Abortion rates have declined in the state of Massachusetts by 24% (2011-2018).
While abortion proponents, including Planned Parenthood's research arm, the Guttmacher Institute, propose various reasons for the steep decline, one obvious foundation for a drop in abortion is left out.
Women are receiving the support they need, and thus don't feel coerced into terminating a child.
This record-breaking drop in abortion could also be related to the growth and expansion of pregnancy resource centers, as well as a wider spread cultural shift that has more and more access to positive media, visual aids to the what humans look like, developing in-utero, and a millennial ethos that shies away from violence.
Massachusetts has opened 3-6 new pregnancy resource centers since this study began, including ClearWay Clinics in Worcester and Springfield.Read more
Proceedings in the California's criminal case against David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt continue as prosecution tries to prove the investigative journalist was in the wrong, filming abortion providers who admit to selling human organs and body parts removed from still-living abortion children.
Special Agent Brian Cardwell, who was originally tasked with investigating the claims of illegal recording of the "does," admitted under oath that he never challenged or properly investigated the claims, even when many of these conversations were held in busy settings like hotel lobbies and elevators. There was a total stranger present in the elevator with Daleiden and Doe 4, yet that video still became a part of this court case! It was also revealed that Cardwell didn't watch the videos he seized from Daleiden's apartment in full, yet he signed off on an arrest affidavit that said he saw no evidence of criminality on the part of Planned Parenthood.
Why do citizens across the political spectrum oppose S.1209, the "R.O.E. Act"? Dr. Kerry Pound, Vice President of MCFL, illustrates why briefly and clearly in the following response to Rev. Robinson's strange conflation of religion with biology, and misunderstanding of the human development. The text below was published in The Cape Cod Times.
By Kerry Pound, M.D., Vice President, MCFL
I appreciate the Rev. Edmund’s Robinson’s Aug. 16 My View in response to my June 15 op-ed, “Two patients? Not according to the proposed ROE Act.” But I am unclear why he believes I have asserted any religious perspectives, given my arguments arose from science. I did not mention religious teachings in either my op-ed or in my testimony at the Statehouse.
Science recognizes the beginning of life as conception. The journal Nature published a study with the opening statement: “The life cycle of mammals begins when a sperm enters an egg.”
Perhaps Robinson’s argument was that I have conflated life with personhood. If we agree life starts at conception, what constitutes the claimed profound difference between a zygote and an adult? Only time and development. Clearly, a human conceptus is not going to become a “wart” or a cancerous growth, and certainly ought not to be treated as such.
Our law in Massachusetts already allows for abortion throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy for concerns of mother’s health and life. The NASTY Act passed last summer guarantees that abortion will remain available in the commonwealth even if federal law changes.
Why then is the ROE Act necessary? Plainly, it isn’t.
Why are people under doctor prescribed suicide laws called burdens, and saddled with euphemisms that paint their life as less "worth-it"?
By Mark Rollo, M.D., MCFL Board of Directors
A woman by the name of Kathryn Judson brought her husband to a doctor in Oregon. He was ill and as soon as he entered the waiting room, he collapsed in a half-exhausted heap in the chair.
Yes, he was a “burden” to her. Clearly, he needed to be carried, emotionally and physically. So, the doctor advised him to consider assisted suicide. “Think of what it will spare your wife, we need to think of her,” he told them both. In Oregon, doctor prescribed suicide is legal and encouraged. Yet the primary reason for Oregonians requesting lethal drugs is a feeling that they are burden to family and caregivers. You see, being a burden is undignified. Being helpless is being less-worth-it. Being ill is another way of being less human, clearly.
But another doctor was obtained. He treated Kathryn’s husband as a valuable patient, and Kathryn’s husband lived five more years.
