handed the baby over for a 2nd autopsy.

    This brings us 2 pieces of breaking news....

    1. Two sources have confirmed to me that the FL Department of Health is pursuing revoking abortionist Pierre Renelique's medical license. Clinic workers called Renelique to complete this abortion, but he never showed.

    2. The 2nd autopsy results, by pathologist Abdullah Fatteh, are in and follow. Based on these results, I am told the state attorney plans to approach Miami-Dade medical examiner, Bruce Hyma, and ask whether he would like to amend his report. Numbers 7 and 10 point to manslaughter.

    Dr. Abdullah Fatteh's autopsy report

    My investigation consisted of:

    A) Detailed interview of mother of newborn.

    B) Review of autopsy report on baby from Miami Dade Medical Examiner.

    C) Examination of microscopic slides prepared by medical examiner.

    D) Review of submitted records.

    I submit the following analysis, observations and conclusions based on my examination of above materials.


    Based on the information detailed above the following conclusions are, in my opinion, justified:

    1. The clinic allowed unlicensed staff to perform abortion.

    2. The clinic failed to dispose of fetal remains in sanitary and appropriate manner

    3. The newborn was born alive.

    4. Unlicensed clinic staff cut the umbilical cord.

    5. The clinic physician was not at the clinic when delivery occured.

    6. The clinic staff was in panic state when delivery occured.

    7. The actions of unlicensed clinic staff probably accelerated and/or contributed to the death of the newborn.

    8. The body of the deceased was decomposed by the time the first autopsy was performed nine days after delivery.

    9. A second autopsy, most likely, will not yield any reliable information.

    10. It is most likely that neglectful actions around the time of birth of newborn and prematurity were the significant factors that resulted in this newborn's death.

    Sincerely yours,

    Abdullah Fatteh, M.D., Ph.D., l.L.B.

    [Photo courtesy of Operation Rescue]


    February 29, 2008
    Make my day: Left wingers try to defend Obama on infanticide

    obama2.jpgBlogger Impeach yesterday mocked "Lil Ricky" Santorum for castigating Barack Obama in a February 28 Philadelphia Inquirer op ed for his indefensible opposition to IL's Born Alive Infant Protection Act Santorum was the U.S. Senate sponsor of the federal version.

    Impeach wrote:

    I also want to direct your attention to the text of the Illinois bill. Here it is. You're free, of course, to peruse what Senator Santorum has declared in his column to be "identical." Of course, it's not.

    No, it's not. Because Impeach linked to the wrong bill, SB 1093 instead of SB 1095.

    Impeach also linked to an amusing piece by left wing Media Matters, supposedly "deconstructing" a February 1 Washington Times editorial taking Obama to task for his opposition to Born Alive. It would appear MM was momentarily disturbed by a brain fart, because it argued our position...

    The Washington Times falsely claimed that... Obama "argu[ed] cold-bloodedly on the IL Senate floor that babies who survive botched late-term abortions should not be considered 'persons' because this would be tantamount to admitting 'that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a -- a child, a 9-month old -- child that was delivered to term.' "

    In fact, Obama was not discussing "late-term abortions" in the remarks the editorial highlighted; as is clear from his March 30, 2001 remarks on the state Senate floor, he was asserting that the bill in question, which was not limited to late-term abortions, would, in effect, "essentially bar abortions."

    Right, MM. Obama was arguing a ban on infanticide would intrude on abortion.

    MM continued:

    ... Obama was asserting that the bill... was unconstitutional because it would "define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or other elements in the Constitution" and therefore represent a de facto restriction on all abortions.

    greg2.jpg Again, right, MM. Good job! Obama, the self-described constitutional expert, was inexplicably trying to make that case. And he was proven a constitutional boor. Born Alive passed on the federal level with nary a lawsuit peep from the other side, because it did not say that.

    I welcome Media Matters and left wing bloggers like Impeach to continue attempting to defend Obama's support of infanticide. Excellent work.


    February 21, 2008
    Catholic Providence Health Care System and induced labor abortion

    Last month I spoke at a pro-life conference in OR and mentioned that a large west coast Catholic health care system, Providence Health & Services, was committing induced labor abortion.

    I received the following letter via email while on vacation and didn't spot it until yesterday (click to enlarge):

    This issue goes back to 2004 when I received a call from Catholic news reporter Tom Szyszkiewicz, who had published an article in Our Sunday Visitor in March 2004. There he wrote....

    An Our Sunday Visitor investigation has revealed that some Catholic hospitals perform a procedure called "early induction for fetuses with anomalies incompatible with life"... or simply as "early induction." This procedure induces a woman into labor after her unborn child reaches viability around 23 to 26 weeks in cases when the child is known to have a condition that makes death inevitable soon after even a full-term birth. The child born in this way is made comfortable and often held by the mother until death.

    The two most common conditions for which this procedure is performed are anencephaly, in which the child's brain and skull fail to develop beyond the brain stem, and renal agenesis, in which the kidneys and lungs are underdeveloped....

    Neither presents an immediate danger to the mother....

    Those Catholic hospitals that OSV found using the... procedure are Providence Alaska Medical Center in Anchorage, Alaska, part of the 10th-largest Catholic health system in the country, and Loyola University Health System in Chicago.

    After I spoke with Tom I called both Loyola and Providence and confirmed what he was saying was true. Both systems admitted they committed, "early induction of labor" for fatally ill babies but insisted these were ethical. Providence stated not all its hospitals were involved, but the system approved the policy. Loyola even sent me its position paper (verbiage below). I wrote a total of 3 columns on Loyola/Providence: here, here, and here.

