Posted on August 13, 2019 11:02 AM

Doctor prescribed suicide gives doctors the right to kill

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

 

Posted on August 13, 2019 10:16 AM

Taxpayer Funded Discrimination (Campaign Against Taxpayer Funded Abortion)

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
Posted on August 13, 2019 9:10 AM

Purchase UnPlanned on DVD Through - Massachusetts

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.

Why?

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.

 

Posted on August 10, 2019 10:10 AM

Seeking Peace, Protecting Life: Weekly Thoughts from MCFL's President

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
Posted on July 17, 2019 8:28 AM

MCFL President Responds to Globe Endorsement of ROE Act*

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.

Respectfully,

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.

Posted on July 17, 2019 6:01 AM

MCFL Board Chairman to Legislators: Defund Planned Parenthood

Testimony in Support of Bill H.1181 (An Act Relative to State Funding of Certain Nonprofits), given before the Joint Committee on Health Care Financing, July 16, 2019

Chair Friedman, Chair Benson, ladies and gentlemen of the committee: my name is David Franks, and I am chairman of the board of Mass. Citizens for Life.

The Commonwealth should not be subsidizing powerful corporations whose quota-driven business has disparate and violent impact on the body politic.

The Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts is responsible for almost 57% of our abortions, performing more than 10,000 last year.

The 1980 Supreme Court decision Harris v. McRae upheld the constitutionality of the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of federal funds to pay for most elective abortions, but according to our Supreme Judicial Court’s 1981 Moe decision, there is somehow to be found in our constitution, drafted by John Adams, a “fundamental right” to abortion more radical than that imputed to the federal Constitution.

So. Our argument in support of defunding Planned Parenthood is not, today, an argument against taxpayer funding of abortion as such—though any government money going to Planned Parenthood commits the people to subsidizing a killing machine. Our argument is that Planned Parenthood is a uniquely bad actor, even amongst the other rough beasts of the abortion industry.

First, I am worried that Planned Parenthood is still caught up in the pandemic of sex abuse and sex trafficking. How many times has PPLM carried out its responsibility as a mandated reported of suspected abuse? I ask any representative of Planned Parenthood to submit data on whatever success it has had reforming itself.

Second, Planned Parenthood targets minority populations disproportionately.

The racial composition of Massachusetts is almost 79% white, and yet only 47% of abortions were performed on white mothers, while more than 20% of abortions were performed on black mothers, though comprising somewhat more than 7% of the population.

Why is it that the black abortion rate is more than three times the white abortion rate? History supplies at least one factor.

Justice Clarence Thomas in his recent concurring opinion in Box v. Planned Parenthood concisely lays out the eugenic history of Planned Parenthood. He quotes founder Margaret Sanger, who wanted to go beyond fellow eugenicists to focus “upon stopping not only the reproduction of the unfit but upon stopping all reproduction when there is not economic means of providing proper care for those who are born in health.”

And that’s still our problem. Rather than providing comprehensive social help to African-Americans, we offer death as a solution. Indeed, we do this to women and girls as such: before the crying evils that females endure in our society, we tell them, “Here, endure some more violence to fix things.”

Justice Thomas notes, “Some black groups saw ‘“family planning” as a euphemism for race genocide’ and believed that ‘black people [were] taking the brunt of the “planning”’ under Planned Parenthood’s ‘ghetto approach’ to distributing its services.”

That’s a voice from 1969, but our zeal for social reform does not burn as it did in the sixties.

You will hear that the sky will fall if Planned Parenthood is defunded. But to quote scholar Michael New, “The state of Texas defunded Planned Parenthood in 2011. Between 2011 and 2015, the last year for which data is publicly available: the minor pregnancy rate in Texas fell by 39 percent, the minor birth rate fell by 36 percent, the minor abortion rate fell by 53 percent. Additionally, during this time the overall abortion rate in Texas declined by over 29 percent.”

PPLM’s CEO makes over $277,000 a year. Planned Parenthood is a very efficient killing machine. It doesn’t need taxpayer help. African-Americans, people with roots in Latin America, women and girls, and our whole broken society deserve better remedies than eugenically conceived violence.

Thank you for this opportunity to speak.

Respectfully submitted,
J. David Franks, Ph.D.

[My great thanks to Helen Cross, the editor of MCFL’s excellent quarterly magazine, MCFL member Lee Crowley, the Charlotte Lozier Institute, and my good friends Tom Harvey (Massachusetts Alliance to Stop Taxpayer Funded Abortion), Michael New (associate professor of economics at Ave Maria University), and the inimitable Catherine Glenn Foster (president of Americans United for Life) for their invaluable help preparing me to give testimony.]

