Yesterday, Wayne Cockfield spoke to legislators and aides about the doctor prescribed suicide ballot question at the MCFL Legislative Breakfast. Groups of nursing students were in the State House, so he spoke to them also. Wayne made an amazing case against the whole concept of doctor prescribed suicide. He got a standing O from the legislators and rapt attention from the students.
Last night he spoke in Worcester to a large group of local pro-lifers. Allison LeDoux arranged for the beautiful, accessible hall. Wayne was able to speak for longer and gave people really useful ideas. He explained that "compassion" means "to suffer with" and stated: "medical abandonment is not compassion"
Today and tomorrow, Wayne has interviews. One of them is live on The Good Catholic Life, radio 1060 from Friday from 4-5pm in the Boston area.
You will want to hear Wayne at Faneuil Hall on Sunday from 2 - 4pm. I know you will enjoy hearing the Treblemakers from the Montrose School also.
March for Life: the police told marchers that the numbers this year were higher than the 400,000 last year. Some articles are reporting one half million marchers. See the March in one minute.
January 4, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A standard pro-abortion argument hinges on the premise that a baby inside his mom's womb attacks her bodily integrity. The developing baby is seen in this light as an intruder, a parasite, a threat to the woman's autonomy. From this perspective the pregnant woman is viewed as being occupied. The only way she can continue to exercise her interest in bodily integrity, the argument goes, is to be liberated through the termination and expulsion of the invader.
But science paints a vastly different picture about the actual relationship between a baby in utero and his or her mother, showing that, far from being a parasite, the unborn child can help heal his mother for the rest of her life, as beneficial cells from the child pass into the mother's body during pregnancy
The MCFL Caucus was amazing! At one point I had to ask some people to move out to the foyer because I was concerned about fire laws.
It is wonderful to see the number of young people, but I also saw many who have come every year since the 70's.
I will be sharing with you information from all our wonderful speakers. Prof New closed the caucus with his usual great analysis of state laws. She told us that planned parenthood has announced that 2011 was their worst year ever! Twenty-Four states passed 92 pro-life laws. Prof New's figures along with those reported by Texas at the NRLC Board meeting, indicate that states have defunded PP by more than $120 million.
A local radio station is broadcasting live.
Congressmen are lined up to speak. The drizzle is very heavy as we set off.
Karen Cross, NRLC PAC Chair, directed us to www.nrlpac.org. Note the chart of a US Senate seats up in 2012. In the states where McCain's vote was under 50%, the incumbent senators have 0% pro-life voting records except Senator Scott Brown, who voted with us 75% of the time last year.
Karen also noted "Advantage for Pro-Life Candidates" at www.nrlpac.org. Our vote is vital!
Please www.nrlc.org for the thorough "Where Do The Republican Candidates Stand on Life" and "The Presidential Record on Life".
The energy, commitment, and expertise of these members of the NRLC Board from across the country is inspiring. Anne
Sunday: 39 years and 55 million dead babies. Who knows how many damaged women.
Catholics in the Archdiocese of Boston and others who are interested can join the Marchers in prayer as they journey to DC on Sunday at a local church at 3:00 pm or 7:00 pm. http://www.bostoncatholic.org/...
For Sunday also, we have joined Jill Stanek who says. "This Sunday, January 22, pro-life bloggers, tweeters, facebookers, commenters, debaters, apologists, and rabble-rousers will band together to counter NARAL's Blog for Choice Day by asking them everywhere they can, "What do you mean by that word, 'choice'"?
"The pro-life bloggers and their contributors are using the same day to ask them: 'exactly what do they mean by CHOICE'? Feel free to join the party. If you tweet, add #tweet4choice to your effort. Use your facebook or similar accounts too! It's good clean fun, and will drive NARAL nutz."
If you can't make the assembly on the 29th, you can still hear Wayne Cockfield.
"The Dangers of Doctor Prescribed Suicide - to You and to Society"
Wayne Cockfield, USMCRet, nationally known pro-life speaker who lost both his legs and partial use of one hand in battle, will speak about the dangers of the Doctor Prescribed Suicide petition, which will be on the Massachusetts ballot. Phelan Center, Blessed Sacrament Parish, 555 Pleasant Street, Worcester, on Wednesday, January 25, 2012 at 7:30 pm. Sponsored by Massachusetts Citizens for Life.
Sunday ushers in the 40th post-Roe year. When the cause is life we will never give up. For those of us in Massachusetts, it will be the most challenging year we have ever had. With that in mind, we have chosen a more active, forceful logo for these emails. I hope you like it.
