In the upcoming few weeks, our legislators will be making a final decision on whether to send the "ROE" Act (S.1209/H.3320) on to a full vote. If voted on and passed, the "ROE" Act will remove parental notification for our young girls entering abortion clinics, legalize passive infanticide, and promote abortion access over our women's safety by removing the grueling 2-3 day late-term abortion procedure from a hospital setting.
You organized last year en masse and stalled this anti-life bill in committee. You arrived in droves on the day of the public hearing, demonstrating that Massachusetts Citizens, both pro-life and pro-choice, do not support promoting abortion access over women's safety, our daughter's safety, and the lives of infants born alive during botched procedures.
You amplified the story of Keisha Atkins, who lost her life to laws like "ROE", which are already on the books in New Mexico.
Members of our legislature heard you loud and clear during our non-stop Fall Call-a-Thons, where you told your lawmakers no to "ROE".
Please make use of our quick lobbying sheet, and share your deepest personal reason for opposing this dangerous bill.
Facts like Keisha Atkins' life, and death, show us exactly where "ROE" leads. It isn't a state for women or children. It is a state with reduced standards of medical care, reduced respect for vulnerable human lives, and reduced respect for women in challenging situations.
Let our lawmakers know today: No to "ROE" -- Massachusetts, we can do a lot better.
The "ROE" Act (S.1209/H.3320) is currently being deliberated on by our Joint Committee on the Judiciary.
After your reach your State Senator, we encourage you to contact the Committee Chairs, whose information can be found below.
Rep. Claire Cronin -- (617) 722-2396 -- Claire.Cronin@mahouse.gov
Rep. Michael Day -- (617) 722-2396 -- Michael.Day@mahouse.gov
Email us to set up a local Pro-Life Call-A-Thon -- email@example.com
Schedule a local Info-Session at your community, chapter, or parish meeting location! Email CJ -- CJ@masscitizensforlife.org.
By Dave Andrusko, National Right to Life
Writing for the Boston University News Service, Keminni Amanor reported Monday that “A new bill requiring public universities in Massachusetts to provide on-campus medication abortion” is currently “in hearings in the Joint Committee on Public Health until further notice.”
Interestingly, while the Joint Committee last discussed the bill on Sept. 10, bill sponsor Massachusetts state Rep. Lindsay Sabadosa “said the conversation cannot yet be made public.”
“More than 100 public universities in Massachusetts will be affected by bill H3841, which will make it possible for students to receive pills in order to end a pregnancy at any campus health center,” according to Amanor .
The text of HB3841 itself does not currently list how late in pregnancy medication abortions could be performed, but Amanor quotes information from Planned Parenthood , saying “these pills can be given only if the woman is less than 10 weeks pregnant.”
The story is very sketchy but apparently the bill was introduced last January by Sabadosa. It largely mimics California’s new law which requires public universities to offer chemical abortion at on-campus student health centers.
“The bill is slightly different than the California legislation in that it does create a trust that would be used to fund the cost of the medication on campuses. It could certainly become a line item in the budget,” said Sabadosa.
This is not as straightforward as it sounds. “According to the bill,” Amanor explains, “the trust, a Public University Health Center Sexual and Reproductive Health Preparation Fund, will be created with money approved by the legislature, though it is unclear where this money will come from yet.”
As was the case in California, the argument for the requirement is access to abortion. “It’s easier for students to be able to access care if they can go on campus, they can get follow up therapy more easily and it just is a huge burden off a time that can already be stressful,” Sabadosa said.
This was not true in California—which is why pro-abortion Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed the bill—and it isn’t true in Massachusetts. Director of Community Engagement at Massachusetts Citizens for Life, C. J. Williams said the bill is an unnecessary expansion of access to abortion at the detriment of safety.
“There’s nothing dangerous about a bus ride. There’s also the fact that in Massachusetts, we have health facilities nearby nearly any college center. I don’t know one campus that doesn’t have one that would provide a chemical abortion within five miles,” she said.
According to the story, “Williams also expressed frustration about how the bill limits the choices young people have when they are pregnant to just termination.”
“If you’re just putting an abortion facility in the middle of their college campus, our daughters are not getting the message that they have a choice. You want to give them options, not abortion,” Williams added.
J. David Franks, Board chairman at Massachusetts Citizens for Life, was also interviewed and said it is a “dangerous bill” for young women. “Facilitating this pop-a-pill mentality as if one can deal with the grave and long-reaching consequences of our reproductive biology, as if one can pop a pill or two and then have no problems. It’s just magical thinking,” Franks told the Boston University News Service.
