Saturday, September 16, 2006

Plan B

Plan B is a concentrated dose of the hormone commonly found in birth control pills.

Morning After Pill Gets FDA Approval

by Lisa Kubota - lkubota@kgmb9.com

To some, it is a second chance to prevent pregnancy. To others, it is a dangerous drug that could cause an abortion. The Food and Drug Administration announced Thursday the Plan B morning after pill will now be sold without a prescription, but with some restrictions.

The decision will not have much of an impact here in Hawaii. In most states, the emergency contraceptive is only available by prescription. But a Hawaii law passed in 2003 already allows women and teens as young as 14 to get Plan B from certain pharmacists without a doctor's note.

Doctor Ann Rahall has helped patients at Planned Parenthood of Hawaii for a decade. "I think it's important for women to know this has occurred, and the word to get out there so they know they can have Plan B any time they need it, and from a 24-hour pharmacy," she said. "That would be the middle of the night, on a weekend, and times when doctors offices aren't open."

The decision allows over the counter sales at pharmacies and other stores with a licensed pharmacist on duty. They will check the patient's identification. Those under 18 need a doctor's prescription, but that restriction does not apply in Hawaii.
"We have a law that allows pharmacists to dispense Plan B without a prescription. So in Hawaii, teens can still access it without having to get a prescription from their doctors by going to one of the pharmacies that participates," explained Barry Raff, CEO of Planned Parenthood of Hawaii.

Plan B is a concentrated dose of the hormone commonly found in birth control pills. It is often confused with the abortion pill RU-486. Plan B delays ovulation when taken within 72 hours after unprotected sex. "If she has already ovulated, it prevents the fertilized ovum from implanting into the uterine lining," said Rahall. "If she's already pregnant, it won't disrupt it or cause an abortion."

The pro-life group Hawaii Right to Life is opposed to the emergency contraceptive.

"Life begins at conception, and when we muddy this up it's the devaluing, the dehumanizing of us as a society as a people that it very, very dangerous," said executive director John Long. "In Europe, there has been no reduction whatsoever in unintended pregnancies since it has been introduced. But what they have seen is a marked increase in STD's."

Plan B could start being sold in pharmacies nationwide by the end of the year.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

© Copyright 2004 KGMB9 – Emmis Communications. All Rights Reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

Friday, September 15, 2006

'Bioethicist': OK to kill babies after they're born

Hat tip to Marti

'Animal-rights' promoter asserts actual birth makes no difference

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 14, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

Princeton's Peter Singer

An internationally known Princeton "bioethicist" and animal-rights activist says he'd kill disabled babies if it were in the "best interests" of the family, because he sees no distinction in the child's life whether it is born or not, and the world already allows abortion.

The comments come from Peter Singer, a controversial bioethics professor, who responded to a series of questions in the UK Independent this week.

Earlier, WND reported Singer believes the next few decades will see a massive upheaval in the concept of life and rights, with only "a rump of hard-core, know-nothing religious fundamentalists" still protecting life as sacrosanct.

To the rest, it will be a commodity to be re-evaluated regularly for its worth.

His newest sermon on his beliefs came in a question-and-answer interview the Independent set up with readers.

Singer's response came to Dublin reader Karen Meade's question: "Would you kill a disabled baby?"

"Yes, if that was in the best interests of the baby and of the family as a whole. Many people find this shocking, yet they support a woman's right to have an abortion," he said.

He added that one point on which he agrees with the pro-life movement is that, "from the point of view of ethics rather than the law, there is no sharp distinction between the foetus and the newborn baby."

The statement furthers the arguments that Singer's position is just an extension of the culture of death that has developed in the world, with euthanasia legal in some locations, abortion legal in many and even charges that in some repressive societies there's an active business in harvesting healthy organs from victims in order to provide transplants for the wealthy.

"At least he's consistent," Alex Schadenberg, executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, told LifeSiteNews.com.

Singer holds that man is no different from other forms a life, and therefore man's life is not worth more than, for example, a cow.

He told readers he'd kill 10 cows before killing one human, but that's not because they are of less value, only that humans would mourn.

"I've written that it is much worse to kill a being who is aware of having a past and a future, and who plans for the future. Normal humans have such plans, but I don't think cows do," he said.

However, he did qualify his description with the word, "normal."

"Once again Singer is making distinctions between human beings he would consider normal and those he would consider not normal, thus he is deciding who is a person and who is not," Schadenberg told LifeSiteNews.

"Non-persons are allowed to be killed," under Singer's theology, he said.

Singer also said the focus on infanticide was not his, but those who oppose him and the media.

"It's always been a minor aspect of my work," he said.

Singer declined to answer whether he believes Steve Irwin, TV's "Crocodile Hunter," got "what he had coming," saying he never watched the television show.

Irwin died recently while filming an undersea special when he approached a stingray and was fatally stung.

But he advocated for the closure of health research centers where animals are used and said it's not at all unreasonable to ascribe human characteristics to animals.