    Reporter Maria Kennedy of the California Catholic newspaper San Francisco Faith read my columns and conducted an investigation of the entire Providence system. She wrote in November 2004:

    Dan Boyle, communications director for Providence Saint Joseph in Burbank... said he had called Providence's corporate headquarters in Seattle for directions on how to respond to any media calls regarding the story. Providence Health Systems issued a statement, which even Boyle called "vague." The statement says that Providence Health System:
    "follow[s] the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, approved by the Vatican in Rome for use in the United States. In individual cases where difficult decisions regarding such issues as early induction during pregnancy occur in a Providence hospital, an ethical review process is undertaken at the institutional level to assure that practices are consistent with the Ethical and Religious Directives. As concerned providers of care we realize that women and families in this situation are suffering greatly. We strive to extend to them respectful, compassionate care throughout a very difficult decision-making process."

    When this reporter pressed Boyle on whether or not late term abortions were performed at Providence hospitals in the San Fernando Valley, he said, "I did check with our corporate headquarters, and I'm very limited in what I can say." According to Boyle, "this procedure is done rarely; it's a private procedure. If this procedure is necessary, we conduct an ethical review to make sure we are in compliance with the Ethical and Religious Directives."

    Clearly, Providence was involved in induced labor abortion. I also contacted the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which was already aware that some Catholic hospitals were twisting the Catholic Church's sanction of full-term or crisis induction of labor so as to induce premature labor before a baby was viable for the express purpose of provoking unnatural death of the baby, i.e., killing the baby.


    The USCCB sent me 2 documents clearly stating the Catholic position, "National Council of Catholic Bishops Statement on Early Induction of Labor," which it issued 4 days after Tom's article was published, and "Moral Principles Concerning Infants with Anencephaly."

    If Providence has since changed its position, it can clear this matter up by sending me its revised policy. Otherwise, the system still sanctions induced labor abortion.

    Loyola's "early induction of labor" policy, sent to me in September 2004:

    Early induction is performed at LUHS only if the fetus has reached 24 weeks of gestation ? currently accepted as the stage of viability ? which is consistent with the Ethical and Religious Directives for Health Care Services. In addition, early induction for fetuses with anomalies is only performed at Loyola if the fetus has anencephaly or Potter's disease (underdevelopment of the brain and kidneys, respectively). Both of these conditions are fatal to the fetus.

    UPDATE, 2/22, 12:10p: Tom Szyszkiewicz has sent me the link to a Catholic Anchor article indicating Providence Alaska Medical Center has mended its ways. But why is it refusing to release its new policy? Still not convinced.

    Meanwhile, both Maria Kennedy and I confirmed the Providence system condones the practice and has 3 other hospitals in AK as well as 20 hospitals in CA, OR, MT, and WA. Until it produces a revised policy it is condemned.

    posted at 12:25 PM | Comments (83)

    February 19, 2008
    Links to Barack Obama's votes on IL's Born Alive Infant Protection Act

    I'm receiving more and more email requests for corroboration of Barack Obama's votes on IL's Born Alive Infant Protection Act as state senator. So I'm going to write a permanent post.

    obama.jpgI'm also posting, right, an August 25, 2004, Chicago Sun-Times cartoon by Jack Higgins, printed on page 49, pictorially admonishing Obama for his opposition to Born Alive.

    A package of Born Alive bills was introduced three times during Obama's tenure.

    The cornerstone bill was the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, which defined legal personhood. This definition was identical to the federal BAIPA which was drafted from the definition of "live birth" created by the World Health Organization in 1950 and adopted by the United Nations in 1955....

    Here I will only post links to Obama's actions and votes on the cornerstone bill, the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. The bill number changed every year it was reintroduced.


    Senate Bill 1095, Born Alive Infant Protection Act

    Obama's "no" vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 28, 2001, is no longer available online.

    Transcript of Obama's verbal opposition to Born Alive on the IL Senate floor, March 30, 2001, pages 84-90

    Obama's "present" vote on the IL Senate floor, March 30, 2001


    Senate Bill 1662, Born Alive Infant Protection Act

    Obama's "no" vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 6, 2002, is no longer available online.

    Transcript of Obama's verbal opposition to Born Alive on the IL Senate floor, April 4, 2002, pages 28-35

    Obama's "no" vote on the IL Senate floor, April 4, 2002


    Senate Bill 1082, Born Alive Infant Protection Act

    Democrats took control of the IL Senate with the 2002 elections. They sent Born Alive to the infamously liberal Health & Human Services Committee, chaired by Barack Obama.

    As can be seen on the Actions docket, Obama held Born Alive on March 6, 2003, from even being voted on in committee. It is also important to note from the docket that on March 13, 2003, Obama stopped the senate sponsor from adding the lately discussed clarification paragraph from the federal BAIPA, to make the bills absolutely identical.


    Meet Gianna Jessen, abortion survivor

    fp.jpgThe photo, right, is of Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life and Gianna Jessen at the West Coast Walk for Life in CA on January 19.

    Ever heard of Gianna? She was aborted alive. Her story in brief:

    Gianna's biological mother was 17 when she had a saline abortion in her third trimester....After being burned alive for ~18 hours in the womb from the saline solution, Gianna was delivered alive in a Los Angeles County abortion clinic. Her medical records state, "born during saline abortion"... caus[ing] her Cerebral Palsy.... She weighed a mere 2 lbs. at birth.

    Gianna was transferred by ambulance to a hospital, grew into a beautiful young woman with an excellent singing voice who now travels the world singing and telling her story.

    I met Gianna in 2000. She testified with me at the Born Alive Infant Protection Act hearings. We both were invited to witness President Bush sign BAIPA into law in August 2001. Here's a photo, with Gianna standing next to me....


    Left to right: Wanda Franz, president, National Right to Life; Archbishop Donald Wuerl; Hadley Arkes, crafter of BAIPA; Steve Chabot, House sponsor of BAIPA; President Bush; Rick Santorum, Senate sponsor of BAIPA; me; Gianna; Dr. Watson Bowes, ob/gyn who testified with us.