No doubt to ward off additional questions about cost, Sabadosa told Amanor, “The legislation, however, only impacts public universities that already have health services on campus where they perform OB-GYN appointments, so it does not require universities to make upfront capital investment. It’s really the cost of the [abortifacient] medication
Ms. Magazine Attacks MCFL with Blatant Misinformation
"Anonymous" writer makes outrageous claims about the June 5 press conference, provides no evidence in article titled “I Went Undercover in the Anti-Abortion Movement—and Found Hypocrisy and Misogyny”
Did you see the hit piece? Providing no evidence, and appearing to mix up details from multiple events, the anonymous writer was published by Ms. Magazine.
We released the following press release.
Now more than ever, we need your support.
Please donate $100 today as we encounter national pushback on our extraordinary pro-life efforts this past year.
On Tuesday morning, Dec. 17, our team was alerted to an anonymously-written article that appeared on Ms. Magazine’s website. In this article, the supposed “feminist gender studies major” claims that she went undercover at one of our events and felt it necessary to share her experience.
There is just one problem…multiple actually: the details of Anonymous' story don't add up.
Given that Ms. Magazine felt it appropriate to print an anonymously-written story without fact-checking any of it, or asking our Massachusetts Citizens for Life staff to confirm or comment, we felt it necessary to publicly do so ourselves.
Claim: “It was a sweltering June day in Boston …Attendants were packed into a conference room on the second floor of the state house, creating a sea of “stop infanticide” red shirts.
Reality: Based on the author's reference to the "data set," this was the June 5th, 2019 press conference unveiling the polling results, which are, of course, misrepresented in her piece. The event was held in Room 437 (not the second floor, as the author stated). The location is important to the story because the room does not allow the kinds of interactions the author claims. The room was completely packed, for one thing. It is a hearing room. Organizers were informed ahead of time of capacity, and State House staff helped seat the public before the polling announcements were made to help fit the number of press and audience present without violating codes.
Claim: “I even wore one of those red shirts—emblazoned with the Massachusetts Citizens for Life logo alongside a crudely drawn fetus.”
Reality: Massachusetts Citizens for Life staff did not hand out red shirts at this event. Though MCFL's logo was one of multiple organization's logos, all opposing ROE. It is not on the front of the shirt as stated. Had Anonymous done even a little research, she would have noticed the t-shirts did not place our logo prominently, nor beside a the other image she mentions.
Claim: “Women are dying. Abortion is killing our women.”
Reality: This is the one truthful thing the author wrote! Women like Keisha Atkins, a 23-year-old woman who died following a legal abortion, at six months, in New Mexico due to the very abortion-deregulations the ROE Act is trying to impose on Massachusetts residents. Additionally, more than 30 million pre-born females have died since Roe v. Wade was legalized in 1973. Anonymous may have been quoting someone else, but it is worth applauding that the the one fact she decided to publish was this true statement.
Claim: “My confusion was warranted: MA Citizens for Life’s argument doesn’t make scientific sense. Their claims about protecting women’s autonomy and reproductive health are actually just thinly-veiled covers for their actual view that women should not have decision-making authority over their bodies.”
Reality: Anonymous apparently doesn’t understand basic scientific facts about human development or the concept of autonomy. Every credible textbook on human development states as a proven fact that life begins at the moment of conception. Anonymous doesn’t understand, or perhaps plays ignorant to the fact, that abortion ends the life of a uniquely different human being, oftentimes through painful dismemberment. Half of abortion's victims are defenseless female human beings. Additionally, too many women, like Keisha Atkins, have lost their lives because of legal abortion, and many more have been harmed physically and/or psychologically.
Claim: “The supposed shocking dataset was just fluff, too, for what it’s worth. ‘75 percent of Massachusetts citizens do not support infanticide. With this bill, full-term healthy babies will be killed. Reject the infanticide bill!’”
Reality: The dataset Anonymous describes as “fluff” is anything but fluff. The independent survey conducted between April and May 2019 surveyed Massachusetts voters from all political spectrums – Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. The survey proved that three quarters of Massachusetts voters reject the ROE Act. In fact, one of the provisions in the law would allow late-term abortions to be done outside a hospital, something 77% of self-proclaimed “pro-choice” in the survey opposed! So, no, Anonymous, the survey is not “fluff." Instead, it proves how out of touch the pro-abortion lobby are with the actual will of voters in the Commonwealth.
Claim: “When there was a call for all young people to come in for a photo-op, two different men pushed me until I stumbled and was able to slink away. “Don’t you want to support the cause?” they were yelling. “What’s wrong with you women?””