Posted on July 08, 2019 10:52 AM

Atlantic Features "Anti-Abortion Advocate," Lila Rose

The Atlantic: You’ve said that there’s never any medical reason for abortion. I wonder if, having gone through some of those tests yourself and been in the vulnerable position of having the ultrasound, you would soften or think differently about the kinds of decisions parents might be making in those situations, where they want to have a happy, healthy baby, but there’s some medical situation where it seems like that’s impossible, and abortion is the route they feel they have to take medically and morally?

So begins a key section of the recent article published by The Atlantic, which profiles Lila Rose, the founder and president of national pro-life investigative organization, Live Action.  The thorough interview prints Lila's strong voice with surprising consistency: her words opposing the violent act of abortion, her words exposing the predatory nature of Planned Parenthood, and her words beautifully describing the necessity for support and respect for women.

But we want to highlight this section, because it speaks directly to the unnecessary and dangerous provisions in the proposed bills S.1209/H.3320 (currently being reviewed by the Judiciary Committee) regarding so-called "fetal abnormality."

Said Lila, in reply to the above quote: If anything, it strengthens my complete opposition to seeing a less-than-healthy baby as less than precious. Abortion is not a medical treatment. It doesn’t make a baby healthier, it doesn’t make a woman healthier. It just kills. (emphasis added)

If my child were to face a life-threatening diagnosis or some sort of disability, my child deserves just as much love from me and my husband. And I hope that our society can be one of compassion and love and advocacy, as opposed to believing it would be better that you died, which is, unfortunately, the way a lot of our health-care system is set up right now for babies before birth.

The Atlantic: [ But we may be ]talking about conditions, especially those diagnosed later in pregnancy, where, for example, the brain is growing outside of the baby’s head. That’s something that doctors might term as being incompatible with life—there’s no way for a baby to live after it exits the womb. In that scenario, do you think it’s wrong or inconceivable that a family or an expecting mother might feel like she has to have an abortion?

Lila: [...], she doesn’t have to have an abortion. If your baby has a life-threatening condition like hydrocephalus—if there’s water on the brain, or the brain is developing outside of the baby’s body—there have been babies that have been born that way, or surgeries that have been done that have allowed that baby to live a year or two or even longer. Often a baby like that can die during delivery or minutes after birth. But there is a tremendous difference morally, and I think personally, for the bond between parents and a child to intentionally destroy a human life, and to love that child in his or her last moments when they’re dying naturally.

As we delve deeper into the action and activity of this year, and the powerful statements our members have made by suiting up and showing up to rallies and hearings, we could not find a more appropriate piece of media to reflect our theme.
This is love in action
Read the entire interview on the The Atlantic's web page: "A conversation with the anti-abortion activist Lila Rose."
We also suggest using the great material in this piece for creating a testimony to submit to the Joint Committee on the Judiciary in opposition to the so-called "R.O.E" Act, S.1209/H.3320. You can find committee contact information here
Posted on July 03, 2019 5:36 PM

Expect to Shine a Winning Light for Life

By Myrna Maloney Flynn, MCFL President 

The year after Roe v. Wade, a blue-collar couple in their 40s was struggling to raise six kids, the youngest 11, when they learned the woman was pregnant. After Mass one day, a friend chided them, saying, “You know, there’s something you can do now.”

I’m Myrna Maloney Flynn. I’m here today because my parents knew the truth and gave me my life. I want to dedicate it to shining light on that truth to save others’ lives.

Every step I’ve taken in the last three decades has prepared me to successfully assume the MCFL presidency now. I studied communications and political science. I hold a master’s degree in teaching. I’ll soon have an MBA.

I’ve lived in Japan and India, so I’ve observed the cultural value of human life from vastly different perspectives. I taught high school in the Bronx, where I witnessed teen motherhood and minors who had abortions. I developed a thick skin while cold calling as a sales rep and an even sturdier spine as a TV reporter. I’ve helped lift startup companies off the ground, led successful nonprofit fundraisers, and sailed past development goals at community events. For the past five years, I’ve held leadership positions in higher education -- an industry, widely known to support abortion rights, that forced me to speak for those who cannot.

I am blessed to have a husband of 16 years, who has become one of my closest pro-life advisors. We thank God each day for our four children.