"Anyone who ascribes rights to babies or humans with intellectual disabilities must be willing to attribute rights to beings who can't understand the concept," Singer said. "It's the moral agents, the ones who are acting, who need to understand the concept. Those to whom we attribute rights, do not need to understand these concepts."

The only moral absolute, he noted, "is that we should do what will have the best consequences for all those affected by our actions."

In WND's earlier report, Singer said that the court-ordered circumstances that killed Terri Schiavo, a disabled Florida woman, in 2005 may be the turning point at which holding the position of the sanctity of life became "untenable."

She died after a court ordered, upon her husband's request, that water and food be withheld from her.

Singer's support for legalized euthanasia and his endorsement of killing the disabled for up to 28 days after birth also sparked protests against his hiring in 1999 by Princeton, a university founded by the Presbyterian denomination.

Editor's note: WorldNetDaily has been reporting on the Terri Schiavo story since 2002 – far longer than most other national news organization – and exposing the many troubling, scandalous, and possibly criminal, aspects of the case that to this day rarely surface in news reports. Read WorldNetDaily's unparalleled, in-depth coverage of the life-and-death fight over Terri Schiavo, including over 150 original stories and columns.

Rules convince another abortionist to quit

Hat tip to Marti

Officials reject license renewal request after state reports on problems

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 12, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

Ohio state regulators have uncovered more than a dozen health code violations, including a serious situation that endangered the life of a patient, and an East Side Cleveland clinic that performed second-trimester abortions is closing down.

The Ohio Department of Health concluded, in an in-depth report on the Center for Women's Health, that the business failed to have agreements with area hospitals for patients to be admitted in case of serious complications, according to the Plain Dealer.

The state report said the clinic had difficulty finding a hospital willing to admit a patient with such complications during a second-trimester abortion, in what appeared to be the most serious infraction.

The Plain Dealer said the closure, just the latest in a long list of abortion business closures over run-ins with rules in recent weeks, actually will happen soon, because officials have cited the problems in rejecting the business's request for a new license.

A wide range of other routine care requirements also were not met, the state agency concluded.

For half a dozen patients, there was "no record that their temperature or blood pressure had been taken before the procedure," Roy Croy, of the Ohio division that regulates ambulatory and surgical care facilities, told the Plain Dealer.

"These are things that should be done before you start surgery," he said.

Cheryl Sullenger, a spokeswoman for Operation Rescue, told WND that these situations are developing more and more, where those running abortion clinics run afoul of regulations and rules.

"The more they're inspected, the more stuff we'll find," she said.

Sullenger said for many years such businesses have fallen under no oversight, and as states impose rules on such facilities, the abortionists are unable to deal with it.

"Oh no, I shouldn't have to follow the law," is the clinic operators' perspective, Sullenger said.

The Center had been licensed as an ambulatory surgical care facility since 2000, when it obtained the license under an order from the state, but later let it lapse. Croy told the Plain Dealer that Dr. Martin Ruddock, who runs the business, believes it is a private medical practice and it should not be regulated by the state.

"The fact of the matter is, the way the statute is written, if you hold yourself out as an ambulatory facility, you are an ambulatory facility," Crow said.

Nearly a dozen other abortion businesses in Ohio, California, Alabama and Florida also have been closed recently over similar issues, such as workers without medical licenses performing medical procedures, the misuse of drugs and others.

Operation Rescue President Troy Newman said the implementation of standards for medical facilities is effective at stopping the abortion industry.

"Standards are useful tools that are putting abortionist clinics out of business in droves," Newman said. "As a result, our land is not only a safer place for women, but also for the child in the womb."

The closure will leave a gap in facilities that perform the late-term abortions, what pro-life activists describe as "partial-birth abortions," in which a baby is almost delivered, then killed before delivery is complete.

In a report by Carrie Gordon Earll, the senior policy analyst for bioethics at Focus on the Family, Ruddock had confirmed that many of the late-term abortions he performed were on unborn children and mothers who were healthy.

Operation Rescue officials say of the dozen clinics shut down, several have reopened following compliance with rules.


A clinic in Omaha, Neb., where the land was purchased from underneath the business and the owners couldn't find another facility to rent was shut down.

The clinic that formerly operated in the building that now houses the Operation Rescue headquarters in Wichita, Kan., was shut down.

A facility in Birmingham, Ala., was closed because of a suspended license.

One business in Montgomery, Ala., was closed when authorities found the abortionist didn't have hospital privileges.

A business in Hialeah, Fla., where an investigation continues into allegations a baby was born alive, then killed and placed on the roof of the building to avoid detection by police, was shut down.

Five clinics owned by a Florida abortionist when his license was suspended all were closed, although several of those reopened later.

And another case involved a business in Daytona Beach, Fla., where the abortionist said he didn't want to meet the required rules.

Wednesday, September 13, 2006

1st Amendment victory goes to Christians

Hat tip to Marti

Parade rule had restricted assembly, free speech in city

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 13, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

The city of Florence, S.C., has given up its battle to keep a city parade rule that imposed unconstitutional limits on a group called Columbia Christians for Life.