Reality: Anonymous first claimed the event was held on the second flood, however, it was held in Room 437. Neither the layout nor the mechanics of the situation would have allowed for the kinds of interactions the author claims. The room was completely packed, and those in attendance were seated or lined up along the back wall. This would not have allowed for a shuffling of the audience for photo-ops. Additionally, those in attendance know full well there was no yelling at any participant. In fact, with half a dozen prominent and reputable media sources reporting on the event, and not one mentioned any grabbing, yelling, or pushing. If there had been any type of altercation, they would undoubtably have reported it.
We know that the media likes to write about any confrontation at any of our events). At the annual Massachusetts March for Life, the media was quick to mention how seven were arrested at the event for acts of violence – two for throwing urine and a slushie at participants. The problem with the report? They failed to mention that all seven arrests were pro-abortion, antifa activists assaulting pro-life advocates.
Biased or otherwise, no news reporter would pass up a chance to report on an altercation in a peaceful press conference.
Claim: “When I initially refused to put on the red shirt, I was booed and sneered at, and the Citizens for Life member handing them out grabbed my arm and yelled that I was too concerned with fashion, and not about “protecting life.””
Reality: No MCFL member handed out any red shirts. In fact, the red shirts were not provided by MCFL. Some of our own staff didn’t even wear red. So this, too, appears to be something the author daydreamed and decided to include in her story. (I personally eschewed the shirts.)
Claim: “The attendees treated children no better. During the photo-op, someone yanked a crying baby out of its mother’s arms to pose for the camera—even though, supposedly, they were fighting for this baby’s safety and happiness. The man smiled for his photo-op while the baby continued crying—and yelled about how we must ‘protect the youngest members of our society.’”
Reality: This also did not happen. We knew the photographer. We also know the number (severely limited by State House request) and names of all attendees. Neither the photographer nor I took any photos of babies.
Claim: “Anti-abortion activists do not care about women—they care about power and subjugation. They care about forcing women into becoming incubators for babies. And they are willing to use force and shame to realize that mission.”
Reality: Anonymous fails to acknowledge that abortion does not empower women. In fact, since Roe v. Wade passed in 1973, more than 30 million unborn girls (and 30 million boys) have been exterminated in the name of “women’s rights." Abortion is the greatest human rights abuse of our time. Abortion is violence. Women deserve better than the ROE Act and what Anonymous advocates for, and three quarters of Massachusetts voters agree with that statement.
Once thing is certain, the anonymous author of the “I Went Undercover in the Anti-Abortion Movement—and Found Hypocrisy and Misogyny” article that appears on Ms. Magazine’s website came to our event with a message written for what she expected to happen, and she left with that same message in hand– if she even came to the event at all. Her supposed experiences contradict what those who actually attended the event have said – that it was friendly, calm, and educational..
Ms. Magazine deciding to publish this article demonstrates a shocking carelessness in journalistic due diligence: No photos or evidence of any kind; no checking with the organization which the piece attempts to slander. The author doesn’t even want her name tied to her article. Perhaps she knows that her claims are false, and she wishes to get her narrative out to mislead others before the real story was told. Perhaps she doesn’t want to held liable for her blatantly false accusations.
Even more puzzling is that this apparently curious citizen journalist, who reputedly has researched MCFL, was not aware that the female leaders in the organization routinely invite and chat with friends or counterparts in pro-choice circles to these events. We have invited NARAL and pro-choice friends to meet for conversation before the Massachusetts March for Life, and to unite on our common ground that removing standards of medical care is not pro-woman, pro-choice, or pro-life. Instead, we were met with violent counter-protestors who assaulted our event attendees.
If the author or Ms. would like to correct these inaccuracies, I can supply facts. But since no one actually reached out to MCFL prior to, during, or after the event, I'm more than a little dubious about the genuine journalistic search for truth here.
I wonder if the author would like to talk. If so, we are always free to chat.
Perhaps Ms. Magazine would also like to fact check their submissions before publishing so-called reporting on actual events. If they do, they can start with who organized the press conference, who was in attendance, and maybe even look up MCFL on social media.
In the meantime, we are calling on Ms. Magazine to pull this fabricated story from their website, for their own credibility, and for their reader's benefit.
Mass. Citizens for Life is the Commonwealth's solely dedicated pro-life organization, protecting the lives of our fellow citizens from conception to natural death and advocating for human rights everywhere in between.
DONATE today to keep our life-saving work moving
JOIN the movement in Massachusetts
Will you join us at a Pro-Life Christmas Carol this Saturday?
With just a few days until Christmas, many of us are preparing to celebrate life.
But what you may not know, is that this is one of the biggest business times for the abortion business. New mothers in unexpected or difficult pregnancies ask: Where will I live if I have a child now? What if she comes home from school with the announcement, "Mom, I have to tell you something..."
Your voice outside the Planned Parenthood can give a small new life a welcome he won't receive otherwise. Your voice will give love and hope to a mother who thinks she has no option.