I self-nominated for a seat on MCFL’s board and was elected last year. Since then, I’ve been invited to participate in nearly all aspects of MCFL’s internal operations and have leveraged my role as director before external audiences as well. In March, I was unanimously elected vice president, an honor and opportunity that I determinedly made the most of.

  • I’ve re-established ties with key pro-life advocates in western Mass., resulting in a new list of 150 contacts and the first pro-life club at Amherst College
  • I’ve taken on the role of spokesperson, representing MCFL in the media, before Anti-fascists at our March for Life, testifying at last week’s S.1209 hearing, delivering remarks at the State House rally and at Northampton’s City Council Meeting; and creatively appealing to our members at events and online
  • I’ve forged a relationship with MassGOP and the leadership at MFI, Renew MA, SBA List and the Charlotte Lozier Institute  
  • I hosted MCFL’s first-ever Northampton rally, in a bitterly cold rain, among that city’s numerous and vocal pro-choice residents
  • Crazy, yes. But it served the purpose of getting Senator Comerford’s attention as well as a meeting with her
  • You can read about that in the new magazine issue, which I helped produce
Read more
Posted on July 01, 2019 1:09 PM

Lobby Your Legislator on Social Media

When you think of lobbying, you probably think of State House halls, formal letters, or official meetings scheduled in offices or quiet restaurants. But what you may not know is that nearly every one of your legislators now has an active presence on social media, and their Facebook and Twitter accounts are as valid and impactful a meeting ground as their offices.

In fact, sometimes, social media causes a greater impact than a formal letter these days, because on social media, one message may not just reach your representative or senator. One message may reach your entire district.

And that kind of reach is a reality every politician watches like a hawk.

Here are the easy steps to finding, reaching, and engaging your legislator online. Double your lobbying efforts by reaching out via social media, bring your fellow state citizens to the conversation, and raise awareness of the laws and proposed laws threatening or supporting human lives in Massachusetts.

 

1. Do you know who your representatives are? Who your senator is? If not, start here: Plug in Your Address and Receive Your Legislators' Full Contact Information (click here to search).

2. Do you have FaceBook? If so, take the names of your representatives to your FaceBook toolbar, and type them in. 

It should look like this in your browser.

 

3. Do you have Twitter? If so, take the names of your senator or representatives and type them into the search bar on your Twitter feed.

 

If your senator or representative has an account, it should show up like this in your browser:

 

Click on the name in the search results, then select follow. Now, you can either tweet at them, or send them a direct message.

Read more
Posted on June 28, 2019 5:30 PM

MA Opposes S.1209: Bad Healthcare is Bad Healthcare

In the next few weeks, we will be running a series of citizen responses to the so-called "R.O.E." Act (S.1209/H.3320). From longtime pro-choice voters and longtime pro-life proponents, and from those in-between and on-the-fence, these letters and remarks show a startling consensus in opposing this badly prepared and dangerous legislation. 

 

 

[ To my fellow citizens and to our legislators ]

I had the privilege of sitting in the hearing before the Judiciary Committee on the ROE Act/S1209/H3320 on Monday, June 17. There was an impressive turnout on both sides for supporting and opposing this... bill [sic] before the legislature. 

I am a retired newborn ICU/labor and delivery nurse, and adoptive mother of two. I have, in the past, sat on the sidelines of the abortion issue trying to respect a woman’s personal choice.

However, after hearing of New York’s [extreme] new abortion law, I have left my “comfort zone” to become educated and involved on this very emotional issue. There are many components to this new proposed legislation now coming to Massachusetts that appear, in my opinion, to be anything but health care!  [The text] can be found on the massgov.org website: S1209/H3320 or on masscitizensforlife.org

A number of aspects of this proposed legislation appear to remove safeguards such as permission by a parent for minors. There is no recognition of the human person/baby/infant growing within the womb or provision for [an infant] born alive [during late-term abortions]*. The "R.O.E" Act would eliminate compulsory hospital-based abortions for second and third-trimester pregnancies when the risk for complications is greatest! It was unclear who, if anyone, would be responsible for inspections and/or licensing of the abortion facilities – just to mention a few. 

I left with too many questions and concerns regarding the "R.O.E." Act. This is a hastily contrived bill where nothing I heard before the committee at the State House convinced me that the [proposed law] is in the best interest of women’s health. Let us move cautiously so that we do not put women at risk. 

Elizabeth Knox

Newburyport

 

*according to former abortionists, a common occurrence when the baby is viable post-23 or 24 weeks.

*