    UPDATE, 4:45p: I forgot this great story about Gianna. This happened in 2006, as relayed by Jon Sanders of Townhall.com:

    Last year Jessen made a memorable appearance before the Colorado House of Representatives. She was invited to sing the national anthem there by Rep. Ted Harvey, R-Highlands Ranch. Her affliction caused her to lose her balance, and her nerves caused her to falter, and everyone present joined with her to encourage her.

    When she was done, Harvey introduced her to the chamber. He spoke of her cerebral palsy from a traumatic birth, her life in foster homes before being adopted, how she struggled even to lift her head, then crawl and walk, and how she now runs in marathons to raise awareness of cerebral palsy. Harvey called her a modern day hero, and Jessen received a standing ovation.

    Harvey wasn't done....

    On the docket that day was a resolution to honor the 90th anniversary of the Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood clinic. Harvey then revealed the cause of Jessen's cerebral palsy: the failed abortion at a Planned Parenthood clinic. He was gaveled down, of course, but he told the Speaker, "I just wanted to put a face to what we are celebrating today."

    House Democrats fumed. Majority Leader Alice Madden told the Denver Post that Harvey had been "amazingly rude to use a human being as an example of his personal politics."

    Jessen, who presumably would have known she had been used, told the Post, "We need to discuss the humanity of it [abortion]. I'm glad to be able to speak up for children in the womb. If abortion is about women's rights, where were my rights?"


    January 17, 2008
    Obama's lie about Born Alive's paragraph (c)

    nys2.jpgThe New York Sun almost got it right this morning.

    The headline reads, "Clinton: Obama should vote 'No' on abortion issue she backed," which is good. Clinton has been lambasting Obama to pro-aborts for voting "present" on the Born Alive Infant Protection Act as state senator when she voted "yes" for it as U.S. senator, "holding him to a tougher standard than she holds herself," states the NYS article.

    Obama's excuse, quoting the NYS....

    He also argued in 2004 that the state and federal bills were substantively different, telling the Chicago Tribune that he would have voted for the "born alive" bill had he been in Congress at the time.

    This is where I'm sorry the NYS missed the mark, although I provided the reporter documentation. I do commend him for getting closer than any other MSM reporter has.

    The definition of "born alive" in both bills was identical:

    "the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, caesarean section, or induced abortion."

    Originally both bills were completely identical. But crafters of the federal bill changed paragraph (c) for its final version:

    Illinois' paragraph (c): A live child born as a result of an abortion shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law.

    Federal paragraph (c): Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being "born alive" as defined in this section.

    And here is where Obama is lying. The IL Born Alive senate sponsor tried to amend it to add federal paragraph (c) and Obama, as chairman of the committee hearing the bill, stopped him and killed the bill.

    In other words, Obama purposefully obstructed the IL version from being the same as the federal version. He is lying when he says he would have supported the federal version. He prevented that.




    January 10, 2008
    Top 10 reasons Obama voted against the Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act

    obama%20and%20baby.jpgHere are the top 10 reasons Barack Obama has variously stated why he voted against Illinois' Born Alive Infant Protection Act when state senator....

    10. Babies who survive their abortions are not protected by the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. Speaking against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act on the IL Senate floor on March 30, 2001, Obama, the sole verbal opponent to the bill stated:

    ... I just want to suggest... that this is probably not going to survive constitutional scrutiny.

    Number one, whenever we define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a - child, a nine-month-old - child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place.

    I mean, it - it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute. For that purpose, I think it would probably be found unconstitutional.

    9. A ban to stop aborted babies from being shelved to die would be burdensome to their mothers. She alone should decide whether her baby lives or dies. Before voting "no" for a 2nd time in the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 5, 2002, Obama stated:

    What we are doing here is to create one more burden on women, and I can't support that.

    During a speech at Benedictine University in October 2004, Obama said, according to the Illinois Leader, that "the decision concerning a baby should be left to a woman, but that he does not see himself as supportive of abortion."

    8. Wanting to stop live aborted babies from being shelved to die was all about politics. During that same speech at Benedictine University, Obama said, according to the Illinois Leader, "the bill was unnecessary in Illinois and was introduced for political reasons."

    7. There was no proof. Also during the Benedictine University speech, Obama said, according to the Illinois Leader, that "there was no documentation that hospitals were actually doing what was alleged in testimony presented before him in committee."

    6. Aborting babies alive and letting them die is a doctor's prerogative. An Obama spokesman told the Chicago Tribune in August 2004 that Obama voted against Born Alive because it included provisions that "would have taken away from doctors their professional judgment when a fetus is viable."

    5. Anyway, doctors don't do that. Obama told the Chicago Sun-Times in October 2004 he opposed Born Alive because "physicians are already required to use life-saving measures when fetuses are born alive during abortions."

    4. Aborting babies alive and letting them die is a religious issue. During their U.S. Senate competition, Alan Keyes famously said:

    Christ would not stand idly by while an infant child in that situation died.... Christ would not vote for Barack Obama, because Barack Obama has voted to behave in a way that it is inconceivable for Christ to have behaved.

    Obama has always mischaracterized Keyes' rationale for condemning Obama by implying Keyes was simply making a statement against Obama's pro-abortion position, which is untrue. Keyes pointedly stated he was condemning Obama for his support of infanticide.

    Nevertheless, live birth abortion must be included in the list of procedures Obama condones. Obama responded first to Keyes by saying, as quoted in his July 10, 2006, USA Today op ed:

    ... [W]e live in a pluralistic society, and that I can't impose my religious views on another.

    obama%20family.jpg3. Aborting babies alive and letting them die violates no universal principle. In the same USA Today piece, Obama said he reflected on that first answer, decided it was a "typically liberal response," and revised it:

    ... But my opponent's accusations nagged at me.... If I am opposed to abortion for religious reasons but seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.