Will you do whatever it takes?
Join us 8am-10am, Saturday, December 21st at 1055 Commonwealth Ave. Boston!
Your gift gives us the means to be there, to offer gifts of baby clothes and supplies to mothers approaching the clinic, and to reach out to the clinic workers.
Spotlight on Local Resources for Women in Massachusetts
Springfield and Worcester Area
Thank you again for forwarding this to a friend, financially supporting our life-saving work, and doing whatever it takes to protect and respect human lives in Massachusetts. At the end of the calendar year, your support is all the more critical as I look ahead to plan for the new year.
Keep an eye out for photo updates and the report on the event after the holidays!
In a recent blog post, Secular Pro-Life president and founder gives us an on-point review of the new and fantastic little picture book, Pro-Life Kids, by the Radiance FOundation's Tiffany Bomberger.
If you're considering last minute gifts, or thinking of shipping to relatives far afield, you could do much worse than this thoughtful, well-rhymed piece of life-affirming literature.
As Kelsey writes: "Pro-Life Kids, written by Bethany Bomberger and illustrated by Ed Koehler, is a rhyming picture book that introduces children to the concept that all humans are people: at every age, no matter where they live, and even before they are born. This concept is conveyed clearly and illustrated beautifully, including children of all races and abilities."
When art shows the truth more often, our society will save lives rather than tossing them out.
Read the full review here.
By Myrna Maloney Flynn, President, MCFL
Each day is a gift from God. What you do with it is your gift to him. -- T.D. Jakes
I knew it was coming. Sure enough, as I sat at my host’s Thanksgiving table a few years ago, that all-too predictable sensation entered the otherwise Rockwell-esque scene: loss.
That first Thanksgiving without my mother along with the one three years later without my father presented the seemingly impossible challenge of “giving thanks” for a phase of life I wasn’t particularly grateful for. If not for the countless distractions that accompany Christmas with four kids, I probably would have sunk into a pumpkin pie-filled pit of despair.
It was about this same time that I became involved with Massachusetts Citizens for Life. And then I became more involved. And still more. I felt better than I had in years and probably more passionate than at any other time in my life. Others noticed my growing engagement and asked why I’d suddenly done the equivalent of a cannonball into the pro-life swimming pool. “It’s how I’m dealing with grief,” I said.
As I gathered with loved ones this past Thursday, someone asked what I was thankful for. After rattling off the obligatory “health, family, food,” I added, “and definitely MCFL, for the opportunity to return the gifts my parents gave to me.”
In that moment, I realized grief has nothing to do with my commitment to MCFL. It’s all about gratitude.
One of life’s unsolvable mysteries is why loss so often threatens to sour the otherwise sweet holiday season. You have lost along the way, too, whether it was your parents, grandparents, siblings, children, or lifelong friends. Maybe you’re living through the loss of a marriage as you read this. Despite the welcome distractions of Black Friday, Jimmy Stewart, and the first snowstorm, there’s something about loved ones' absences that stings worse during these six weeks.
I invite you to transform your grief into gratitude. Give your time by volunteering at MCFL. March with us in Washington, D.C., in honor of a lovedone who can’t make the trip. Become a member and give your voice to the voiceless. Make a gift in the name of a cherished friend. Or simply add your name to our online petition in opposition of the ROE Act.
Thanksgiving may be over, but I would like to share my gratitude for our members. Getting to know MCFL supporters like all of you has been one of the greatest gifts I have ever received. I can’t wait to continue our work together in this season when life itself is the reason for giving.
In New Mexico, the proposed removal of late term abortion procedures from the hospital setting made by the "R.O.E." Act in Massachusetts is already law. This reduction in standards of care has proved fatal for Keisha Atkins, and deadly or injurious to nearly 25 other women.
By Leslie Palma
Priests for Life Director of Communications
It’s heartbreaking to imagine the last day in the life of Keisha Atkins, a 23-year-old woman who died following a legal abortion, at six months, in New Mexico.
“In our last conversation in the hospital, she said, ‘Mom, I’m going to die,’” recalled Keisha’s mom, Tina Atkins. “And I said, ‘Don’t talk like that, you’re going to be fine.’”
Soon after that, Keisha was taken to the operating room, and Tina never saw her alive again.
Tina described her daughter as “a beautiful, exuberant young lady,” who loved the outdoors and karaoke singing, going to concerts with her mom and just hanging out with family.
“We just had a great life and all of a sudden, it was gone,” Tina said.
The family has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the late-term abortion business that started the abortion and the hospital where she died.
“They messed with the wrong black woman, because I am not going to step down,” Tina said during an interview with Father Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, and Alveda King, director of Civil Rights for the Unborn for Priests for Life. Tina has testified before the New Mexico Legislature and is hoping to talk to President Trump about abortions that are killing women and their children.