I leave at the crack of dawn Saturday morning for the National Right to Life Board meeting in DC. I'll let you know what is happening there. Anne
Today's story of the woman whom a judge ruled should be forced by her parents to have an abortion and then be sterilized is not, unfortunately, bizarre in our world.
Thank goodness another judge has overruled.
When you read it you will see that the woman's severe mental problems could very well have been caused by a previous abortion. She certainly needs prayers.
What we have wrought! Anne
"Moe, who also suffers from bipolar disorder, has been pregnant twice before. On the first pregnancy, she had an abortion. On the second she gave birth to a boy, who is now in the custody of her parents, according to the Appeals Court ruling.
"At some point between her abortion and the birth of her son, she suffered a 'psychotic break', and has since been hospitalized numerous times for mental illness.
When she was in college, she began believing people were staring at her and saying she killed her baby. She becomes agitated when discussing her abortion, and has refused obstetric care and testing, the ruling stated. "
After hearing the local church bell toll for someone who had passed-on, I got to thinking:
I understand wanting to honor the person, but it seems out of balance, only hearing a bell for death.
Wouldn't it be just awesome, if there were a similar (nowadays digital) bell sound, that could ring out from atop the hospitals when someone enters this life? It should be a lighter tone, not so ominous sounding, if you know what I mean. But I for one would get a kick out of hearing it each time. It's hopeful.
Janet tells me that many buses are full but she can still fit in a few more people. The Braintree bus definitely has a few spaces. Sign up ASAP so that we can get your MCFL knitted cap to your bus captain. http://www.masscitizensforlife...
We have some delightful news about the Caucus. The link is a press release telling about a wonderful new program we have just started, which will be included at the Caucus. Michael will address Caucus-goers. http://massprolife.com/compone...
We just received news that the 2013 March for Life will be held on Friday, January 25, 2013! It will be the 40th Anniversary and we will have come off a winning election. Now that it will be Friday, we can all go. Looking forward to seeing you in DC and/or the Assembly on the 29th! Anne
Brent Rooney of Justice for Kids, which looks at the connection between previous abortions and problems in subsequent children, brought to our attention this recent study from Harvard. It is so powerful that I sent his press release to all the media outlets in Massachusetts. Take a look at their website, http://www.justiceforkids.webs... It has intuitive but still-amazing information like the fact that the incidence of cerebral palsy went down by 71% in Poland when abortion was made illegal. You and Mother Nature have been right all along!
Following the press release, I have the link to a study showing that some stem cells of unborn babies stay with their mothers and protect them for a life-time! Not bad!
Anne
Harvard Study Links Autism to Prior Abortions
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]
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]
Massachusetts Initiative Petition No. 11-12
Petition for an Act Relative to Death with Dignity
Initiative No. 11-12,titled "An Act Relative to Death With Dignity," is an assisted-suicide proposal patterned on Oregon's and Washington's laws permitting doctor-prescribed suicide.
This proposal comes at a time when:
More people in Massachusetts die annually from suicide than from motor vehicle accidents.
The number of suicides in the state is three times higher than the number of homicides.
Elder abuse has increased by 31 percent in the last three years.
Analysis Initiative 11-12 would give government bureaucrats an profit-driven health insurance programs the opportunity to cut costs by denying payment for more expensive treatments while approving payment for less costly assisted-suicide deaths.
This has already been documented in Oregon. The state on which the Massachusetts initiative is based.
In Oregon, the Oregon Health Plan (OHP) has notified some patients that medications prescribed to extend their lives or improve their comfort level would not be covered, but that the OHP would pay for a lethal drug prescription.
Referring to payment for assisted suicide, the Oregon department of Human Services explains, "Individual insurers determine whether the procedure is covered under their policies, just as they do any other medical procedure."
If Initiative 11-12 is approved, will health insurance programs and government health programs do the right thing - or the cheap thing?
Initiative 11-12 would allow health care providers and others to suggest and encourage vulnerable patients to request doctor-prescribed suicide, setting the stage for elder abuse and pressure on vulnerable patients.
Initiative 11-12 does not prohibit anyone from suggesting or encouraging a patient to request doctor-prescribed suicide.
Since victims of domestic abuse, including elder abuse, are extremely vulnerable to persuasion from their abusers, it takes little imagination to understand how Initiative 11-12 could put these abused patients at-risk of being persuaded to request lethal doses of drugs.
