In 2019, Facebook slapped Live Action with a “false news” label when founder Lila Rose stated in a video that abortion is never medically necessary. Using two abortionists, Facebook published a fact-check claiming abortion can be necessary if a woman has serious complications or health risks. Yet while it is true that things can go wrong during pregnancy, an abortion — which deliberately targets a child for death — is never needed.
‘A skilled physician can save both lives’
In the biased “fact check,” abortionists Daniel Grossman and Robyn Schickler gave examples of complications which they claimed would necessitate an abortion, such as placenta previa, ruptured membranes, pre-eclampsia, and even hyperemesis gravidarum. Yet thousands of doctors disagreed, including Dr. Ingrid Skop, an American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) Fellow, and an active member of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG). Skop has delivered over 5,000 babies, and serves on the boards of Healthy Futures of Texas and Any Woman Can. In a statement to Live Action News in 2019, Skop pointed out that the issues the two abortionists cited are often treatable, are not immediately life-threatening for the mother, and do not require an abortion.
“Abortion for hyperemesis is a travesty,” Dr. Skop said. “With modern medicine, no woman should ever die from that problem. I still can’t understand why they are willing to recommend abortion for placenta previa. Intentionally placing a surgical instrument through a placenta gives me chills!… [A] skilled physician can save both lives with standard obstetric techniques.”
READ: Former abortionist: Abortion is never medically necessary to save the life of the mother
She added, “While we do see early severe preeclampsia/HELLP on occasion, I have never seen it at such an early gestational age that the fetus does not at least have a chance at survival,” adding that the abortionists had “intentionally misrepresented the age of viability — they called it 24 weeks, but neonatologists call it 22 weeks.”
The only scenario, she said, in which the baby might die “is the previable premature rupture of membranes resulting in sepsis… The uterus does need to be evacuated, and we do this by inducing labor, not by D&E.” (emphasis added) She added, “Additionally, because these women are sick, they need IV antibiotics and to be cared for in a hospital, where ICU and other interventions for sepsis are immediately available. Referring them to an abortion clinic, where most D&Es are performed, would subject them to a lower standard of care, and unnecessarily threaten the woman’s health.”
Abortion would be ‘irresponsible’ and ‘much riskier’
Dr. Christina Francis, AAPLOG’s Chairman of the Board, has likewise explained before that proscribing abortion for some of these complications, like placenta previa, could actually threaten the mother’s life (emphasis added):
Placenta previa is a condition in which the placenta covers the cervix, making a vaginal delivery impossible due to the possibility of life-threatening hemorrhage if labor occurs. These are frequently diagnosed in pregnancy on ultrasound around 20 weeks, however approximately 90% of these will resolve on their own before delivery. If significant hemorrhage occurs due to a placenta previa (which again is so rare prior to viability that no incidence is even reported), the patient should be taken for an emergency C-section which is the most expedient way to get her bleeding under control.
It would be medically dangerous and irresponsible to try to do an abortion since any instrumentation through the cervix would pierce the placenta and cause immediate massive bleeding. An abortion would take significantly longer in this case and be much riskier for the mother.
Yet abortionists, abortion advocates, and pro-abortion physicians continue to claim that abortion must be available for pregnancy complications.
One of the most famous examples they turn to is that of Savita Halappanavar. According to the pro-abortion lobby, Halappanavar repeatedly requested an abortion while in process of miscarrying, but before her preborn baby had died. Abortion was still illegal in Ireland at the time, so her request was denied, and Halappanavar died. Abortion activists have continuously exploited her death, arguing that if she had undergone an abortion, she would have survived. But the reality is that Halappanavar died because her care was grossly mismanaged. Abortion would not only have not saved her life; some medical experts believe it would even have caused her to die more quickly.
Abortion to save a mother’s life ‘sounds noble… but it’s a real stretch’
Some abortionists, like Don Sloan, have even admitted that the idea of abortion to save a woman’s life is not an honest medical claim (emphasis added):
If a woman with a serious illness – heart disease, say, or diabetes – gets pregnant, the abortion procedure may be as dangerous for her as going through pregnancy… with diseases like lupus, multiple sclerosis, even breast cancer, the chance that pregnancy will make the disease worse is no greater that the chance that the disease will either stay the same or improve. And medical technology has advanced to a point where even women with diabetes and kidney disease can be seen through a pregnancy safely by a doctor who knows what he’s doing. We’ve come a long way since my mother’s time…
The idea of abortion to save the mothers’ life is something that people cling to because it sounds noble and pure – but medically speaking, it probably doesn’t exist. It’s a real stretch of our thinking.
Induced deliveries and C-sections are NOT abortions
Another common tactic by abortionists is to claim procedures like induced deliveries or c-section are abortions — even though they clearly are not the same thing. In cases such as severe pre-eclampsia, gestational diabetes, or placenta accreta, for example, it may be necessary to induce labor early or perform a hysterectomy to save the mother’s life. If the baby is severely premature, then it is a tragic reality that the baby might not survive. But the difference is that the doctors are not directly attacking the preborn child. The intent is not to kill either patient, and for an OB/GYN, both mother and baby are the patients.
Abortion after cancer diagnosis?
Some women are told they need abortion after a cancer diagnosis. Ellie Whittaker was told she had Hodgkin’s Lymphoma at 16 weeks pregnant. “The doctor advised I have an abortion because cancer treatment could cause problems for the baby,” Whittaker said, according to the Daily Mail. “There was no way I was going to give her up so I chose to delay it.” Another mom, Stacey Johnson, was diagnosed with breast cancer while pregnant. She was told to have an abortion as well. Both women refused, though, and for good reason — multiple studies have confirmed that women can safely undergo chemotherapy during pregnancy.
Abortion activists continue to claim that abortion is necessary for women facing pregnancy complications. Yet women truly do not have to choose between their own health and killing their preborn child.
“Like” Live Action News on Facebook for more pro-life news and commentary!