“This is a tragedy,” Father Pavone said. “It’s so important to be speaking out about this.”
KEISHA’S ABORTION EXPERIENCE
Keisha went to the University of New Mexico (UNM) twice, on Jan. 23 and Jan. 30, 2017, seeking an abortion. She was given an ultrasound but was ultimately turned away from the hospital and referred to Southwestern Women’s Options, an Albuquerque business that performs third-trimester abortions on healthy babies growing in the wombs of healthy mothers. The UNM staff made the appointment at Southwestern for her. The two businesses often collaborate, both in the training of abortionists and, until last year, in the transfer of body parts harvested from aborted babies.
On Feb. 1, Keisha went to Southwestern, where her baby girl received a shot of digoxin to stop her heart and laminaria were inserted in Keisha’s cervix to begin the dilation process that would, if all went according to plan, result in Keisha delivering her stillborn daughter two or three days later.
Keisha signed consent forms and was instructed, in writing, that if she experienced any problems, she should not call 911 or go to an emergency room, but should just call Southwestern. She was sent home.
Feb. 2, she returned to Southwestern to have the laminaria replaced and was sent home again. Late that night, at about 11 p.m., she called Southwestern to say she was having trouble breathing and experiencing abdominal pain. Tina was with her when she made that call and remembers that Keisha was instructed not to call 911 but just to get to the clinic in the morning.
“I stayed with her all night,” Tina said. “She was in so much pain.”
On Feb. 3, Keisha arrived at Southwestern at 6:45 a.m. with a high fever and experiencing shortness of breath. Her physical symptoms did not improve through the course of that long day.
“That day was horrible,” Tina said. “I was in the waiting room and they finally let me see her for a minute at 2:30 p.m.” Keisha was on oxygen and had a high fever, her mother said.
At 4:08 p.m., almost nine and a half hours after Keisha had arrived at Southwestern, an ambulance finally was called. The abortion was not performed because she was too ill.
Keisha was admitted to the Emergency Room at UNM at 4:53 p.m. Tina remained with her until just before she was taken to the operating room at 10:29 p.m. for a “dilation and evacuation” abortion of her dead baby. That would entail repeatedly inserting forceps into Keisha’s uterus to remove her daughter piece by piece.
On the operating table, Keisha went into cardiac arrest and was declared dead at 12:10 a.m. Feb. 4.
Eventually the remains of Keisha’s baby, whom she had named Mavis, were reunited with Keisha’s body. They were cremated and their ashes, together in one urn, are with Tina.
“I miss my baby,” Tina said. “She should be here with me right now, and my grandbaby.” Mavis would be 2 years old.
Keisha’s sister, Nicole, also had an abortion at Southwestern and suffered complications so serious, she had to have a hysterectomy. She would advise any woman considering abortion to make another choice.
“This has impacted me and my family in ways you could not imagine,” Nicole said. “It has a tremendous amount of loss involved and I wish I had never done it.”
Tina and Nicole both wish Keisha had never set foot inside Southwestern.
WHAT WENT WRONG?
An autopsy performed by UNM’s Dr. Lauren Dvorscak concluded that Keisha died of a pregnancy-related pulmonary embolism - a blood clot in the lungs. The death was listed as “natural” and the autopsy report noted that “pulmonary embolism is the 6th leading cause of maternal mortality in the United States.”
But according to email transcripts obtained by Albuquerque attorney Michael Seibel, who last year filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Southwestern and UNM, some of the hospital’s medical staff were skeptical that it was really a pulmonary embolism that killed Keisha.
The autopsy report noted that Keisha “also had a high white blood cell count and other clinical features concerning for sepsis upon her hospital admission.” Keisha’s family believes that sepsis, a widespread infection, is what killed her.
Some hospital staffers seem to agree.
In an email dated July 20, 2017, Dr. Trenton Wray, an assistant professor of emergency medicine at the University of New Mexico Hospital, who was one of the physicians who treated Keisha, said: “Everything about her course was consistent with septic abortion … I have to admit, I was floored by the cause of death being a massive PE.”
Wray was asking for an opinion from Dr. Gary Hatch, a diagnostic radiology specialist, who responded:
“The autopsy report doesn’t make sense to me. Who did the autopsy?” Hatch also insisted “there was no massive PE at the time of the CPTA. Period.”
CPTA stands for computed pulmonary arteriogram, a test that would have detected a pulmonary embolism.
In a subsequent email to Lisa Hofler, who was primarily in charge of Keisha’s treatment in the emergency room, Wray said: “My personal opinion on it is that she had septic cardiomyopathy.”
