Massachusetts Citizens For Life

39^th Annual Interfaith

ASSEMBLYFOR LIFE

Sunday, January 29^th, 2012

2:00 pm – 4:00 pm

The Great Hall at Historic Faneuil Hall

(1 Faneuil Hall Square, Boston, MA)

Keynote Speaker:

Wayne Cockfield

Vietnam War Veteran

Disability Rights Activist

Come join us…

Together with our religious leaders and political representatives.

Come as we stand… United For Life!

Attachments:

File	Description	Uploader	File size
Interfaith Assembly 2012.pdf		Administrator	105 Kb

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

January 15, 2012     contact: Anne Fox, 781-449-1774

BOSTON— Massachusetts Citizens for Life has announced the winner of its first award for the best legal writing in the country. Michael Fragoso, a student at Notre Dame Law School, has won the cash award with a published legal review, “Taking Conscience Seriously or Seriously Taking Conscience?: Obstetricians, Specialty Boards, and the Takings Clause.” MCFL will present the cash award to Mr Fragoso at the Massachusetts Caucus preceding the March for Life on January 23 in Washington, DC.

Fragoso’s research and paper explains how decertifying doctors because of their moral opposition to performing abortions and euthanasia could be a confiscatory action by the government, which would require compensation paid to doctors whose medical practices would be taken.

“We have identified many risks, such as rationing, denial of care, and slashing of conscience rights in state controlled health care. We are grateful to Michael Fragoso for explaining how slashing conscience rights will drive doctors out of business in a way which is actually illegal.” Stated Anne Fox, President of MCFL.

Fox continues, “Since published legal research can have a significant impact on court decisions. MCFL has started the National Pro-Life Legal Writing Award to reward those who are working to advance the cause of life in law. This is the only competition which encourages both the research and the publication of such research in a law school journal or review, or in an ABA journal.

“Considering the number of pro-life physicians, especially obstetricians, whose livelihoods are at risk, this is a very timely entry. We are proud to reward Mr. Fragoso for his good work.”

Amy Pedagno, of Ave Maria Law School in Florida was chosen as the first runner-up for a soon-to-be-published piece on young women in state foster care, “Who are the Parents? In Loco Parentis, Parens Patriae, and Abortion Decision-Making for Pregnant Girls in Foster Care.”

Massachusetts Citizens for Life is the oldest and largest right to life group in the state. MCFL is committed to restoring legal protection to life at all stages of development.

-----

The article can be found in Vol. 86, Issue 4 of Notre Dame Law Review

Find a link to the article HERE

9 January 2012

Press Release: Third Study Links Autism Risk to Prior Abortions

Source:              Brent Rooney (MSc; Reduce Preterm Risk Coalition)

In 2011 Harvard University researchers led by Kristen Lyall

reported that women with prior IAs (Induced Abortions) elevate

their relative odds of delivering a newborn later diagnosed with

Autism by a significant 26%.[1, Lyall] This makes at least the

third published study finding that prior IAs significantly raise

Autism risk in a newborn baby. In 2002 Ball State University

researchers led by Diana Wilkerson reported significantly

higher Autism risk for women with prior abortion surgery, a

finding that was NOT mentioned in the abstract (i.e. summary)

section of their study.[2, Wilkerson]. In 1999 Professor Larry Burd

and colleagues found that women with prior IAs tripled their odds

of having newborns later diagnosed with Autism.[3, Burd]

Do these three (3) significant studies 'prove' that previous abortions

boost Autism in future newborn babies? That is a question based

on a FALSE PREMISE. Why? Until a new medical treatment

is demonstrated to not inflict a credible adverse risk, the BURDEN of

PROOF is on providers to very clearly demonstrate via published

studies that the adverse risk is not, in fact, a risk. Only AFTER such

convincing evidence is produced does the BURDEN of PROOF

switch onto the shoulders of 'safety skeptics'. The most common

abortion treatment in the U.S., Canada, and the U.K., 'suction' (i.e.

vacuum aspiration) abortion, was invented circa 1958 [4, Wu] but

there are not even animal studies demonstrating that prior 'suction'

abortions do not affect mental health.[5. Rooney] There are zero

human studies demonstrating that prior surgical abortions do not inflict

higher Autism risk on future newborns.

The total lifetime cost ( medical + non-medical + lost income )

for a U.S. citizen with Autism was estimated by Harvard U. Professor

Michael Ganz to be $3.2 million.[6, Ganz]

.................................................................................................................................

References

1 Lyall K, Pauls DL, Spiegalman D, Ascherio A, Sanangelo SL. Pregnancy

Complications and Obstetric Suboptimality in Association with Autism

Spectrum Disorders in Children of the Nurses' Health Study II. Autism

Research 2011;4:1-10

2 Wilkerson DS, Volpe AG, Dean RS, Titus JB. Perinatal Complications

As Predictors of Infantile Autism. International J Neuroscience

2002;112:1085-1098

3 Burd L, Severud R, Kerbeshian J, Klug MG. Prenatal and perinatal risk factors

for autism. J Perinatal Med 1999;27(6):441-450

4 Wu Y, Wu X. A report of 300 cases using vacuum aspiration for the

termination of pregnancy. Chinese J Obstetrics Gynaecology

1958;447-449 [ English Translation:

http://www.bmj.com/content/suppl/2008/06/12/336.7657.1332-a.DC1/chinaabortion.rtf.pdf ]

5 Rooney B, Calhoun BC, Roche LE. Does Induced Abortion Account

for Racial Disparity in Preterm Births, and Violate the Nuremberg Code?

J American Physicians Surgeons 2008;13(4):102-104 [ URL:

http://www.jpands.org/vol13no4/rooney.pdf ]

6 Ganz ML. The lifetime distribution of the incremental societal costs of

autism. Arch Paediatr Adolesc Med 2007;161:343-34

Those who have implied that the President’s health care law will establish “death panels,” have encountered excessive criticism. Yet, more and more information is being released identifying that rationing of care will in fact occur, and that it will be done by government bureaucracies.

For example, a phone call into The Mark Levin Show on WLS 890 from a Chicago neurosurgeon last month revealed that a Health and Human Services (HHS) document, associated with the Obama Administration’s federal health law, will inhibit patients over the age of 70 from receiving neurological care. Instead of receiving “advanced neurosurgical care,” “units,” (meaning patients), over 70 will receive care to make them “comfortable.” In order to provide the neurosurgical care, a physician would have to appeal to a “ethics committee” made up of administrators, not physicians, to determine if the services can be administered.

This document, not surprisingly, has not been presented to the public.

Listen to the call by clicking the link below:

 Obamacare Rationing – A Phone Call From A Neurosurgeon