    2. Sinking Born Alive was simply about political oneupsmanship. Obama has this quote on his website:

    Pam Sutherland, the president and CEO of the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council, told ABC News, "We worked with him specifically on his strategy. The Republicans were in control of the Illinois Senate at the time. They loved to hold votes on 'partial birth' and 'born alive'. They put these bills out all the time... because they wanted to pigeonhole Democrats...."

    And the #1 reason Obama voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act was:

    1. The IL Born Alive Infant Protection Act was a ploy to undercut Roe v. Wade. During a debate against Keyes in October 2004, Obama stated:

    Now, the bill that was put forward was essentially a way of getting around Roe vs. Wade.... At the federal level, there was a similar bill that passed because it had an amendment saying this does not encroach on Roe vs. Wade. I would have voted for that bill.

    This was an out-and-out lie. The definition of "born alive" in the federal and Illinois versions were identical. The only difference came in paragraph (c), which was originally identical in both versions but changed on the federal level.

    Illinois' paragraph (c): A live child born as a result of an abortion shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law.

    Federal paragraph (c): Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being "born alive" as defined in this section.

    When the senator sponsoring the IL bill tried to amend IL's paragraph (c), Amendment 1 below, to be the same as the federal paragraph (c), Barack Obama himself, as chairman of the committee hearing the bill, refused, and he then also killed the bill (click to enlarge).


    December 19, 2007
    Hannity & Colmes: Stanek, Obama, and babies aborted alive

    Last night on Hannity & Colmes Alan Keyes did a real good job explaining Barack Obama's actions as IL state senator to halt the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. Keyes brought my name into the discussion since I witnessed babies being aborted alive and testified before Obama in committee. The relevant portion of the interview comes during the first 2-1/2 minutes:

    [HT: Fran from IL Review]


    December 12, 2007
    Fighting chance

    I heard Matt Drudge say recently he loves the British press, and I do, too. They tell a story honestly, albeit sometimes melodramatically, but with no agenda. From the Daily Mail, December 8:

    It was to be the one and only cuddle Carolyn Isbister would have with her tiny, premature daughter.

    Rachael had been born minutes before - weighing a mere 20oz - and had only minutes to live. Her heart was beating once every ten seconds and she was not breathing.

    As doctors gave up, Miss Isbister lifted her baby out of her hospital blanket and placed her on her chest.

    She said: "I didn't want her to die being cold. So I lifted her out of her blanket and put her against my skin to warm her up. Her feet were so cold.

    "It was the only cuddle I was going to have with her, so I wanted to remember the moment." Then something remarkable happened....

    The warmth of her mother's skin kickstarted Rachael's heart into beating properly, which allowed her to take little breaths of her own.

    Miss Isbister said: "We couldn't believe it - and neither could the doctors. She let out a tiny cry.


    "The doctors came in and said there was still no hope - but I wasn't letting go of her. We had her blessed by the hospital chaplain, and waited for her to slip away.

    "But she still hung on. And then amazingly the pink colour began to return to her cheeks.

    "She literally was turning from grey to pink before our eyes, and she began to warm up too."

    Four months later, Rachael was allowed home weighing 8lb - the same as a newborn baby - and she has a healthy appetite....

    When Rachael was born [at 24 weeks] she was grey and lifeless.

    "The doctor just took one look at her and said no," said Miss Isbister.

    "They didn't even try to help her with her breathing as they said it would just prolong her dying. Everyone just gave up on her."

    Ian Laing, a consultant neonatologist at the hospital, said: "All the signs were that the little one was not going to make it and we took the decision to let mum have a cuddle as it was all we could do.

    "Two hours later the wee thing was crying. This is indeed a miracle baby and I have seen nothing like it in my 27 years of practice. I have not the slightest doubt that mother's love saved her daughter."

    Rachael was moved on to a ventilator where she continued to make steady progress.

    Miss Isbister said: "The doctors said that she had proved she was a fighter and that she now deserved some intensive care as there was some hope.

    "She had done it all on her own - without any medical intervention or drugs....

    Because Rachael had suffered from a lack of oxygen doctors said there was a high risk of damage to her brain. But a scan showed no evidence of any problems....

    We would never withhold CPR from a child or adult pending demonstration of proof they were "fighters." How ridiculous. Premature infants are the most medically discriminated against of any age group.

    [HT: moderator Bethany]


    December 6, 2007
    Obama may have voted "present," but Hillary voted "yes" on identical pro-life bill

    I reported Tuesday that Hillary Clinton is giving Barack Obama heat for voting "present" on certain bills as IL state senator, seven on abortion issues, according to Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times. I know three of those were on the Born Alive Infant Protection Act package of bills.

    Well, there has been such a rich development.

    emily%27s%20list2.jpgMSNBC reported yesterday on a press conference arranged by the Clinton campaign with Ellen Malcolm, head of the pro-abortion group, EMILY's List, to tout Hillary as the best credentialled pro-abort presidential candidate. EMILY's List raises funds for pro-abort female legislative candidates, and has a dismal record to show for it, btw. Continued MSNBC:

    Malcolm hadn't mentioned Obama by name, but she said that those who vote "present" at tough times don't show a true commitment to leadership - referring to Obama's "present" votes on some anti-abortion measures while serving in the Illinois state Senate.

    Does Malcolm really want to go there?

    The fact is Hillary voted in favor of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act as U.S. Senator, one of the very bills she and EMILY are nailing Obama for voting "present" on as state senator. Was it not better to vote "present" than "yes"? Is that the kind of leadership EMILY wants?

    This point is begging for someone in the MSM to pick up on, particularly since the Obama and Clinton campaigns are vying for pro-abort affections.