In an email exchange between Dvorscak, who performed the autopsy, and Hatch, Keisha’s infection was mentioned again.
“I agree that everything makes sense for sepsis, and I’m not denying that she was septic and going through a septic abortion,” Dvorscak wrote.
In his response, Hatch asked: “Could a potential sequence here be PE due to DIC due to sepsis due to endometrial infection?”
DIC stands for disseminated intravascular coagulation, a dangerous blood condition that can lead to hemorrhaging. Retention of a dead fetus is one potential cause of DIC.
“I think the scenario you outlined is entirely plausible,” Dvorscak replied, “that everything may have been sort of a sequence from her underlying infection.”
A month after these email exchanges, on Aug. 23, 2017, the Albuquerque Journal ran a story under the headline “Autopsy Rules Out Abortion as Cause of Death.”
In the story, New Mexico Chief Medical Investigator Dr. Kurt Nolte called Keisha’s death “a rare and tragic case for the family.” Southwestern, in a statement, said “All of us … are heartbroken by her death. Our thoughts and prayers are with her family.”
The Southwestern statement went on to berate pro-lifers who were trying to learn the truth about the death of a healthy 23-year-old during the abortion of her healthy baby:
“For those who oppose women’s reproductive justice to exploit this sad event by putting forth lies about abortion and the patient’s care is sickening.”
Tina Atkins has a different take on what’s sickening about this situation.
“These late-term abortions are killing our children, our mothers, our daughters,” she said. “And they’re just getting away with it. I wanted to raise my grandbaby. I can’t even do that now because I don’t have either one of them here.”
Another set of emails sent two days after the Journal story was published brought up another discrepancy.
Remember that UNM turned Keisha away when she went there seeking an abortion, instead sending her to Southwestern for an elective abortion of her six-month fetus. That makes it curious for Eve Espey, chairwoman of UNM’s Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, to write: “… would you be willing to remove the word ‘elective’ – she qualifies under New Mexico’s definition of ‘medically indicated’ but I would suggest just saying ‘abortion.’ “
If her abortion was medically indicated, why was Keisha sent to an abortion business that, according to files collected by Seibel, had no emergency equipment on hand and whose doctors did not have hospital admitting privileges?
That’s just one of the many questions Keisha’s family want answered when the case is heard in December 2020.
They will also want to know why Southwestern waited more than nine hours before transferring her to the hospital, and why UNM waited more than five hours before sending her to an operating room to remove Keisha’s baby, who had been dead for about 60 hours at that point.
They would like the truth about the cause of death to come out – was it really a pulmonary embolism, or, as their lawsuit contends, did she die due to a septic infection that was overlooked until it was too late?
They want to know if, with better care, Keisha might have lived.
Keisha’s family, working with Elisa Martinez, executive director of the New Mexico Alliance for Life and a candidate for the U.S. Senate, also want to ensure that no more women die from abortion.
Noting that even literature supplied to Keisha at Southwestern said the risks of later abortions were much greater than those performed early in pregnancy, Ms. Martinez said: “This is why we have to put an end to barbaric late-term abortion. There are too many women in who are being lied to. We need this story to get out.”
Why young women, particularly women of color, continue to die from legal abortion is beyond the scope of the lawsuit, but it’s a question that needs an answer, especially as late-term abortion spreads to states like New York, Massachusetts, Illinois and Vermont.
“So many of the details sound so tragically similar,” Father Pavone told Tina and Nicole Atkins. “Not only are we praying for you, but we are going to work side by side with you to make sure this tragic loss will not be in vain. We’re going to save more lives as a result.”
press conference and annual State House Celebration of Life this Wednesday
Massachusetts Citizens for Life and partner organizations to illustrate dangerous impact of proposed ROE Act.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - BOSTON, MA - 28 October, 2019 - During the Celebration of Life, an annual lobby day that highlights holistic and life-affirming resources for women and children, Massachusetts Citizens for Life invites media to a press conference at noon on Wednesday, October 30th. National experts from a broad spectrum of political backgrounds, including abortion survivor, Claire Culwell, will speak on the impact of provisions in the ROE ACT(S.1209/H.3320).
Great Hall, Massachusetts State House
Press Conference: 12:00 noon - 1:00pm
Celebration of Life Event: 10:00am - 3:00pm
C.J. Williams, Director of Community Engagement, MCFL: "Massachusetts can do much better than a bill that ditches basic standards of medical care in favor of a burnt-earth push for abortion access over women's safety. In no other medical procedure do we reduce regulations and safety- it's backward. In this case, it uniquely discriminates against women."