Under Initiative 11-12, someone who would benefit financially from the patient's death could serve as a witness and claim that the patient is mentally fit and eligible to request assisted suicide.
Initiative 11-12 requires that there be two witnesses to the patient's written request for doctor-Prescribed suicide. One of those witnesses shall not be a relative or entitled to any portion of the person's estate upon death. [Section 21]
However, this provides little protection since it permits one witness to be a relative or someone who is entitled to the person's estate. The second witness could be the best friend of the first witness and no one would know.
Victims of elder abuse and domestic abuse are unlikely to share their fears with outsiders or to reveal that they are being pressured by family members to "choose" assisted suicide.
Initiative 11-12 has no protections for the patient once the assisted-suicide prescription is filled.
Initiative11-12 only addresses activities taking place at the time the prescription for death is written by the doctor. There are no provisions to insure that the patient is competent at the time the overdose is taken or that the patient knowingly and/or willingly takes the lethal drugs.
Due to this lack of protection at the time of their deaths, Initiative 11-12 would out patients at enormous risk. For example, someone who would benefit from the patient's death could trick or even force the patient into taking the fatal drugs, and no one would know that the patient's death was not voluntary.
Initiative 11-12 gives the illusion of "choice." Yet, it will actually constrict patient choice.
Under Initiative 11-12, before writing a prescription for death, a doctor must fully "inform" the patient of "all feasible alternatives including, but not limited to, comfort care, hospice care, and pain control." [Section 4] However, being "informed" of all options does not mean that patients will have access to all options. It only means they must be informed of those.
If doctor-prescribed suicide becomes just another treatment option, and a cheap option at that, the standard of care and provision of health care changes. There will be less and less focus on extending life and eliminating pain, and more and more focus on the "efficient" treatment of death.
Patients may find that their insurance carrier will not cover the "feasible alternatives" that their doctor explained to them, but instead, will pay for those patients to receive a prescription for death.
Initiative 11-12 would permit assisted-suicide prescriptions for mentally ill or depressed patients.
Before receiving a prescription for death, patients do not need to have any psychological or psychiatric evaluation unless a doctor thinks that the patient is suffering from a psychiatric or psychological disorder or depression that causes impaired judgment. [Section 6] Even if a counseling referral is made, it may consist of only one consultation between the patient and a psychiatrist or a psychologist. That consultation is only to determine if the patient does not have "impaired judgment." [Section 6]
Even if the counselor determines that the patient has a mental disorder or disease, the prescription for suicide could still be written as long as the counselor determines that the patient's judgment is not impaired.
This provision is the same as that contained in Oregon's law where, in one year, not a single person - out of the 59 assisted-suicide deaths reported for that year - was referred for counseling. A study about the Oregon law found that it "may not adequately protect all mentally ill patients."
Patients Right's Council Executive Director Rita marker spoke on the dangers of the Legalization of Doctor-Prescribed Suicide at Worcester's Assumption College on Nov. 13, 2011
Persons from the disability, medical, legal, pro-life and pro-family communities came together to fire the opening salvo in the fight against the legalization of assisted-suicide. Hosted by former state representative Mark Carron, The Massachusetts Alliance Against Doctor-Prescribed Suicide announced their opposition at a press conference at Boston's State House on December 8.
Legalization of Doctor-Prescribed Suicide is one of the four ballot questions that have been approved for voters to consider in 2012. "We're here exercising democracy," said Carron. "It's alive and well."
Carron introduced long-time Boston activist John Kelly, a member of the Commission for People with Disabilities. "Why would people with disabilities be opposed to Doctor-Prescribed Suicide?" Kelly asked.
Dangers to disabled persons "Reasons for requesting DPS coming out of Oregon (where doctor-prescribed suicide is legal) show that the people committing suicide are doing it for social reasons," Kelly answered. "These reasons are addressable, such as feeling a lack of autonomy or losing control of one's bodily functions. We're here to say that these losses are not something that deprive anyone of dignity. You can have dignity however you live this life.
"There are so many problems with this initiative," Kelly continued. "First of all, it's not even needed. People are seeking a right that people already have, to refuse all treatment, refuse all intervention, or decline treatment at any time. This is not a time when people need to die in agony without sufficient pain relief. We all support necessary pain relief, even if that means sedation, even if it means a hastened death. We are committed to working with people so that they can get the care that they need and we need. We people with disabilities are on the front lines of dealing with the heath care system that is always, always trying to find ways to cut costs and to limit access to health care; to have insurers, who may be profit driven, to have state regulators, even to have doctors deciding, who it is gets to die under this initiative. There are just so many problems with coming abuse.