    [HT for MSNBC story: Lifenews.com]


    September 26, 2007
    Mother of four stashed fetuses may sue

    I christy%202.jpg wrote about Christy Freeman 6 weeks ago.

    Police searched Freeman's Ocean City, MD, home and grounds after she was hospitalized July 27 for retained placenta but denied having been pregnant.

    They found four dead preborn babies - the newly delivered under her bathroom vanity, twins in a bedroom chest, and one in a Winnebago in the driveway.

    According to several news sources like the Delmarva Daily Times...

    Police reports state Christy Freeman confessed that she allegedly birthed a set of twins sometime in 2004 at her Sunset Drive home and allowed one twin to drown in her toilet.

    But on September 20 charges were dropped, according to the DDT, because:

    ... [S]tate medical examiner Dr. Tasha Greenberg concluded there was no proof the babies were ever alive. Some of the remains were years old.

    In a murder case, [State Attorney Joel] Todd explained, "you have to prove that the victim of that homicide had ever lived."

    But life and death have been confused since abortion was legalized. Note these discrepancies in the Washington Post:

    The medical examiner's office issued fetal death certificates for all the remains, concluding that the deaths might have occurred naturally based on Freeman's history of stillborn births, an infection in the placenta doctors found inside her, and her tobacco use and alleged cocaine use.

    ~ Death certificates for babies they admit lived, just not sure in our air space.

    ~ Natural death due to cocaine and tobacco use.

    (Many states do now provide fetal death certificates, which makes it difficult for abortion proponents who maintain fetuses are just appendages. I've never heard of issuing a death certificate for a removed gallbladder or kidney stone.)

    We did learn through this process there is no MD law against stashing one's own dead fetuses and at any rate, mothers are exempt from murder charges if self-aborting - more demonstrations of the callous disregard for human life thanks to abortion.

    At any rate, as goes this day and age, Freeman got away with murder and now may sue prosecutors:

    [HT: moderator MK and reader MJ; photo courtesy of the Washington Post]


    September 13, 2007
    Fetus beyond the womb

    victoria.jpgThis seems cut-and-dry. There is no question the Born Alive Infant Protection Act applies here. Passed in 2001, it states any human born alive, no matter the circumstances and no matter the gestational age, is constitutionally protected as a legal person.

    And it's a good thing we have BAIPA, because legalized abortion has completely radicalized thinking on personhood. From the Kansas City Star, September 11:

    A federal magistrate judge has questioned defense arguments that Lisa Montgomery should not be charged with kidnapping because the child she abducted was not a legal person....
    Montgomery is charged with kidnapping resulting in death in the December 2004 killing of Bobbie Jo Stinnett in Skidmore, MO. Prosecutors have accused Montgomery of strangling Stinnett and using a kitchen knife to cut Stinnett's baby from her womb. The baby survived.

    In March, defense attorneys argued that if the baby was defined as a fetus under the U.S. Supreme Court's abortion decision in Roe v. Wade, then Stinnett's death could not have been the result of a kidnapping, which requires the victim to be a person.

    In a filing Monday, Judge John Maughmer recommended that the trial judge strike defense motions based on the Roe argument.

    Chief U.S. District Judge Fernando Gaitan will rule on Maughmer's recommendations before Montgomery's trial begins in October.

    The nonperson, living, now 4-year-old fetus is named Victoria Jo Stinnett and lives with her father Zeb.

    Even abortion proponents should see how incredible this defense argument is.

    But had this baby been aborted, you might not see that. In fact, you likely wouldn't. You've argued it here. You have defended Barack Obama for arguing against IL's Born Alive Infant Protection Act based on that very premise.

    And had the baby had not survived her attack you might not see it either.

    [HT: moderator jasper; family photo is of Victoria at 4 months]


    September 4, 2007
    Stanek on the O'Reilly Factor

    At long last I've got this video formatted correctly and posted on YouTube.

    On September 29, 2000, I was interviewed on the O'Reilly Factor about my experience as an RN at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, IL, holding a live aborted baby.

    Bill O'Reilly was uncharacteristically speechless a couple times throughout, which may be why he chose to replay this as one of his five highlights of the year on December 28, 2000.


    August 24, 2007
    First things first

    A guest columnist in yesterday's Times-Mail acknowledged global warming but said abortion eclipses it and may have snuffed its problem solvers. Same for Social Security.

    Christ Hospital was used to demonstrate abortion's worst example. On that topic, some of you may not have seen the photos I took of the Comfort Room. All can be clicked for enlarged view.

    I believe what Gore is presenting.... Indeed, the climate has been shifting and altering and, of course, we are responsible....

    But I believe there is a bigger issue afflicting us. I believe the cause of protecting our environment is looming for this generation. I also believe that until we understand the socio-economic affect of abortion on our society, we will be unable to solve our environmental problems.

    Simply put, we have probably destroyed those that could have pulled us out of this dilemma. So many things in our economy banked on the 40 million people who have been eradicated. Our Social Security system was based on succeeding generations supporting the current elderly population. What looked good on paper in the 1930s, diminished greatly at the dawn of abortion rights....

    I find it heart wrenching to think of polar bears drowning in a melting polar ice cap. I find it admirable that men of substance find this motivating.

    But where is the weeping for the human lives abandoned to laundry room clutter 'til their new lives ebb?

    Incidences of stories like this have been documented across our country, the most newsworthy having taken place at Christ Hospital in Chicago when nurse Jill Stanek observed the standard procedure for babies who survive the abortion procedure.

    The administration of that hospital remedied that situation, however. No longer will women have to wonder what has happened to their aborted infants, the ones who had the tenacity to be alive after the heinous procedure. No, the kind-hearted administration of that particular hospital has allowed a room set aside for the mourning of these infants who do not make it to the trash can in pieces. There is a rocker, a camera for those first/final photos, comfortable chairs and refreshments for those who are having a difficult time accepting their choice.

