On March 19, The Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) hosted a live webinar, reacting to the passage of prenatal education bills in multiple states requiring videos depicting the development of human life in the womb — which may include Live Action’s “Baby Olivia” video — to be shown to students in public schools. The webinar’s featured speakers — representing the pro-abortion groups SIECUS, Planned Parenthood, and Reproaction — claimed that the inclusion of prenatal development education and ultrasound videos in sex education is “misinformation” and amounts to an “anti-abortion” campaign.
Prenatal education bills have been signed into law in Tennessee and North Dakota. Very recently, Idaho lawmakers overwhelmingly passed a prenatal education bill, which is now headed to the governor’s desk. Multiple bills are currently being considered in 20 states, as SIECUS’ Baby Olivia Tracker shows.
The webinar speakers repeatedly claimed that the Baby Olivia video is “anti-abortion,” but the video makes no mention of abortion, and educates only on the topic of prenatal development. The speakers also suggested that those groups lobbying against the prenatal education legislation use parents, educators, and students as spokespersons to sway legislators from adopting the legislation. The suggestion was also made to lean into messaging claiming that the video is medically inaccurate, and to emphasize the importance of local control over the process of education policy decisions.
Why are groups including SIECUS and Planned Parenthood linking arms in opposing the use of “Baby Olivia” or similar prenatal development educational tools in public school classrooms? Although the “Baby Olivia” video is not explicitly “anti-abortion,” as its opponents make it out to be, the video illustrates the reality, wonder, and beauty of preborn human life.
This is what pro-abortion advocates prefer to hide from youth, because they fear that seeing prenatal development could make minors less likely to choose abortion.
“Medically inaccurate”?
Michelle Slaybaugh, director of social impact and strategic communications at SIECUS, introduced the topics and aims of the webinar, entitled Fetal Development & Ultrasound Bills: The New Front in the War on Sex Education. She claimed:
Across 20 states, lawmakers have introduced 36 bills aimed at forcing medically inaccurate fetal development lessons and ultrasound videos. These bills are not rooted in science. They are part of a coordinated effort to spread misinformation, reinforce abortion stigma, and undermine Comprehensive Sex Education.
One of the most commonly cited tools in these bills is the Baby Olivia video produced by Live Action, an anti-abortion, extremist group known for pushing false narratives about abortion. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists or ACOG has stated that this video is medically inaccurate, misrepresents fetal development, and is being used as a propaganda tool rather than an educational resource.
Panelist Erin Matson, co-founder and president of Reproaction, echoed Slaybaugh’s claims, alleging that the Baby Olivia video “makes a large number of false, inflammatory, misleading claims not backed by science and that have been debunked by numerous medical professionals.” Matson even criticized the video for affirming that a new human life begins at the moment of fertilization.
Live Action News has repeatedly debunked claims that the Baby Olivia video is medically inaccurate. As Matson herself acknowledged, and as stated on Live Action’s Meet Baby Olivia website, the video’s “state-of-the-art animation was reviewed and certified by leading OBGYNs and medical professionals.”
However, Matson claims that the six medical professionals who reviewed the Baby Olivia video are affiliated with pro-life organizations, therefore insinuating that the video itself is biased because of these affiliations. Matson inaccurately cited the values of the medical professionals’ organizations as the cause of what she thinks is a biased depiction of human life in the video, when there is no way to prove that the medical professionals provided biased scientific reviews based on the beliefs of their organizations.
Matson neglected to mention that much of the information in the video was gleaned directly from the Endowment for Human Development (EHD), as Live Action News previously reported. EHD describes itself as “a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving health science education and public health,” which is “committed to neutrality regarding all controversial bioethical issues.” EHD’s own prenatal development video, featuring many of the same milestones, is distributed by National Geographic.
Screenshot, SIECUS webinar
EHD’s “board of directors, board of advisors, staff, and volunteers includes accomplished educators, researchers, authors, programmers, and clinicians from a variety of scientific and business disciplines who share the common goal of improving lifelong health through prenatal development-based education.”