A culture of death is aided by corruption of language. Euphemisms obsscure our ability to see the victims involved in doctor prescribed suicide, and erase the risks inherent in its advancement in our legislature.Read more
According to their own estimates, Planned Parenthood performs over 330,000 abortion procedures per year. Apparently, that act of violence is their non-negotiable, because they've just voluntarily withdrawn from the program granting them funds through Title X. The organization receives approximately $60 million a year through Title X (which is less than 15% of the overall public funds given to the abortion giant); but in refusing Title X, Planned Parenthood is brazenly stating that abortion matters more than women's healthcare.
Most of other government funding comes through Medicaid, which does cover human abortions.
Despite what leadership in Planned Parenthood has stated, no part of the current federal administration is forcing PP to forgo Title X funds. The rule does not target any particular organization; the rule is a blanket policy that guarantees Title X monies (federal funds) follow rules instated already by the HHS which bar abortion funding. The recent decision follows the ruling that now separates abortion from actual healthcare, and prohibits any organization providing healthcare from receiving federal funding if they also provide abortion. As of the writing of this article, courts support the decision, despite lawsuits from PP.
Unbiased observers have made a good point quietly between the shouts on both sides of this news story: Does PP have a deeper commitment to making a profit off killing the preborn, or to women's health? Is it "Care. No Matter What." or "Abort. No Matter What."?
Doctor Prescribed Suicide does not give patients the right to die; it gives doctors the right to kill
By Dr. Mark Rollo, Board of Directors, MCFL
Giving doctors the right to kill is dangerous.
Take Kate Cheney for instance. She was an eighty five year old Oregonian with terminal cancer. Her daughter, Erika, brought Kate to her physician to ask about assisted suicide. However, Kate had mild dementia and her physician refused to prescribe suicide pills because he felt she lacked the capacity to understand the process.
Erika then engaged in "doctor shopping." She took her mother to see a psychiatrist who rejected the request for assisted suicide on the same grounds as the former doctor, saying that Kate lacked the ability to weigh options about assisted suicide. The psychiatrist noted that Erika seemed coercive.
Undeterred, Erika continued to shop and took her mother to an “ethicist” at the HMO who determined that Kate was cognitively able to request suicide pills. Thus, poison was prescribed despite the obvious conflict of interest. You see, Kate would no longer be an expense for the HMO if she were dead. After initial reluctance, Kate consumed the suicide cocktail. She had just spent a week in a nursing home, alone.
Kate is one of many people in Oregon who have been steered toward suicide. This has been documented in the New England Journal of Medicine where patients doctor-shopped for suicide until they got what they wanted . . . . or what their family wanted for them.
It is estimated that about 10% of the elderly in Massachusetts are subject to abuse. Doctor prescribed suicide is the perfect recipe for carrying out that abuse while simultaneously saving money for the health insurance carrier and providing the lure of a quick inheritance to family members.
All patients have the right to refuse care and take advantage of palliative care or hospice. Doctor prescribed suicide is different. This act corrupts medicine by making the doctor, who should be committed to healing, complicit in killing.
Doctor prescribed suicide is dangerous indeed.
Who would be the first Kate Cheney of Massachusetts to die at the hands of a “healer?”
Bills that are before the Massachusetts joint committee on public health, S.1208 and H. 1926; “An act relative to end of life options,” would fuel elder abuse in Massachusetts and must be defeated.
Mark J Rollo, MD
In Massachusetts, the killing of preborn people through abortion is publicly funded. This not only means the government is paying to kill its most vulnerable citizens, it also means you, as a citizen, have no choice about supporting deadly discrimination in our state.
Because this tax law infringes on your rights, and threatens the lives of our women and children, we have thrown our full support behind the Campaign to End Taxpayer Funded Abortion in MA.
You can find the legal requirements involved in removing this insanity from our state constitution here. In the meantime, join the campaign beginning this Fall to collect the signatures, the first step in the process of restoring our rights to pay for life, not death, in the Commonwealth.
Trainings will be scheduled for the upcoming month soon.
Please email us with questions or to host your own.
We encourage you, however, to sign up to volunteer in the Fall regardless of whether you've attended an official training! Register to collect signatures: I'm in!