"There are no safeguards. Once the prescription is filled and is in the home of the person who is going to use it, there are no safeguards in administering it. An heir of the person subject to the suicide potion could even be one of the witnesses, no one would know if something were to happen. There are just too many problems with this bill. It promotes a negative view of persons with disabilities; we think that the dangers are just too great and the benefits are too small.
"Another issue is expanding eligibility. We fear that we ourselves will become eligible," concluded Kelly. "I have a catheter. If I were to remove that, I could easily be classified as terminal. Maybe not this year, but it could come, and that's already happened in the Netherlands.
Wayne Cockfield testified at the United Nations for inclusion of protective language in a UN treaty to ensure the rights of persons with disabilities.
Will Speak at the MCFL Assembly for Life, Jan. 29, Faneuil Hall
In 1969, Wayne Cockfield was a young Marine serving in the mountains of Vietnam. "We were going down a river in rubber rafts," he explained. "We landed the rafts and went up into an area where we were ambushed. We had stopped in a clearing and a mine went off. I went up 20 feet in the air. One second I was on the ground, the next second I was even with the top of a tree. I saw another Marine badly hurt, but I didn't know if he was still alive. I was immediately medevaced to a hospital, awake the whole time. I was critically injured, with shrapnel in both my legs and my arms. Two weeks later I lost both of my legs through infection. I was later sent to the Philadelphia Naval hospital which was filled with thousands of severely injured Marines. We were not begging for death, we were fighting with everything we had to stay alive."
Said Cockfield, "Our country is at a cross-roads. In the fight against assisted-suicide and euthanasia we are choosing what kind of future medically vulnerable people will have. Will we protect them and provide care, or will we become a predatory society, where people will have to pass a 'value' test to have the privilege of life. What happens if you don't measure up? This is a choice with far reaching consequences."
Cockfield's perspective of how a disabled person views assisted suicide was summed up in an article he wrote for the National Right to Life Committee called, Living in the Bulls-Eye of Euthanasia. "The disabled, the chronically ill, and the elderly are being targeted," Cockfield said. "But the push for assisted-suicide and euthanasia is not based totally on money, it's a justification based on someone's quality of life. It's a subjective, not a medically objective judgment.
"If you asked someone from a third world country like Bangladesh, what's a good quality of life, they may say something simple, like having clean water. A person from a more affluent country may say it's having a house with three bedrooms. But, if a doctor's definition of what's a good quality of life is being able to walk around the block without assistance, I'm in trouble. People with disabilities experience the danger of a doctor's prejudice, medical treatment is in their hands. They have the power to withhold critical medical treatment.
"Advocates of assisted-suicide appeal to the prejudice, 'who wants to be old, disabled and sick?' Well, the old, the disabled and the sick. I've been in a wheelchair for forty years. People think, 'I don't want to be like that, you shouldn't be like that,' that's the prejudice and the bias. But your quality of life, your degree of happiness is not predicated on your degree of physical perfection. You don't get rid of problems by getting rid of the people with problems.
Even though a non-election year is not usually that exciting, 2011 was an excellent year for pro-life!
http://www.nationalrighttolife...
Helen Cross explained in the MCFL News why embryonic stem cell research has had its day. Here is a positive stem cell research story, out of California no less.
We pro-lifers are keen political observers and participants because we know that politics is part of the process to restore the Culture of Life. Last night a good chunk of the country joined us to watch the results of the Iowa caucuses. Of course, pro-lifers are very fond of Rick Santorum!
We in Massachusetts wish Governor Romney would recognize the failings of state-controlled health care and come up with a better way to accomplish his laudable goals but we do not fault his pro-life position.
In the last few days we have had calls at the MCFL office from operatives of other campaigns trying to get us to criticize Romney's positions on life. The governor's positions are pro-life and we feel confident that they will stay that way.
During the fall, national media called for interviews. This 11/11/11 article from the Wall Street Journal, about the Romney turning point in 2005, is an example of where we have referred these operative,
"Mr. Romney as governor pressed forward with a health-care law that he saw as his legacy, a market-driven approach that was in vogue with many conservative thinkers at the time. Now, it appears he may have miscalculated: The Massachusetts health-care law remains a major burden on his quest for the Republican nomination.
Mr. Romney met with abortion-rights activists while running for governor in 2002. He assured them he would protect women's right to choose abortion and said he would neither expand nor restrict such a right as governor, according to Nicole Roos, chairwoman of NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts' political-action committee. She adds that he said he didn't wish to be called "pro-choice" and didn't like the "pro-life" label, either.
