Abortion clinics, particularly Planned Parenthood clinics in Iowa, have offered RU-486 (chemical) abortions to patients without a doctor being physically present for assessment of the woman’s medical condition. Instead, the woman talks to a doctor over the internet and the doctor, who could be hundreds of miles away, remotely approves the dispensing of the drug. FDA guidelines require RU-486 to be dispensed by a doctor. This requirement is essential to protecting the health of the woman since RU-486 requires surgical follow-up in some cases, and has been associated with severe health consequences and even death. Removing the physical patient-physician contact places women at additional risk and leaves them without a doctor of their own to call on should complications arise.

LLDF commends the pro-life members of congress who have taken this first step toward curbing the abominable practice of “telemed abortions.” To see if your member of Congress was among the original cosponsors, see the list below.

Original Cosponsors:

Rep. King, Steve [R-IA-5]
Rep. Bachmann, Michele [R-MN-6]
Rep. Bartlett, Roscoe G. [R-MD-6]
Rep. Benishek, Dan [R-MI-1]
Rep. Black, Diane [R-TN-6]
Rep. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN-7]
Rep. Brady, Kevin [R-TX-8]
Rep. Broun, Paul C. [R-GA-10]
Rep. Canseco, Francisco “Quico” [R-TX-23]
Rep. Cole, Tom [R-OK-4]
Rep. DesJarlais, Scott [R-TN-4]
Rep. Duncan, Jeff [R-SC-3]
Rep. Ellmers, Renee L. [R-NC-2]
Rep. Fleischmann, Charles J. “Chuck” [R-TN-3]
Rep. Fleming, John [R-LA-4]
Rep. Flores, Bill [R-TX-17]
Rep. Garrett, Scott [R-NJ-5]
Rep. Gohmert, Louie [R-TX-1]
Rep. Harris, Andy [R-MD-1]
Rep. Hartzler, Vicky [R-MO-4]
Rep. Huelskamp, Tim [R-KS-1]
Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-2]
Rep. Hultgren, Randy [R-IL-14]
Rep. Johnson, Bill [R-OH-6]
Rep. Jones, Walter B., Jr. [R-NC-3]
Rep. Jordan, Jim [R-OH-4]
Rep. Kelly, Mike [R-PA-3]
Rep. Lamborn, Doug [R-CO-5]
Rep. Landry, Jeffrey M. [R-LA-3]
Rep. Lankford, James [R-OK-5]
Rep. Lipinski, Daniel [D-IL-3]
Rep. Manzullo, Donald A. [R-IL-16]
Rep. Marchant, Kenny [R-TX-24]
Rep. McCotter, Thaddeus G. [R-MI-11]
Rep. McHenry, Patrick T. [R-NC-10]
Rep. Miller, Jeff [R-FL-1]
Rep. Murphy, Tim [R-PA-18]
Rep. Myrick, Sue Wilkins [R-NC-9]
Rep. Neugebauer, Randy [R-TX-19]
Rep. Pearce, Stevan [R-NM-2]
Rep. Pitts, Joseph R. [R-PA-16]
Rep. Roe, David P. [R-TN-1]
Rep. Ross, Dennis [R-FL-12]
Rep. Schmidt, Jean [R-OH-2]
Rep. Schweikert, David [R-AZ-5]
Rep. Scott, Tim [R-SC-1]
Rep. Smith, Christopher H. [R-NJ-4]
Rep. Southerland, Steve [R-FL-2]

Over the past two weeks Chen Guangcheng made headlines with his daring escape from house arrest in China, his short stay at the United States Embassy in Beijing, and his current desire to leave the country with his family.

Chen and his family endured severe beatings and starvation over approximately 19 months of house arrest, as well as other forms of persecution. Chen’s “offense” was speaking out against human rights abuses in China. He has become a top leader in efforts to shed light on the horrific forced abortion and sterilizations that occur as part of the nation’s “one child policy.”

Chen’s dramatic escape was an added embarrassment to Chinese officials as it occurred just days before a high-profile meeting with U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. After leaving the U.S. Embassy, Chen indicated that he and his family will be applying to come to the United States.

The high-profile nature of Chen’s case has ensured that it has received attention through the international media. In the United States, Chen has at least one dedicated friend in Congress, Congressman Chris Smith, who has been tireless in advocating for Chen’s freedom and safety. However, unless the pressure is continued, there is danger that China will not follow through in allowing Chen and his family to leave the country. Reggie Littlejohn with Women’s Rights Without Frontiers has expressed continuing concern for Chen’s wellbeing, and indicates that public pressure will be essential to his safety. “Some say that quiet, back door diplomacy is the way to deal with the detention of Chinese human rights defenders. But human rights activists have found that high profile, public pressure is far more effective,” states Littlejohn.