    I would venture to bet that some of these gentlemen and women of that hospital hierarchy are members of PETA and would fight to the death for the protection of an endangered species....


    August 11, 2007
    Rush Limbaugh, Christ Hospital, and Barack Obama

    Yesterday, Rush Limbaugh had a caller on who spotlighted Christ Hospital, its involvement in the hideous practice of aborting babies alive and letting them die, and the connection to Barack Obama, who as state senator spoke and voted against IL's Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

    The fired nurse mentioned in the call was, as most know, me.

    Rush is currently showcasing the call on his home page. (Click to enlarge.)

    You can read or listen to a transcript of the call here, or read the relevant portion on my page 2.

    Until Christ Hospital stops aborting, its reputation will continue to be dragged through the mud, of couse, rightfully so.

    As for Obama, there is no way he can explain this one away, although he has tried - giving four different answers by my count.

    The question is whether or not MSM will force him to address his support of aborting babies alive and letting them die.

    Rush is optimistic, telling the caller, "This stuff will all come out. I'm going to tell you something. Aside from the most-informed audience in media, which is you and everybody else listening to this program, most people really start paying attention to this stuff after Thanksgiving, when the primaries start."


    RUSH: Janet in... Godley, Illinois?

    CALLER: (Laughs)

    RUSH: Is that really Godley, Illinois?

    CALLER: Yes, it is.

    RUSH: Well, Janet, welcome to the program.

    CALLER: Thank you. I am so excited about talking to you, and I'm so nervous. I wanted to talk about a different aspect of Obama's candidacy. No one has touched on his very far left stance on social issues such as abortion, and there was an incident here in Illinois about seven years ago, at Christ Hospital -- a suburban hospital to Chicago -- where babies who were born alive after a botched abortion, were left to die in linen closets and a nurse exposed it, and she was of course fired, and there were demonstrations, and it led the Illinois legislature to formulate the Infants Born Alive Act, which stated that infants who were born alive as the result of a botched abortion, could not be left to die, and Barack Obama voted against it.

    RUSH: May I stop you right there?

    CALLER: Yes.

    RUSH: Don't lose your train of thought.

    CALLER: Okay.

    RUSH: What does it say about the state of Illinois and the country in general, when such a law is required?

    Rush22.jpgCALLER: Yes, I know. It is very sad.

    RUSH: A baby born alive in a botched abortion can't be killed!

    CALLER: Right.

    RUSH: (Gags.)

    CALLER: I know. It's pretty sick.

    RUSH: Okay, what did Obama do?

    CALLER: He voted against that act. He went on record and voted against a law to protect those children.

    RUSH: Well, I'm sure he had a reason! What was it?

    CALLER: You know, I could not for the life of me tell you. I'm sure it was to protect the right of the woman to choose.

    RUSH: It is that, but I'll tell you what it is? There is something corrupting about the Democrat Party. Do you know that both Bill Clinton and Al Gore were pro-liers?

    CALLER: No, I did not know that.

    RUSH: Yeah, they were. When you seek national office in the Democrat Party, one of the first things you have to do is cash in that chip, and you have to pay homage to the sacrament of the religion of that party which is abortion. You don't stand a prayer of getting the nomination in the Democrat Party if you do anything that would make any abortion harder to accomplish or to get done. So that's Obama. It's clear to me he had national aspirations at the time, then he did not want to do anything that would anger the NAGs and the militant feminists, and the general leftists in the party.

    CALLER: Right. I think that should be publicly known during this campaign, how far, far left he is.

    RUSH: This stuff will all come out. I'm going to tell you something. Aside from the most-informed audience in media, which is you and everybody else listening to this program, most people really start paying attention to this stuff after Thanksgiving, when the primaries start.


    August 10, 2007
    Fetal homicide vs. infanticide

    There is way more going on with this story than meets the eye.

    You've likely heard about it by now. Four babies were discovered July 26 in an around the Maryland apartment of Christy Freeman after she was taken by ambulance to a hospital for hemorraging with retained placenta but denied having a baby.

    Police searched and found not just the 26-week-old baby Freeman had just delivered - under her bathroom vanity - but two more in a bedroom chest and another in a Winnebago in the driveway.

    The state attorney originally charged Freeman with murdering the baby she had just delivered, under a 2005 Maryland fetal homicide statute passed in response to the murders of Laci and Connor Peterson that targets criminals intending to kill a "viable fetus."

    christy.jpgThen, last week, the state attorney changed course and instead charged Freeman with murdering "Twin One," as they call him/her, after the coroner concluded s/he was "full-term or near full-term," and after Freeman confessed to letting the baby drown in the toilet where delivered.

    Yes, two of the found babies were apparently twins, the ones found together in the bedroom chest, delivered in either 2003 or 2004. (There are two dates out there.) Freeman has not said how Twin Two died, nor has the coroner reported yet.

    When reading various news reports, it was on these points I became confused and called Denise Burke, vice president and legal director of Americans United for Life, who was quoted in at least one news story re: this case....

    The media has gotten hung up on the 2005 fetal homicide law, particularly because it has a clause exempting mothers from prosecution who have committed self-abortions that result in fetal demise.

    Also problematic is the fact that three of the four deaths appear to have occurred before the law was passed.

    Also problematic for prosecutors, I know, is that Baby One was 26 weeks, and viability is currently considered 23 weeks, making it harder to prosecute.

    Burke told the Associated Press "she knew of no other cases in the nation of women charged under fetal homicide laws with murdering their own fetuses," which in itself makes this case remarkable.

    But what if Freeman didn't try to abort but just delivered the babies naturally?

    And what if she did try to abort - and they were born alive?

    And so what if the babies were not viable?