Regarding a weeklong campaign launched by MassNARAL that claims, "Massachusetts can do better," MCFL President Myrna Maloney Flynn said, "I agree 100% with NARAL. Massachusetts can do better. But the so-called ROE Act wi make things worse. Instead, let's start talking about prevention, about the facts of fetal development, the effect abortion has on a woman's long-term mental health, adoption, and, especially, universal childcare programs like the one Senator Warren proposes," she said. "That's doing better."
Bill Gilmeister, executive director of RenewMass, said, regarding the showcasing of resource centers, "Pregnancy health centers offer a positive response to pregnant women in difficult circumstances. They provide the resources women need when experiencing tough pregnancies. They are willing to come alongside in support. This is in stark contrast to the abortion businesses that seek to profit from women in need.”
New Mexico attorney Mike Seibel will speak to reporters in the Great Hall Wednesday. Siebel is currently prosecuting the outpatient abortion facility on behalf of his client, mother of Keisha Atkins, who was killed by the deregulation of late-term abortion procedures in New Mexico, the same kind of provision that "R.O.E.” would permit in Massachusetts.
Seibel said, "Massachusetts may take late-term abortion out of hospitals and away from life-saving medical equipment. Let [New Mexico] be a lesson for Massachusetts. You pass that bill, and there will be transports to hospitals for uncontrolled bleeding, uterine rupture, sepsis . . . just like here in New Mexico. Massachusetts will devolve from its first-class status in healthcare to substandard care. There will be deaths just like those in New Mexico."
Depositions, testimony, and other legal documents will be available to press following the speakers’ statements, as will activist and abortion survivor Claire Culwell.
Director of Community Engagement
Massachusetts Citizens for Life
857 302 0466
Are you a concerned citizen or MCFL member? Do you have the resource, but maybe not the ability or energy to spend time or travel to engage in the activism and education MCFL facilitates?
You can still support our work.
To support our digital and local action campaigns to shelve this anti-life bill, you can donate now. Just click through our secure links here: Donate to MCFL.
Boston Mayor Marty Walsh joined mayors from across Massachusetts, October 1st, at the Massachusetts State House, to declare support of legislation removing basic standards of medical care for women and newly born infants. SB 1209/HB 3320, the "ROE Act," abolishes parental consent, eliminates every meaningful constraint on any abortion up until birth (while simultaneously making such abortions even more unsafe by canceling the current requirement that abortions after the first trimester be performed in hospitals), and removes the current requirement that life-supporting medical equipment be on-hand during late-term abortions—in case a child survives the abortion attempt.
The event included Lawrence Mayor Dan Rivera, Cambridge Mayor Marc McGovern, Framingham Mayor Yvonne Spicer, Newburyport Mayor Donna Holaday, and Easthampton Mayor Nicole LaChapelle.
If any one of these officials is your mayor, call them today to express your deep disappointment in their judgment.
Boston - Marty Walsh - Phone: 617-635-4500
Cambridge - Marc McGovern - Phone: (617) 349-4321
Easthampton - Nicole LaChapelle - Phone: (413) 529-1400 ext. 470
Framingham - Yvonne Spicer - Phone: 508-532-5400
Newburyport - Donna Holaday - Phone: (978) 465-4413
By C.J. Williams, Director of Community Engagement, MCFL
I returned from the Let There Be Life Conference in California with more information than my heart or head could properly organize.
Much like the citizens of Massachusetts, Californians face an abortion-business extremism that is well beyond pro-choice. Laws proposed in the California legislature mirror the "ROE Act" (and newly introduced Bill H.3841, which would force our public universities to include abortion centers offering chemical terminations on their campuses). These bills abandon even the appearance of seeking women’s safety, and push abortion for any reason, at any stage, in any circumstance. These proposals brazenly remove medical standards of care for the abortion-minded mother, putting abortion promotion before her safety.*
California’s pro-abortion university bill inspired the introduction of HB 3841 here. Even my Planned Parenthood-supporting friends have wondered aloud to me why chemical abortions should be forced onto university health centers, when abortion access is so open in both Massachusetts and California--and the proposed laws make abortion more available but less safe.
Just in summary, these pieces of legislation:
--prioritize access over safety*;
--expand and promote abortion businesses but disempower doctors*;
--target viable preborn children; and
--target underage girls and young adults on college campuses*.
If the governor signs the legislation, California will force its public universities to provide chemical abortions on-site to their students. We in Massachusetts don’t yet have these laws on our books. The Committee on the Judiciary has recently informed me they are still taking testimony on the ROE Act (as is the Committee on Public Health for HB 3841, the chemical-abortion bill). The ROE Act, if passed, would remove all adult supervision and protection for a 12- or 13-year old girl seeking an abortion, as well as removing any requirement that grisly, multi-day late-term abortion procedures be performed in a qualified hospital. HB 3841 would require our publicly funded universities to institutionalize abortion centers on their campuses.
