|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
  |
||
|
|
|
Pro-Life News, Jan. 22, 2003Premature baby saves mom’s lifeWe’ve all heard of that conjectural “abortion to save the life of the mother.” Here is a childbirth that saved the mother’s life, summarized by Dave Andrusko from a Canadian newspaper story. In late 2000, Patrizia Durante, now 27, learned she was suffering from acute myloid leukemia when she was two-thirds of the way through her first pregnancy. She told the [newspaper], “It was terrifying,” she recalled. “I was afraid for the baby. I was afraid of dying and not being there for my daughter. It was very stressful and difficult for my family.” When she did not respond to moderate doses of chemotherapy, the doctors induced labor at 26 weeks so they could crank up the dosage without hurting her baby. On Sept. 2, 2001, Victoria was born. Weighing 3½ pounds and two months premature, baby Victoria was placed in an incubator while Mrs. Durante renewed her chemotherapy. By March, however, Mrs. Durante was so ill that doctors at Royal Victoria Hospital could wait no longer for a suitable donor for a bone-marrow transplant. At that point doctors took a calculated risk. They infused Mrs. Durante with Victoria’s umbilical cord blood, which had been frozen. Umbilical-cord blood is usually banked for later use by the child should it develop a life-threatening illness such as leukemia. While clearly Mrs. Durante’s body might have rejected the blood (because Victoria’s blood was only a half-match; it carried her mother’s genes as well as her father’s), this might work to Mrs. Durante’s benefit. As Dr. Pierre Laneuville, director of hematology at the McGill University Health Centre, told the Gazette, “[I]n this case, the incompatibility — that is, the genes that the baby’s dad contributed — theoretically could have been very beneficial in this transplant. There was the possibility that the immune system of the baby may identify the leukemia as foreign and attack.” Which is exactly what happened. As the Canadian newspaper described it, “The stem cells also flooded Mrs. Durante’s bloodstream and stuck to her bone marrow — the part of the body that manufactures the blood — and began rebuilding her blood system.” The stem cells also destroyed residual cancer cells, and seven months after the infusion Mrs. Durante is in complete remission. “We’re elated,” Dr. Laneuville said. “This is the best-case scenario we could possibly have imagined.... From a doctor’s point of view, the chances are she’s cured.” … What makes umbilical cord blood so useful is that it is plentiful in the hemopoietic stem cells that can rebuild a blood system that has taken a beating from mega-doses of chemotherapy. Preliminary results from animal studies to determine whether stem cells derived from cord blood can repair damaged heart and brain tissue are “promising,” the newspaper also reported. … For pro-lifers, who’ve argued ceaselessly that there are morally unobjectionable alternatives to lethally extracting stem cells from human embryos, one of Dr. Laneuville’s concluding observations is especially poignant: “We are now in an era where we are realizing scientifically and medically that we have sources of stem cells that can become other tissues and can be used therapeutically,” he said. “And the most accessible source and the one we’re throwing in the garbage all the time are these cord cells.” Dave Andrusko, Today’s News & Views, 10-30-2002; www.nrlc.org/news_and_views/index.html, dha1245@juno.com. Poll: Americans want to protect babiesNearly 70 percent of Americans say they favor “restoring legal protection for unborn children,” according to a new poll that pro-life groups say shows public opinion is developing on the side of protecting babies from abortion. “This is the new, big change in this country,” Sandy Rios, president of Concerned Women for America, said January 15 as she and other leaders of pro-life and traditional family groups released the findings of a Wirthlin Worldwide poll taken in December 2002. Some 1,000 adults were asked whether, in light of medical advances that reveal the unborn child’s body and facial features in detail, “are you in favor of restoring legal protection for unborn children?” Sixty-eight percent of the randomly surveyed adults said they were in favor of legal protection, with 44 percent in strong agreement of such action. Almost the same number – 66 percent – said they favored nominees to the Supreme Court “who would uphold laws that restore legal protection to unborn children.” By comparison, a June 1999 Wirthlin poll found that 62 percent of Americans supported legal abortion only in three or fewer rare circumstances: When the pregnancy results from rape or incest or when it threatens the life of the mother. The data means that they would be willing to prohibit nearly all of America’s annual 1.3 million elective abortions. Building on these numbers, the group Faith2Action is circulating a petition urging action on the part of President George W. Bush, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and House Speaker Dennis Hastert. The political reality is that seven out of 10 Americans surveyed want legislation that protects the rights of unborn babies, and that two out of three support U.S. Supreme Court justices who will uphold such laws. The petition may be reviewed at www.conservativepetitions.com/petitions.php?id=118. Cheryl Wetzstein, The Washington Times, 1-16-2003; www.washingtontimes.com. More pro-life legislation could pass during the 108th Congress than at any time since Roe vs. Wade.More pro-life legislation could pass during the 108th Congress than at any time since Roe vs. Wade was decided, according to Joel C. Rosenburg, of World magazine. In the January 25 issue, he predicts that U.S. House leaders will move quickly to pass the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003. The bill would prohibit any person or company from knowingly (1) performing or attempting to perform human cloning; (2) participating in such an attempt; (3) shipping or receiving an embryo produced from human cloning; or (4) importing a cloned embryo. The bill passed the House decisively last session, 265-162, but Democratic leaders refused to bring it up in the Senate. However, Sen. Bill Frist, now the Senate Majority Leader and in control of the legislative agenda, supports the ban. Other pro-life bills expected to pass and be signed by the president: The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, the Child Custody Protection Act, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, and a bill to allow faith-based hospitals to opt out of performing abortions. World magazine, www.worldmag.com. Virginia legislature opportunityVirginia Delegate Bob Marshall (R-PW) writes, “Emails and phone calls should