Pro-life news brief 7-19-13
by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat
- It’s funny how Reuters decided to investigate the absurd claim which was repeated non-stop that only 5 clinics in Texas would stay open after pro-life legislation passed. Why they didn’t investigate these claims while the legislation was being debated and making national news is anyone’s guess:
Twenty-six states have laws that require abortion clinics to meet varying levels of hospital standards, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which supports abortion rights. Pennsylvania, Virginia and Missouri passed strict health and safety rules similar to Texas, it said.In those three states, however, most clinics were able to stay open after the laws passed, some by reallocating dollars to comply with building upgrades, according to abortion providers and state health department officials interviewed by Reuters….
Elizabeth Nash, state issues manager for the Guttmacher Institute, which favors abortion rights but does research cited by both sides, said the new law will have an impact in Texas but maybe less than the worst fears.
“Clinics will close,” she said. “But I can’t say we are going to go down to six.”
Only one clinic has closed in Virginia since a new law was implemented there earlier this year, the state health department said. No clinics have closed in Missouri because of a tough law passed there in 2007, abortion provider Planned Parenthood of Kansas and mid-Missouri said.
- In Indiana, a woman named Purvi Patel (pictured left) has been charged with felony neglect of a dependent – not feticide, as originally expected – after putting her premature newborn child into a dumpster to die:
The affidavit alleges Patel took drugs she ordered from Hong Kong to induce an abortion, but gave birth to a live baby that a forensic pathologist determined was born at least 7 months from conception….
Last Saturday, hospital staff called police when Patel went to an emergency room bleeding, with the umbilical cord still protruding, but had no baby with her.
Patel told doctors she had never been pregnant but later told them she miscarried and put the body in the dumpster behind the Mishawaka restaurant that she manages.
The affidavit says a forensic pathologist concluded the infant could have survived outside of the womb and did take a breath after it was born.
RH Reality Check’s Robin Marty repeatedly describes the dead newborn child in the case as a “fetus.”
- Sharon Grigsby, the editor of the Dallas News, writes about how her position on abortion has changed over the years and how she didn’t find HB2 in Texas to be unreasonable:
Fast forward to House Bill 2, the sweeping and controversial abortion regulations bill. While my thinking hasn’t moved to the place that I’m ready to lead a board revolt to change our pro-choice stand and call for the overturn of Roe v. Wade, neither do I think the provisions of House Bill 2 are unreasonable.
When our board debated the restrictions in this bill, I couldn’t really find a lot of fault in the rules. I certainly think the 20-week limit is reasonable. And I don’t think the surgical center rules — even being able to get a gurney through the door — are unreasonable. I recognize that almost never does something go wrong in an abortion procedure, but it can. The “admitting privileges” at a nearby hospital is troublesome, but not so much that I think it was cause to oppose the bill.
- Abortionist James Pendergraft has reopened his Orlando clinic which closed after debt collectors removed equipment.WFTV.com has video:
[HT for WFTV.com video: Life Talk’s Facebook page]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I appreciate that we owe Robin Marty a debt of mutual respect. This is a very good thing that Robin has done with us recently.
I really do appreciate her dialogue, with deep sincerity.
So it is with a gentle tone that I offer this correction: When we are discussing reproductive health, we must use words like baby and child in their proper context. If we aren’t talking about human mothers and their human children, then we aren’t talking about reproductive health.
A human fetus is a human child – in the fetal stage of development. That’s a technical, medical definition. Don’t be afraid of it.
A baby is not a medical term. Baby is a layman’s term. Americans typically use the word baby to describe a child from conception to about the time the child begins walking. Consider this common sentence: “Mommy has a baby in her tummy!” This is perfectly good English, with no confusion to anyone who hears it.
As a general rule: Any blog that is afraid to use plain language when discussing plain matters is either lying intentionally, or laboring under self-delusions. (And there’s an awful lot of these, on every topic, all across the internet!)
RHRealityCheck needs to learn how to use the words child and baby, or they aren’t talking about reality in the context of reproductive health.
Child
a person 6 to 12 years of age. An individual 2 to 5 years old is child, preschool.
http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Child
Although, wandering around the multitude of definitions and everyday use of words like baby and child, I think it’s all pretty subjective really.
Then again, in the context of reproductive health, isn’t it helpful to have terms which differentiate?
If someone says fetus, we know they mean pre-born. If someone says baby or infant we know the mean new born. If they say child then we know they mean beyond baby or infant. Telling folks you have a baby when you are six weeks pregnant is a bit confusing if people don’t see a stroller or anything.
Yes, ‘mommy has a baby in her tummy’ is in common use. Because a young child would have difficulty understanding all the implications of fetus. And it makes it easier for them to understand the process if they can grasp the image of what the end result will be.
The word “fetus” may have been used because the woman has been charged with FETICIDE. It also may be used because parts of the article seem to talk about the unborn when it was STILL INSIDE the womb.
I agree that “fetus” is not the right word if separation from the womb occurred. If a breath was taken outside the womb, the term IS in fact “baby.”
I commented there. :3
Let me post it here, since some others are having difficulty:
FETUS:NounAn unborn or unhatched offspring of a mammal, in particular an unborn human baby more than eight weeks after conception.
Umm…yeah. This offspring was BORN, therefore an INFANT or NEONATE.
ne·o·nate /?n???n?t/
NounA newborn child or mammal.An infant less than four weeks old.Way to fail basic vocabulary and science, simultaneously. But I guess in Pro-Abortion Land, the Whim of The Mother determines legal status AND changes facts and the definitions of basic terms.
ba·by
[bey-bee] noun, plural ba·bies, adjective, verb, ba·bied, ba·by·ing.
noun
1. an infant or very young child.
2. a newborn or very young animal.
3. the youngest member of a family, group, etc.
4. an immature or childish person.
5. a human fetus.
Oh my, I see my reputation proceeds me, even at a place like RH(sur)Reality Check! XD
Reality says:
Telling folks you have a baby when you are six weeks pregnant is a bit confusing if people don’t see a stroller or anything.
Yes, ‘mommy has a baby in her tummy’ is in common use. Because a young child would have difficulty understanding all the implications of fetus. And it makes it easier for them to understand the process if they can grasp the image of what the end result will be.
Fetus is the technical term for a child in the womb. But a pregnant mother never says, “I have a fetus.” She says, “I’m having a baby.” No one is confused.
A woman in a crisis pregnancy and considering abortion says, “I don’t want to have this baby.”
We know what RHRealityCheck is trying to do: As advocates for abortion, they want to dehumanize the child by using technical terms that real women do not use.
I urge Robin and RHRealityCheck to understand that this language also dehumanizes real women. They are not helping real women in distress to make a good decision for herself. The are simply using the same language that the abortion industry uses during the pitch they sell to a vulnerable woman.
A website for abortion advocates who are truly concerned about women’s health would spend roughly half their time defending against pro-life legislation, a quarter of their time urging the abortion industry to provide better care for post-abortive women, and a quarter of their time educating women against the propaganda of the pro-life movement and the mis-information sales pitch of the abortion industry.
As it stands now, no one reads RHRealityCheck except pro-lifers and the abortion industry. RHRC is not reaching out to women in need of help and real information.
“Although, wandering around the multitude of definitions and everyday use of words like baby and child, I think it’s all pretty subjective really.” – glad to see you agree xalisae and JoAnna.