A leading abortion foe, Anne Fox of Massachusetts Citizens for Life, says she didn't even bother to reach out to Mr. Romney during the 2002 campaign, presuming that he was no ally.
Both groups found a change in 2005. In July of that year, Mr. Romney vetoed legislation that would have widened access to the Plan B emergency-contraceptive pill, by requiring hospitals to offer it to all rape victims and allowing some state-approved pharmacists to sell it without prescription.
To Mr. Romney, this was a principled decision consistent with his pledge not to change Massachusetts law relating to abortion.
Ms. Roos of NARAL says that although Mr. Romney had made such a pledge orally, he had stated in the group's written questionnaire that he supported efforts to expand access to emergency contraception.
The day after the veto, Mr. Romney wrote in a Boston Globe op-ed piece that his convictions on the issue had "evolved," and declared "I am prolife"-embracing a label Ms. Roos says he had avoided as a candidate in 2002.
Ms. Fox of Citizens for Life says her antiabortion group began having regular contact with a Romney aide and through him asked if Mr. Romney's wife, Ann, would become an honorary chairwoman of its new capital campaign. She did so."
Ah, yes, the Duchess, "Tut, tut, child! Everything's got a moral, if only you can find it."
"The current debate on assisted-suicide is not about a 'right to die,' attorney Rita Marker, President of the Patients Rights Council, explained to the participants at an MCFL workshop on November 13 at Assumption College in Worcester. "The debate is over whether public policy should be changed in a way that will transform prescriptions for poison into medical treatment. The outcome of the debate will profoundly affect family relationships, interaction between doctors and patients and concepts of ethical behavior."
Marker, an internationally known author, speaker and educator on assisted-suicide and euthanasia said, "The term Doctor-Prescribed Suicide is accurate because it recognizes the act for what it is, a doctor prescribing a deadly overdose: take this with a light snack and alcohol to cause death. Legalization transforms Doctor-Prescribed Suicide into a medical treatment.
"Creating doubt changes minds," said Marker. "People think Doctor-Prescribed Suicide sounds great for someone with a terminal illness. You must create doubt that this is a good idea. The most effective way to do that is by raising questions in the person's mind. By asking questions you are better able to raise doubts.
"Committing suicide or attempting suicide is not illegal. Doctor-Prescribed Suicide adds a level of respectability, it transforms suicide for people who are struggling with serious illness and adds a layer of pressure. It says all options are equally good and it becomes ingrained. People equate something being legal with something being good.
"Euthanasia and assisted-suicide are not private acts. Rather, they involve one person facilitating the death of another. This is a matter of very public concern since it can lead to tremendous abuse, exploitation, and erosion of care for the most vulnerable people among us."
Marker's presentation included strategies and communication skills necessary to effectively combat Doctor Prescribed Suicide. "In Massachusetts, religious or right to life arguments won't help because people will see it as 'imposing your morality.' Instead, use the argument, 'it's too dangerous' or 'it's just plain common sense,' " she recommended. "Don't bring in any other arguments such as abortion, because there are people who will be with us on this issue but not on others. Don't allow people to buttonhole you. If you write a letter, don't sign your affiliation (i.e. priest, right to life organization.)
"Don't feed the bigotry beast, don't allow the issue of assisted-suicide to be cast as a religious issue. Religion-bashing will be part of the battle, don't provide ammunition for the bigotry. Rhetoric that says opposition to Doctor-Prescribed Suicide is coming primarily from the Catholic Church. It's purpose is to marginalize opponents of Doctor-Prescribed Suicide. It is intended to convey the message that religious institutions and people of faith are standing in the way of patient choice, freedom and well-being and are attempting to force their religious views on others.
"In debates and interviews, assisted-suicide advocates (and sometimes even sympathetic questioners) ask questions about religion, abortion, and other hot button topics. Straying into those areas takes the focus off assisted-suicide, splinters the audience, and gives assisted-suicide proponents the opportunity to paint their opponents are religious or pro-life zealots.
"Don't take the bait. Stick to the topic. Don't mix issues. The topic is assisted-suicide. Keep all of your remarks on it."
Concluded Marker, "Euthanasia and assisted suicide are not about giving rights to the person who dies but, instead, they are about changing public policy so that doctors or others can directly and intentionally end or participate in ending another person's life. Euthanasia and assisted suicide are not about the right to die. They are about the right to kill."