be directed immediately to Attorney General Kilgore regarding his reluctance to challenge the U.S. Supreme Court’s virtual endorsement of infanticide in the Stenberg decision, which struck down state laws banning partial birth abortion.” Del. Marshall and Sen. Steve Newman have introduced identical bills that define when birth occurs and infanticide as the intentional killing of a partially born child. Del. Marshall’s HB 1541 is at http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?031+ful+HB1541; and Sen. Newman’s SB 1205 is at http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?031+ful+SB1205. Under the proposed statute, once a baby’s head enters the birth canal, the child would be considered a live human being subject to all the protections of the law. Since partial-birth abortion is performed after that point, the procedure would be punishable as infanticide in Virginia. Jerry Kilgore’s chief lieutenants are opposing the efforts of these two legislators on the grounds that the Supreme Court may strike these efforts down. Yet, there are no direct Supreme Court decisions defining when birth occurs. The Supreme Court opinion in Roe v. Wade did not challenge the part of existing Texas law that criminalized the killing of a fetus “in the state of being born.” That statute (Article 4512.5) remains in the Texas Code unchanged since 1879, not even by the Supreme Court’s Roe and Doe decisions of 1973 or their legal progeny. However, Mr. Kilgore’s chief aides are pushing for “health” exceptions instead, which abortionists would be able to use to continue partial birth abortions. Governor Mark Warner’s aides even asked Del. Marshall about including health exceptions last year on a partial birth abortion bill. Other promising innovative efforts are afoot in other states, according to World magazine. Both Minnesota and Texas are considering informed consent laws that would include information on fetal pain. Women beyond the 20th week of their pregnancies would have to be notified that babies feel intense pain during the abortion procedure. In Texas, a woman who still opts to abort would have to agree to anesthetize her child before killing it. Attorney General Kilgore, 804-786-2071, mail@oag.state.va .us. Del. Robert G. Marshall, bob.marshall@trincomm.org. World magazine, 1-18-2003 Bush Proclaims Sanctity of Human Life DayWASHINGTON – Pledging to build a culture that respects life, President George W. Bush declared Sunday, January 19, National Sanctity of Human Life Day. “As we seek to improve quality of life, overcome illness and promote vital medical research, my administration will continue to honor our country’s founding ideals of equal dignity and equal rights for every American,” Mr. Bush said January 14. “By working together to protect the weak, the imperfect and the unwanted, we affirm a culture of hope and help ensure a brighter future for all.” The president referred to the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act he signed last year, which amends the legal definitions of “person,” “human being,” “child” and “individual” to include any premature baby that survives an abortion procedure. Mr. Bush also underscored his administration’s efforts to champion compassionate alternatives to abortion, such as promoting maternity group homes, encouraging abstinence and adoption and passing parental-notification and waiting-period laws. “Every child is a priority and a blessing and I believe that all should be welcomed in life and protected by law,” he said. “Through ethical policies and the compassion of Americas, we will continue to build a culture that respects life.” He urged Americans to mark the occasion at home or in places of worship, to help others in need and to “reaffirm our commitment to respecting the life and dignity of every human being.” From wire reports. Global trend seen best where the Iron Curtain fell“The most striking recent trend,” according to a summary of abortion rates by the leading pro-abortion think tank, the Alan Guttmacher Institute, “is a sharp decline in abortion incidence in eastern and central Europe and the successor states to the Soviet Union.” “For example,” the summary continues, “rates fell by 28 to 47 percent in the four former Soviet states with reasonably complete data (Belarus, Estonia, Kazakhstan and Latvia), and by 18 to 65 percent in six states with less-complete reporting. “Similar patterns were seen in such nations as Bulgaria, Hungary and the Czech and Slovak Republics. Rates have also declined in several other developed countries: Since 1975, the abortion rate in such countries as Denmark, Finland, Italy and Japan has dropped by 40 to 50 percent.” The AGI makes a case for contraception out of all this, but the truth is that women who are free to learn about God and to serve Him will not kill their children as readily as the model Soviet Woman might have done, albeit with tears. It is interesting to consider that this single measurement of human misery may be an indicator of the rise and fall of nations. For instance, in some free nations – among them Canada, New Zealand and Scotland – abortion rates have shown an increase during the nineties. Are these nations at risk of decline? Among developing countries with reliable data, China, South Korea, Tunisia and Turkey have experienced a declining rate of abortions, while others, such as Cuba and Vietnam, where oppression and restrictions on the spread of Christianity are still in place, have seen increases in prevalence of abortion. Data from International Family Planning Perspectives, 1999, 25(1):44-48; published by the Alan Guttmacher Institute. Women fight backPatricia Heaton, the Emmy-winning co-star of the hit CBS sitcom Everybody Loves Raymond, serves as honorary chair of Feminists for Life. Her message on the organization’s web site: “Every 36 seconds in America a woman lays her body down, forced to choose abortion out of a lack of practical resources and emotional support. Abortion is a reflection that society has failed women.” Women Deserve Better, a new marketing campaign launched by six national pro-life groups, takes a similar tack, stressing that “Abortion is a reflection that we have not met the needs of women. This campaign is dedicated to promoting women-centered solutions to significantly reduce abortion and protect women’s health.” World magazine, www.worldmag.com, 1-18-2003. Poland stands firmPolish President Aleksander Kwasniewski says he opposes any changes to his country’s legal protections for unborn babies. Mr. Kwasniewski spoke in response to a proposal by a leader of the governing Social Democratic Party, the SLD, to hold a referendum on the law. Currently, abortion is allowed only to women who have been raped or whose lives are endangered by pregnancy. BBC, 1-18-2003, http://news.bbc.co.uk.
|