Action Item: Keeping the political pressure on the U.S. State Department is essential to assure Chen’s safety and that of his family. You can contact the White House by clicking here, as well as your elected members of the House by clicking here and the Senate by clicking here. Ask for swift and immediate action to honor the U.S. commitments to human rights by extending every possible protection to Chen and his family.

For updated information on Chen Guangcheng please visit www.LifesiteNews.com

SB 1338 would authorize 41 non-physicians (nurses and physician assistants) to do surgical abortions under a revolutionary Project called HWPP #171. SB 1338 is based on flawed and incomplete research and is dangerous to women.

• NO INDEPENDENT ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT OR PEER REVIEW
The Project was orchestrated not by an independent academic source but by vested interest agents at UCSF’s Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, directed by Dr. Philip Darney. The Bixby Center itself was the beneficiary of Project funds. The California Nurses Association has objected that there was no independent peer review of this Project.

• DUBIOUS FUNDING
The Project to train non-physician abortionists was primarily financed by a major ($3.5 million) donor whom UCSF refuses to identify. Why is this donor being kept anonymous? Will it be an embarrassment to the Legislature if/when the identity of the donor who effectively paid for this law is revealed?

As to Project expenditures, UCSF/Bixby Center has NOT provided an accounting for 2/3 of the $3.9 million collected for the Project, despite a Public Records Act request.

• BAD POLICY, BAD LAW
SB 1338 has now been narrowed so that only the 41 persons who participated in the Project will get the benefit of legal protection from prosecution. It is illegal for non-physicians in California to perform surgical abortion. SB 1338 elevates this one privately and anonymously funded project, HWPP #171, to the status of a state policy, determining who is and is not guilty of a crime. This is a bad way to make law.

• NO PROFESSIONAL OVERSIGHT
Neither the Medical Board of California nor the Nursing Board had any oversight of the Project.

• GREATER HARM TO WOMEN:
INCREASED COMPLICATIONS FOR GIRLS AND YOUNG WOMEN
The Project reported in December 2011 an 80% increase in complications when non-physicians performed surgical abortions. No explanation was given as to why complications increased. They reported that these complications included “incomplete abortion, failed abortion, hemorrhage/excessive bleeding, hematometra, infection, cervical injury, and uterine perforation. The non-physicians had a reported 141 total complications for women while the Physicians had 78 complications.

• LACK OF PHYSICIAN OVERSIGHT FOR CONTRAINDICATED CONDITIONS
The Project reported that several hundred of the patients sampled were deemed ineligible to participate in the Project by the supervising physicians, because of various conditions including medical abnormalities and incomplete surgical or medication abortions. Under SB 1338, there will be no “supervising physician” to screen out these at-risk patients.

• MERELY ONE WEEK OF TRAINING
According to the Project’s “Early Abortion Training Workbook” the entire training period for each non-physician abortionist was only “2-5 days of simulated and hands on training” in order to perform 20-50 first trimester surgical abortions.

* Life Legal Defense Foundation prepared this Fact Sheet based upon public records. A hearing is scheduled for May 10, 2012, on a Writ of Mandate to require UCSF to disclose vital information relating to HWPP #171 that it has withheld from the public.

First Resort, the only Pregnancy Resource Center in San Francisco currently affected by the ordinance, was threatened by the City Attorney for not sufficiently “disclosing” the fact that they do not refer for abortions before the ordinance had even taken effect. Facing this immediate threat to its life-saving work, First Resort brought a challenge to the ordinance based on Free Speech and other concerns.

The City of San Francisco brought a motion to dismiss on all but one claim. The claim the City has not moved to dismiss is the claim for violation of Free Speech under the First Amendment. Counsel for First Resort vigorously defended the City’s motion, and the parties’ positions have been fully briefed. Oral arguments on the motion are set for May 8, 2012, at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in Oakland. The arguments will center on whether the Ordinance violates the constitutional principles of Due Process and Equal Protection, and whether it should be considered preempted by state law.

Earlier articles on this Ordinance from October 2011
and June 2011.

Thanks to all of you who contacted your state representatives regarding SB 1338. After the bill passed in the Senate Public Safety Committee, it was then re-referred to the Senate Committee on Business, Professions and Economic Development. (Story available here). The bill failed in the April 26 hearing in that committee, reconsideration being granted. It was then set for rehearing May 7, 2012, but prior to the May 7 hearing the bill was pulled from the committee by the bill author.

Action Item for California Citizens: Search (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/bilinfo.html) for Senate Bill 1338 to see the current status and history of this bill. Write to your senator, and to the appropriate committee, its members and the bill’s authors and sponsors expressing your opposition to allowing non-physicians to legally perform abortions within your state.

LLDF prepared a fact sheet about SB1338 that will be useful in drafting correspondence to your legislators. This document is also available in PDF.

In February (2012), Senator Christine Kehoe (D-San Diego) introduced CA Senate Bill 1338, which if enacted would allow non-physicians to perform abortions. The new breed of abortionist would merely need to complete a training provided pursuant to the Health Workforce Pilot Project #171 (HWPP). SB 1338 was heard in the Senate Committee on Business, Professions and Economic Development Monday, April 16. View the bill’s status and history.