As always, your generous contributions to our work are what give our team the means to change hearts, laws, and minds -- and save lives -- in Massachusetts. Please consider donating today here to support our campaign.Read more
PURCHASE UNPLANNED THROUGH MCFL!
Did you see the film that had media in an uproar this Spring? Since UnPlanned was released, and our Massachusetts premiere, stunning numbers of abortion workers have quit their jobs.
Because what Abby Johnson saw is the face those human beings victimized by the worst human rights abuse in history. But the revolution in this film is not an argument. It is one woman's story, a woman who was and is like many of us, living in post-ROE world in which "America wants abortion."
But do we when we it is no longer hidden?
Buy it today through MCFL, and show the state what Abby saw. Purchase the film here.
In UnPlanned, people see the humanity of the child in the womb. At the same time, they see the humanity of the abortion workers, and the vulnerability and humanity of the women, seeking help from an organization we as a society have allowed to claim as its motto, Care. No matter what.
You saw it. And you saw it again and again. Because UnPlanned leaped to 6+ million its first weekend. Not only that, it leaped from 7,000 Twitter followers, to 350,000 Followers in a few short days.
Can you change everything? With a film?
Perhaps not any film.
But perhaps seeing does change everything. And now we have the opportunity to share this story personally on our home screens.
This film takes us beyond rhetoric, and PR. This film takes us beyond the smokescreen of euphemisms and catchphrases. This film takes us beyond parties, and the false lines we draw: Us and Them.
This film connects heart to heart, and heals.
We will be more than happy to support and facilitate screenings and events, and invite you if you're pro-choice to watch the movie, and then reach out. Whatever your response after your viewing, we will listen without counter-arguing.
Our president reflects on the attitude and actions we to need to create a culture based in relationship, valuing the humanity of the other, no matter the cost. Foundational to ending violence is a proactive personal commitment to generosity and peace.
by Myrna Maloney Flynn, MCFL President
How is it they live in such harmony, the billions of stars, when most men can barely go a minute without declaring war in their minds? ― Thomas Aquinas
I spent the summer before my senior year of high school as an exchange student in Japan. When I arrived, my host family gave me a choice between two weekend destinations that we could visit at the end of my stay: the beach or Hiroshima.
Now, if you’ve spent each of your 17 years in Minnesota, with its countless, albeit beautiful, lakes, hanging out on the exotic sands of Okinawa is a no brainer. After all, I reasoned, I was on vacation; I preferred the thought of lounging comfortably. Plus, the prospect of being an American in Hiroshima wasuncomfortable.
Yet as my return trip to the U.S. approached, I changed my mind. I’d find comfort back home soon enough, I thought. So the week before I left, we embarked on a road trip to Hiroshima: my non English-speaking host parents, their teenage daughter, and me.Read more
The Globe’s endorsement of the so-called “ROE Act” should concern readers expecting journalistic due diligence. It seems the editorial team did not think through the grave implications of the bill. (“Mass needs abortion law update,” July 3)
Requiring minors to obtain consent ensures one impartial adult will act in a girl’s best interests. Removing this safety measure is irresponsible and fails to protect those who need our care, often the impoverished or girls of color, whom editors rightly pointed out. Sexual predators, like Jeffrey Epstein, will benefit from removal of parental and judicial consent. If girls “are further victimized by capricious laws,” it will be due to legislation that fails them, as will S.1209/H.3320.
As written, this bill will permit an abortionist to end the life of any viable human being, not just those with fatal fetal anomalies. Abortions past 24 weeks may occur due to “all factors.” A fetus with any perceived disability may be killed up to birth, advancing eugenic discrimination.
Curiously, editors didn’t vouch for the bill’s other provisions: removing legal protection and lifesaving treatment for babies who survive abortion; allowing late-term procedures to be performed outside hospitals; increased taxpayer funding—bolstering the theory that a thorough analysis of “ROE” never happened.
Myrna Maloney Flynn
President, Massachusetts Citizens for Life
*Though the statement above was submitted July 7 to The Boston Globe as a letter to the editor, the paper had still not published the piece as of July 17.