Court cases and emergency records in states with laws that remove these basic medical standards and abortion regulations show that countless women per year are maimed or killed by abortionists.*
During the conference, attendees also held a protest at the University of San Francisco. Well-known for its cutting-edge technology programs and medical track, UCSF is less well-known as the premiere late-term abortion training school in the nation. Doctors training there learn to perform abortions by aborting: they dismember human beings in-utero, and the organs of those individuals are then sold for a profit to medical researchers. Neither mother nor child gives consent in this scenario.
I joined other conference-goers outside the university chancellor’s window to expose the heinous human rights abuse.
“How can you have a medical school training late-term abortionists with the specific goal of harvesting human body parts? How many kinds of wrong can you go?” A girl named Ana asked me, as we held signs next to a young man in a mouse costume. (His sign: Don’t experiment on me and don’t experiment on BABIES.)
Loud and clear, even to passers-by, this event showed that we are no longer in a landscape divided at pro-life / pro-choice. Even the pro-choice students who wandered over to ask what we were protesting expressed horror at the flagrant disregard for human dignity.
What was the most valuable takeaway in all of this for Massachusetts?
It gave me a vivid view of what our state will look like for women if the “R.O.E.” Act is passed.
S.1209 (“R.O.E.”) will no not require basic medical standards of safety for the women having the 3 to 4 day late-term abortion procedure. These grisly labor-and-delivery-of-a-dead-child surgeries will be performed outside of hospitals under “R.O.E.”
I encountered a firsthand witness to the fallout of these policies in San Francisco. He is an attorney, whose client is the mother of Keisha, a woman who waited over 17 hours for proper medical care after her late-term abortion left baby parts in her womb. She ultimately died of sepsis -- and the incredible negligence of so-called women’s healthcare providers in outpatient abortion facilities.
This attorney is currently prosecuting the abortion doctors and outpatient abortion facilities in New Mexico for over 17 women’s deaths and countless injuries because of the gross negligence of their laws -- which right now do exactly what “R.O.E.” would do here -- has countless other incidents documented as well.
This event, and these facts are critical to your communication with your legislator, and the Joint Committee on the Judiciary (find their contact information here and submit your testimony to Chair Claire Cronin).
My pro-choice friends and I agree: The "ROE" Act is no ROE v. Wade. Where the Supreme Court decision recognizes a state interest in the life of a viable child, and (after the first trimester) recognizes a state interest in seeing that abortions are given the same attention as other surgeries (at least), the ROE Act would remove the current hedges separating “legal” abortion from an actual back-alley abortion.
So why are legislators and pro-abortion lobbies pushing this in Massachusetts?
An attorney in New Mexico dealing with the human fallout from late-term abortion cases there pulled these key points for us as we scrolled through page upon page of emergency assistance calls and death statements from non-hospital abortion facilities:
-- Outpatient clinics reduce overhead by reducing life-saving medical equipment.
-- Outpatient clinics do not need to have a doctor perform the procedure (or one with hospital privileges).
-- Outpatient clinics do not hold patients for monitoring as hospitals do.
-- Outpatient clinics send women home carrying a dead or dying full-term baby, effectively leaving her at risk for sepsis, hemorrhage, etc., with no medical attention near to hand.
No matter what end of the ideological spectrum we stand on, we can unite to oppose privileging ease of access over safety, risky abortion over healthcare, and profit over people’s lives, dignity, and well-being. Share these facts with the Joint Committees, and your family and friends -- pro-life or pro-choice.
San Francisco has a political climate similar to Massachusetts in some ways. New Mexico has an abortion extremism that could be Massachusetts in a few years.
They both have dead children being sold for their body parts, and women dying too often from reduction in the medical standards of care.
Let’s learn from both: Massachusetts citizens, get out there and lobby the Joint Committee on the Judiciary against the ROE Act. This isn’t about abortion access or removal of access, as ROE Act proponents have tried to say. It is about removal of care, safety, and a pushing for profit from organizations that make money on procedures that hurt women, and kill preborn people.
*SB 24 (CA) would require campus health services at all 34 public campuses throughout the state — 11 under the University of California system and 23 under the California State system -- to make available "abortion by medication techniques," which involves a regimen of mifepristone and misoprostol.
*The ROE Act would remove the requirement that a doctor have life-supporting medical equipment on-hand for both humans involved in an abortion. This bill even eliminates language recognizing that a woman and child are the relevant patients in an abortion.
*New Mexico is a case in point. You can read testimony from expert late-term abortionists from the ongoing court case in Albuquerque, wherein over 25 women are recorded dead from outpatient late-term abortions.