Thanks to each of you who responded so generously to our matching gift challenge!
Saving lives in 2012 will be a huge responsibility. When we are able to print materials and do ads about the dangers of Doctor Prescribed Suicide., it will be because of your generosity.
As you are marking your new 2012 Calendar, please note these important dates:
Jan 14: Open House for anyone who is thinking of speaking on the life issues. You are invited to the MCFL Office to hear current speakers present what they say and what it is like to be an MCFL Speaker. All are welcome, 9:30 am - noon. Please call 617-242-4199 X 230 to register.
Jan 23: Massachusetts Caucus, Kennedy Caucus Room, Russell Senate Office Builiding, Washinton DC, 9:30 am - 11:30 am. We will hear from Hadley Arkes, Dwight Duncan, Karen Cross, Jennifer Popik, Dan Avila, Thea Rossi-Barron, Michael New, and Michael Pakaluk. They are experts in areas affecting us - like the Scott Brown election and the Doctor Prescribed Suicide petition. Coffee and pastries provided
Jan 23: March for Life, noon to 3:00. The buses are filling up quickly. Check http://www.masscitizensforlife... for bus information.
Jan 29: Assembly for Life, Faneuil Hall, 2pm - 4pm. Nationally known Wayne Cockfield, USMCR, who lost both legs and partial use of his hands on active duty, will speak about the dangers of the Doctor Prescribed Suicide petition. The Treblemakers from The Montrose School were so popular last year. They have agreed to sing again.
Feb 21: Student Lobby Day at the State House: meet legislators, learn the process, have a private tour.
Dec 31, 2011: Last day for matching gift challenge. I am so grateful to all who have given. If you have not yet supported our life-saving efforts, please help right now, http://www.masscitizensforlife... Thank you all! Anne
During the 1800's abortion was despairingly common. The abortion rate in the US was the highest in the world. Abortion was used almost exclusively by upper class, urban, married women for the usual reasons: they had vacations planned, wanted to wear their fashionable clothes, etc. Abortionists and abortifacients were openly advertized in the newspapers.
The abortion rate in Boston was twice that of New York City, which was 10 times the national average.
Is it any wonder, then, that the doctors at Harvard Medical School were among the pioneers of the pro-life movement? As early as 1805 they were talking about human life beginning at conception. In the 1860's they were talking about fetal pain at 15 weeks.
I was reminded today - on the Feast of the Holy Innocents - that their papers at both the Mass. Medical Society and Harvard Medical School quote these doctors calling abortionists "Herods".
We reviewed Frederick Dyer's books about Horatio Storer and these other courageous physicians in a recent MCFL News (reprinted below). You can read more from Dr Dyer. Dr Dyer has donated both books to the MCFL Library. You may borrow either book by calling the MCFL office. They are thick but so quotable!
I want to thank those of you who have taken the Dec 31, 2011 matching grant challenge and urge the rest of you to donate at
http://www.masscitizensforlife...
Thank you! Anne
From the MCFL News, May/June, 2011
For those of us who get a real satisfaction from proof that we are right all along, The Physicians' Crusade Against Abortion and its companion, Champion of Women and the Unborn, by Frederick Dyer, are must reads. Horatio Robinson Storer, Harvard Medical School, 1853, was probably the most powerful anti-abortion crusader ever.
In the 19th century abortion drugs and devices, as well the actual procedure, were openly advertized in leading newspapers. The abortion rates were very high - mostly among privileged, married women. The US had the highest abortion rate in the world and Boston's abortion rate was twenty times that of the rest of the country!
Doctors at the time noted that the Catholic women were not aborting. The doctors, who were the pro-life leaders, bemoaned the lack of clergy instruction from the pulpit. They felt it was the priests speaking in the confessional that kept the Catholic abortion rate nil. Dyer stresses, that, if the reader has Protestant ancestors in the US in the 19th century, that reader is very lucky to exist.
Dyer used Storer family papers, which he then donated to the Mass. Medical Society and HMS. Remember Justice Blackmun's claims in Roe v Wade that 19th century anti-abortion laws were all for the health of the mother? As early as 1805, doctors talked about the humanity of the unborn baby from the moment of conception. In the 1860's doctors were talking about fetal pain at 15 weeks. Doctors consistently referred to abortionists as "Herods". Just the direct quotes about the humanity of the unborn from conception, and the absolute evil of those who would destroy them, would make a power point presentation at least two hours long. This meticulously documented analysis exposes the tendentious character of the arguments in Roe v Wade.
Facebook
Twitter