    It seems to me these cases fall instead under the realm of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, passed in 2002, and not a fetal homicide law.

    I asked these questions of Burke, who said she had asked the very same questions of many people. Burke can only conclude there is information the police have not yet released. Or perhaps the coroner has yet to complete all the autopsies.

    Either way, this case could be the first in nation to test a fetal homicide law against a mother, or the first in the nation to test the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

    And here we see another unintended consequence of abortion. Maryland Del. Richard Weldon Jr., thinks the clause in the fetal homicide law will make it "difficult if not impossible to prosecute" Freeman. And I know Born Alive has been difficult to prosecute as well.

    If Freeman cannot be prosecuted, apparently any mother in America can deliver her baby at home and kill the baby and get off scot-free.

    So infanticide will be legal.

    [Hat tip: Mary Kay (MK)]


    April 23, 2007
    Live birth abortions across the pond

    Several news sources have reported on the British study finding that one in 30 babies who are aborted for birth defects survive up to several hours (here, here, and here). These are usually late-term induced labor abortions, following testing for abnormalities.

    gianna.bmpThe study itself, conducted over 10 years from 1995-2004 in 20 hospitals and published by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, contained additional interesting information not yet reported:

  • The prevelance of TOPFA (termination of pregnancy for fetal anomaly) was 1 in 253 conceptions

  • Date range of abortions was 8 to 40 weeks: ~20% were before 16 weeks, ~32% b/t 16-20 weeks; ~38% b/t 20-24 weeks, and 8.4% at or after 24 weeks

  • There were 264 abortions after 24 weeks. Of those, 94 were at or after 28 weeks and 26 were at or after 34 weeks....

  • Reasons? 39% were for chromosomal anomalies (would include Down syndrome), 25% for malformations of multiple systems, 23% for neural tube defects (would include spina bifida and anencephaly), 5% for kidney problems, and 5% for heart defects

  • Live born TOPFAs occurred in 18 of 20 hospitals

  • The median survival time of babies aborted alive was 80 minutes. Six survived 6+ hours.

  • At 23 weeks gestation, the number of babies aborted alive increased to almost 10%.

    [Photo, courtesy of The Evening Standard, is of Gianna Jesson, aborted alive 30 years ago at the age of 7.5 months]


    April 11, 2007
    Remembering Baby Rowan

    I'm really sorry I just missed the second anniversary of Baby Rowan's death.

    Baby Rowan was aborted alive into a toilet on April 2, 2005, at one of abortionist James Pendergraft's late-term abortion mills, EPOC Clinic, in Orlando, FL.

    By dates, Rowan was 22-6/7 weeks old, just 1 day shy of conventional wisdom's current line of viability (although Amillia Taylor was recently born at 21 weeks at a Miami hospital and survived).

    I received an anguished email from Rowan's mother Angele several days after the abortion and wrote about what happened. I later met Angele, a warm, loving, and tortured woman. Here is what she relayed to me....

    rowan2.jpgAngele had belatedly decided to abort. She traveled out of state to undergo a late-term abortion, in this case the induced labor abortion procedure.

    The abortionist gave her a medication to irritate and open her cervix the first day, then she spent the night at a hotel and returned to the mill to complete the procedure the next day.

    Angele felt like having a bowel movement and went to the bathroom. Baby Rowan was delivered alive in the toilet. Angele wrote me, "The very moment I saw my son was alive, nothing else in the whole world mattered but Rowan's safety! I fell immediately in love with my baby boy and was afraid of nothing that I ever feared before. Only one thing mattered to me: getting Rowan help. I begged, repeatedly."

    Angele begged abortion clinic worker Violene to get help, but Violene shut the bathroom door on Angele and little Rowan, along with "blood everywhere," as Angele later said.

    Angele panicked and called her friend who was awaiting her return at the hotel. The friend called 911. You used to be able to hear that call here, but YouTube has apparently removed it. While waiting for help, Angele held her baby and sang to him. But no help came, and Rowan died after 11 minutes.

    rowan3b.jpgMeanwhile clinic workers turned the ambulance drivers away at the front door, saying not to worry, the call was just placed by a hysterical patient.

    After much prodding, the state finally autopsied the baby. The medical examiner said it did not look like air entered Rowan's lungs, although babies can live for quite some time without that appearance.

    The ME did not test Rowan's blood to see if the abortionist had tried to kill him before starting the abortion. Sometimes they do this by visualizing the baby's heart on ultrasound and injecting medication through the mother's abdomen into the baby's heart that causes instant cardiac arrest.

    Angele's attorney took these photos of Rowan at the morgue. To read more articles and columns about Rowan, go here, here, here, and here.

    Hat tip: Marilyn, Patte]


    February 20, 2007
    World's youngest surviving baby born in Miami

    amillia1.jpgLittle Amillia Taylor was born at the age of 22 weeks and six days, weighing only 10 oz. We know her exact age because she was conceived by in vitro fertilization.

    Four months later, weighing four pounds, Amilliia is being released from Baptist Children's Hospital in Miami, Florida, today.

    How ironic that the world's youngest known baby to survive was born in Florida, the very state so much in the news lately for standing by as babies older than this little girl are aborted alive and either purposefully killed or shelved to die.

    In fact, according to Local10.com, Amillia's mother Sonja, lied to doctors about her baby's age, knowing they would not resuscitate her otherwise....

    See another photo and link to video as story continues on page 2.

    "Survival of babies that is less than 22 weeks of gestation is close to zero, if not zero," said Dr. Phuket Tantavit, who specializes in neonatology.

    The medical standard is not even to resuscitate a 22-week baby, so when Sonja Taylor knew she was going into labor in October after just 19 weeks, she lied about the baby's term.

    Doctors worked to delay the birth, but nine days later, they had no choice but to perform an emergency C-section, thinking they were delivering a 23-week baby.