Matson’s criticism of the “Baby Olivia” video for marking gestational age from the moment of fertilization instead of from the last menstrual period (LMP) has been a common objection that has been used by pro-abortion groups to claim the video is “medically inaccurate,” though this itself is a dishonest claim (and as you can see from the links to EHD, their award-winning video also uses a “from fertilization” timeline).
Medical professionals calculate gestational age based on LMP by adding two weeks to the date of fertilization/conception; “Baby Olivia” shows development from the moment of fertilization onward. It is not inaccurate to discuss the timeline for prenatal development from the moment of fertilization instead of two weeks prior, before the new life even exists. (Notably, the fact that life begins at fertilization/conception is also supported by The Mayo Clinic.)
Slaybaugh cited the pro-abortion American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) as stating that “Baby Olivia” is “medically inaccurate” and “misrepresents fetal development,” but gave no reasons supporting ACOG’s claim. ACOG is in no way an unbiased, neutral source.
Screenshot, SIECUS webinar
Mazie Stilwell, director of public affairs with Planned Parenthood North Central States, echoed the talking points from Slaybaugh, Matson, and Alison Macklin (SIECUS), but went much further, claiming that the prenatal development education legislation consists of “religious ideology” pushed by “Christian Nationalists” and “indoctrination” aimed at promoting “dangerous legislation” which would “politicize” public school classrooms. In Stilwell’s home state of Iowa, prenatal education legislation including “Olivia” is currently being debated. Anecdotally, Stilwell criticized Iowa’s bipartisan MOMS Act in her home state of Iowa, which is designed “to provide personalized support to pregnant women to provide stabilization to families.”
Stilwell’s claims about religious ideology ring empty, as there is nothing religious in the “Baby Olivia” video or in the prenatal education legislation. The video is scientific and apolitical, and again, makes no mention of abortion.
Katie Christensen (Planned Parenthood North Central States) highlighted the fact that North Dakota was the first state to pass such prenatal education legislation, and Live Action provided the video to schools for free, though parents kept the “Baby Olivia” video out of the city of Fargo by claiming that the video is medically inaccurate — which, again, rings hollow.
After discussing how to use the Trump administration’s respect of state authority to defeat Baby Olivia legislation, the panelists voiced their strong support for federal legislation, namely the Biden-era Real Education And Access for Healthy Youth Act, which would force their own questionable version of sex education into classrooms, heavily leaning into a pro-abortion and LGBTQ+ agenda.
Prenatal development education provokes aggressive response
Groups in favor of abortion and Comprehensive Sex Education (CSE), including the most outspoken groups that were represented in the SIECUS panel, are coming out strongly against the “Baby Olivia” video and any type of prenatal development education bills, which very simply require minutes-long videos about prenatal human development — including prenatal ultrasounds — to be shown in an age-appropriate manner.
Both SIECUS and Reproaction have posted petitions to stop prenatal development education legislation, and are seeking signatures. It is important to clarify exactly what these groups, which claim only to support science and necessary facts, actually support and promote.
Screenshot, SIECUS webinar
SIECUS promotes sexually explicit materials in classrooms as part of Comprehensive Sex Education. As previously reported by Live Action research fellow Carole Novielli, SIECUS today espouses the belief that “sexually explicit visual, printed, or online materials can be valuable educational or personal aids, helping to reduce ignorance and confusion and contributing to a wholesome concept of sexuality” (emphasis added). SIECUS also promotes abortion and the LGBTQ+ agenda to children. Likewise, Reproaction, which was also represented in the webinar, exists to promote similar ideologies.
Planned Parenthood is one of the leading distributors of explicit sexual materials for schools, including materials promoting abortion, and encouraging youth to participate in unhealthy and risky sexual behaviors, including types of “experimentation.” Some of those behaviors lead youth to Planned Parenthood’s doors for “services,” including abortion. With the help of sex education advocates like those at SIECUS, Planned Parenthood essentially grooms children to be its customers. Planned Parenthood has also begun offering hormonal transgender “treatments” at some of its locations, including for minors at a few locations.
SIECUS was founded by Mary Steichen Calderone, who once served as a medical director for Planned Parenthood, and the two organizations maintain ties to this day.