Abortion is an atrocity even when committed by a physician. By eliminating the physician from the abortion procedure, essential elements of medical safety evaporate. Informed consent becomes nothing more than ticking off a check-list of possible injuries, and the abortion itself simply becomes “a service that involves a certain level of technical expertise on the part of the operator, but otherwise bears merely the semblance of medical care. A woman will receive more genuine medical counseling before undergoing plastic surgery than undergoing an abortion,” writes Katie Short, LLDF’s Legal Director. Read LLDF’s letter opposing SB 1338 in its entirety.

To justify the bill, SB 1338 proponents point to a University of California, San Francisco training for non-physicians under HWPP. In fact, this training program is specifically referenced in the bill, and graduates of the program would be specifically designated as “qualified” to perform abortions under the new law.

LLDF’s repeated public records requests to find out further information concerning this program have been ignored and rejected outright. On Friday, April 13, 2012, LLDF filed a Writ of Mandate to compel disclosure of the information it has been seeking pursuant to public records law, including the identity of the physicians providing HWPP training. Identifying the physicians involved with the training ought to be a paramount legislative concern in order to determine whether the physicians participating in the training are themselves under investigation or discipline for providing substandard care.

Action Item for California Citizens: Go to http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/bilinfo.html and search Senate Bill 1338 to see the current status and history of the bill. Write to your senator, and to the appropriate committee, its members and the bill’s authors and sponsors expressing your opposition to allowing non-physicians to legally perform abortions within your state.

Keynote Speaker – Julia Holcomb, former fiancée of Aerosmith lead singer Steven Tyler.

Life Legal defends the defenders of life to save innocent lives and prevent women from suffering as Julia Holcomb has. God has used Ms. Holcomb’s tragic experience for good (Romans 8:28).

“I pray that all those who have had abortions or have participated in any way in an abortion procedure may find in my story, not judgment or condemnation, but a renewed hope in God’s steadfast love, forgiveness and peace. Marriage and the family are the building blocks of all virtuous societies. I pray that our nation may find its way back to God’s plan by respecting the life of unborn children and strengthening the sanctity of marriage.” – Julia Holcomb

Please also see Citizen Link article Alabama Health Officials: Abortion Center to Close as Scheduled

Birmingham News article (5/1/2012) about the license denial.

Last week the Alabama Department of Public Health wrote the final chapter for the abortion facility New Woman All Women (NWAW) by revoking its license because it failed to offer safe medical care. A decision was preceded by legal actions of the Life Legal Defense Foundation (LLDF) through their Legal Director Catherine Short and Senior Staff Counsel, Allison Aranda, along with local attorneys Trenton Garmon, Nicholas Beckham and Philip Jauregui. For almost two years, attorneys worked in the courts to make it possible for pro-life advocates to counsel women with a crisis pregnancy. They were also able to observe activities that demonstrated this was an unsafe place for women’s medical treatment, activities that were curtailed by both the clinic and Birmingham police.

“Had we not stopped the police from illegally arresting pro-life advocates, who else could have reported to the authorities that in one day, three women were taken from this abortion clinic to a hospital for emergency medical treatment?” said Dana Cody, Executive Director, Life Legal Defense Foundation. “Their ability to bear witness outside this Birmingham abortion clinic helped to shed light on a very dark and deadly place that needed to be closed.”

HISTORY OF LLDF LEGAL WORK

Back in January of 2011, pro-life advocates Jeff White and the Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust were victorious when the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama dismissed a lawsuit against them seeking to prevent White and others from peacefully praying, holding signs, and engaging in oral communication on the public sidewalk outside the NWAW abortion clinic.

In October 2010, after the Survivors, represented by Life Legal Defense Foundation (LLDF), and local attorney Trent Garmon, won an injunction prohibiting the Birmingham police from interfering with their free speech activities, NWAW countered by attempting to enforce an inapplicable federal injunction against White, the Survivors, and other pro-life groups. For over a decade, the clinic and police had been using this injunction to intimidate local pro-lifers from engaging in sidewalk counseling on the public sidewalk. Initially, NWAW was successful in obtaining an injunction against pro-lifers. However, the injunction was a short-lived victory for NWAW when days later it was set aside by Circuit Court Judge Ramsey.

This ruling by Judge Ramsey quashed any hope of victory for NWAW in state court, with the court stating in its order of dismissal that jurisdiction belongs to the federal court.

LLDF Legal Director Catherine Short stated, “The NWAW got used to a new reality: pro-life sidewalk counselors could bring their life-saving message directly to women in crisis pregnancies. Now they have another reality check, putting up a ‘closed’ sign on their doors.”

[Lifeline Vol. XXI, No. 1 (Spring 2012) is available in PDF format.]