    Congratulations to Amillia and her loving, protective parents.


    [Photos courtesy of London's Daily Mail, where video footage may also be seen.]


    February 18, 2007
    Gone and hoped forgotten

    A WorldNetDaily.com headline story yesterday expanded on my Feb 12 blog post, "Bodies of evidence," about sidewalk counselors reporting a young father to Orlando police who brought his baby, accidentally aborted at home, to James Pendergraft's Florida abortion mill. Police refused to act.

    According to Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel to WND, at least two laws may have been broken....

    1. FL state prohibition on late-term abortions outside of hospitals

    2. The federal Born Alive Infants Protection Act, which declares born alive babies are legal persons to be equally protected under the law - including the receipt of medical treatment

    An autopsy of the baby was called for, but sidewalk counselor Patte Smith said police officers on the scene refused to confiscate the baby. She said one of those officers, Charles May, moonlights as a mill security guard, indicating a conflict of interest.

    An autopsy would have determined whether the baby was aborted alive and whether the mother had ingested the drug Cytotec to cause her abortion, which Pendergraft, a convicted felon, would not be authorized to dispense, said Staver.

    Orlando police refused to return multiple calls to WND. The baby's body has most certainly been disposed of by now anyway. Whew. Another close one.

    [Photo courtesy WND and Operation Rescue.]

    posted at 10:50 AM | Comments (1)

    February 11, 2007
    Baby Rowan 911 call

    This is a 911 call unlike any other you may ever hear. It was just posted on You Tube. Made on April 2, 2005, the call was to report a baby had been aborted alive in an Orlando abortion mill. It was not clinic workers who made the call but a friend of the aborting mom, reporting clinic workers were attempting to ensure the baby's demise. It seems to me 911 operators also helped ensure the baby's demise by mishandling the call, solely because the person in life-threatening distress was an aborted baby.

    Clinic workers turned the response team away at the door, and the response team complied. Rowan died in his mother's arms as she sang to him, alone in the bathroom where he was aborted. The photos you will see are of Rowan, taken in the morgue.

    I interviewed and later met Rowan's mother. You can read Rowan's story here. Rowan's mother is a gentle, sensitive person who made a terrible decision under distressing circumstances.

    The abortionist, James Pendergraft, is still in business.


    October 23, 2006
    Blobs of tissue inside and out?

    The bad news is the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists will recommend that babies born alive before the gestational age of 22 weeks not be issued birth certificates, according to Britain's Sunday Times yesterday, since doing so "causes unnecessary suffering to mothers who wanted an abortion."

    The good news is RCOG's recommendation may provoke calls to "drop the limit for social abortions from 24 to 22 weeks," said Dr Vincent Argent, medical director of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, also according to the Times. In Britain, those are illegal.

    Hat tip: Rich Collier. Read full article on page 2.

    The Sunday Times October 22, 2006

    Brief life of premature babies may go unmarked

    Sarah-Kate Templeton, Health Correspondent

    BABIES born alive at less than 22 weeks gestation should be treated as if they had never existed, even if they breathe, move or their heart beats, a report by a royal college is expected to say.

    Guidelines drawn up by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) are expected to recommend that babies born alive before 22 weeks are not routinely issued with a birth certificate.

    Doctors say that even if babies born at less than 22 weeks show signs of life, they are extremely unlikely to survive, so their short existence should not be recorded.

    About 300 babies are born every year below 22 weeks. The babies survive for only a few minutes and often die in their parents’ arms. While most of these cases are extremely premature births, they also include up to 50 babies born alive after failed abortions.

    The RCOG is expected to say that acknowledging that these babies have been born alive, and having to register the births, causes unnecessary suffering to mothers who wanted an abortion. It will say that babies born below 22 weeks are “pre-viable” and not capable of life.

    Although very few babies born below 22 weeks are believed to have survived long-term in Britain, statistics have not been kept. At 22 weeks a couple of babies survive in the UK every year. By 23 weeks, 17% survive.

    The suggestion not to count babies born below 22 weeks gestation would prove contentious. Dr Paul Clarke, a consultant neonatologist at Norfolk and Norwich University hospital, said: “I find this incredible and deeply disturbing. To pretend that any foetus was born dead when it was actually born with signs of life, no matter how small or immature, would be a grave deception.”

    Professor Stuart Campbell, whose 3D ultrasound images of a foetus sucking its thumb at 14 weeks and opening its eyes at 18 weeks, shifted popular opinion on abortion, said society could not deny that babies younger than 22 weeks had been born alive. “If the foetus is making respiratory efforts, its heart is beating and it is moving its limbs then it is born alive. This seems like trying to deny the truth of what is happening,” said Campbell.

    In stating that babies become viable at 22 weeks, the RCOG will also provoke further calls to end abortions for social reasons up to 24 weeks.

    Dr Vincent Argent, medical director of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, is the latest abortion expert to add his support to lowering the upper limit. “It may be reasonable to drop the limit for social abortions from 24 to 22 weeks in view of the expected RCOG guideline on the pre-viable foetus,” said Argent.

    Last year 875 late abortions were carried out at 22 and 23 weeks gestation, which would not be allowed if the cut-off point was reduced to 22 weeks.

    Abortions would still be allowed up to birth if the baby had a severe disability or if the mother was in grave danger.

    Copyright 2006 Times Newspapers Ltd.

    posted at 12:30 PM

  • :: return home ::

    quote of the day

    weekly poll

    site proofreader (notify for corrections)

    have a news tip?

    daily record
    March 2008
    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    2 3 4 5 6 7 8
    9 10 11 12 13 14 15
    16 17 18 19 20 21 22
    23 24 25 26 27 28 29
    30 31          

    rss feeds
    [rss feed]
    [rss feed]

    news links

    web links

    lifeblog links

    poliblog links

    search the site