The city has agreed to settle a lawsuit brought by the pro-life organization by paying $51,000 in damages and attorneys' fees, according to a report by WBTW News 13.

The case was triggered by the arrests by Florence police of several Christians who were "peaceably assembling and exercising free speech and freedom of religion on public sidewalks without a permit from the government," according to the pro-life organization.

Florence city manager David Williams told the television station the Columbia Christians for Life had challenged a parade permit requirement that was similar to another ruled unconstitutional in Charleston and Travelers Rest.

The arrests were made on Aug. 14, 2002, after members of the organization refused to sign a permit that the city ordinance required in order to govern activities ranging from parades to processions, the station reported.

Williams also said the city has updated its ordinance to remove the sections that were at issue.

"We had a court case that indicated the language in our ordinance was perhaps unconstitutional," he told the station. "We wanted to minimize any monetary damages to the city."

He also said the city decided against fighting for the ordinance, because it wasn't being enforced anyway.

The city came out "OK," he said, since most ($35,000) of the settlement money was designated for attorneys' fees anyway.

The Christian group, of 30 members, had begun a state tour on Aug. 14, 2002, called "Show the Truth – Establishing Blood Guilt," that focused on the sanctity of human life, the evils of abortion and the message of Jesus Christ.

The demonstration in Florence was part of that campaign, officials said.

Steve Lefemine, a group leader, told WND yesterday that the tour's peaceful assemblies have continued.

"We did have tours in 2003, and 2005. Each year we had clear sailing in some cities, opposition in other cities. There's an uphill climb to establish our God-given constitutionally-protected rights of peaceable assembly, freedom of speech and freedom of religion," he said.

Lefemine and three others who were arrested each got $3,000 in damages, while four others who were at the assembly but were not arrested were awarded $1,000 each, officials said.

The First Amendment battle arose because of the city's demand for a parade permit for the abortion protesters to assemble in public. Florence Police Chief Anson Shells had said the subject of the assembly wasn't an issue, just the assembly itself

The pro-life organization noted the federal court order also ordered the city never again to enforce such requirements.

Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Mother who had child after 'abortion' says she'll battle on for £250,000

Hat tip to Marti

AURA SABADUS AND SHÂN ROSS


A YOUNG mother who lost a groundbreaking battle for £250,000 compensation after giving birth to an "aborted" twin daughter yesterday vowed to appeal against the decision.

Stacy Dow launched the action - the first of its kind in Britain - earlier this year, convinced she had not been given proper warning by NHS medics that termination operations do not always guarantee success.

But following a court's decision to reject the action, Miss Dow, 21, of Perth, said she was determined to fight on.
"I found out on Friday that my claim had been rejected," she told The Scotsman. "It was a letter written in legal terms and I did not know what to think. It was difficult to understand.

"I'm still determined to continue. I'll talk to my lawyer and see what he thinks is best."
The single mother decided to take the case to court, hoping to force the hospital to pay for the upbringing of her child.

Five years ago, at the age of 16, Miss Dow discovered she was pregnant. After much soul-searching and fearing she could not cope with premature motherhood, she went to Perth Royal Infirmary for an abortion.

But seven weeks from term, she was told that one of the foetuses had survived the abortion and in August 2001 she gave birth to a baby daughter, Jayde.

Cash-strapped and unemployed, Miss Dow hoped the £250,000 compensation would help her to raise the child, now aged five. But last week at Perth Sheriff Court, Sheriff Michael Fletcher rejected the bid against Tayside University Hospitals NHS Trust, saying patients could not expect a legally binding contract with their doctor.

"All this over the past months has been a stress, and sometimes I don't know if I can go on," Miss Dow said.
"People tell me this is the way big organisations like the health trust operate, to wear you down - and I know that's what's happening to me.

"I'm still living at my mum and dad's, waiting to start a proper life on my own with Jayde.
"Jayde started school two weeks ago and is enjoying it. I still want to do the best for her, but it's exhausting dealing with the legal side."

Shortly after reaching a decision on Friday, Sheriff Fletcher said that simply because a doctor had used the word "termination" during a conversation with Miss Dow, it did not guarantee success. "I am of the view that a proof in this case is not necessary to decide the question of whether the conversation amounted to a guarantee of success of the operation," he said.

"In order to be held to have guaranteed success of the operation, the doctor would have had to have expressly said he was doing so.

"He could not be held to have done so impliedly, or because he had used the word termination," the sheriff said in findings issued at Perth.

"He would have had to have had the intention to give a warranty of success, and it would not matter a great deal what she subjectively thought the use of the word 'termination' implied." Sheriff Fletcher said that except in unusual circumstances, the relationship between a patient and his NHS doctor was not a contractual one.

He added that the situation would have been different if Miss Dow had been a private patient, as the doctor/patient relationship then became a contractual one.

NHS trust advocate David Stephenson added: "NHS patients don't contract with health trusts or health boards for medical treatment. There's no contractual relationship between the NHS patient and the NHS service provider."