Friday, February 22, 2019

Christian Medical Association lauds new Title X family planning rule



Washington, DC - February 22, 2019: The 19,000-member Christian Medical Association (CMA, www.cmda.org) in a statement today enthusiastically welcomed a final new rule that will govern tax funds awarded for family planning purposes under the Title X program administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
The following statement may be attributed to VP for Govt. Relations Jonathan Imbody (JI@Freedom2Care.org), who also serves as Director of Freedom2Care (www.Freedom2care.org) and its over 30,000 constituents.
"Practically speaking, the new rule now opens the door to many more health organizations, which should translate into more and better options for patient care. Many life-affirming, full-service health organizations nationwide had been shut out of the program by the previous administration's abortion-related requirements.
"Our polling, cited in the final rule document, showed that 91 percent of faith-based health professionals will leave medicine rather than bow to pressure to compromise their life-affirming convictions.
"As the new rule document notes while citing this polling (p. 268), 'With the final rule’s added emphasis on protecting rights of conscience, more individuals may enter the Title X family planning program, helping to meet that unmet need for care.'
"The program remains open to any organization willing to respect the statutory separation of abortion from Title X family planning funds and operations. The only organizations shut out of the Title X family planning program will be those who insist on mingling abortion with Title X funds and programs. So Title X will no longer serve as an exclusive  funding pipeline for the abortion industry while shutting out pro-life health programs.
"This new rule finally brings the Title X family planning program in line with federal Title X law that forbids funds for abortion as a family planning method—a principle that reflects the values of the American people."


Tuesday, February 19, 2019

Medical organizations urge support of Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act

The following letter by life-affirming medical organizations is being sent today to U.S. senators:


February 19, 2019

Joint Medical Statement on S. 311
Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act
SUPPORT
Presented to the 116th Congress U.S. Senate

Dear Senator,

As medical professional organizations and individuals representing over 30,000 physicians who practice according to the Hippocratic Oath, we write in support of S. 311, the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.

Medical facts are important. 

Fact 1. It is an undisputed scientific fact that a distinct, living human being exists in the womb of a pregnant mother.

From the moment of fertilization, a human being meets all of the scientific criteria for a living organism[1] and is completely distinct from her/his mother, not a part of her/his mother’s body.  This is scientific fact.  It is therefore scientifically correct for S. 311 to identify the living survivors of abortions as human persons and afford those human beings the full protection of the law in the same way that infants of similar gestational ages are currently protected.

Fact 2. Abortion is NOT healthcare, much less an essential part of women’s health care and abortions in the third trimester are NOT done to save a woman’s life[2]. 

The fact that over 85% of ob-gyns in a representative national survey do not perform abortions on their patients[3] is glaring evidence that abortion is NOT an essential part of women’s healthcare.  The vast majority of abortions are done by abortion providers who do not provide any other kind of medical care for the woman. Abortion treats no disease. Pregnancy is not a disease, and deliberately killing the unborn child by abortion is NOT healthcare. 

It is clear from testimony by abortion practitioners during the Partial Birth Abortion Ban hearings[4] that, unlike a delivery which separates the mother and her fetus for the purpose of life, an abortion separates the mother and the fetus with the purpose of guaranteeing that the baby is born dead.  That’s why a fetus who survives an abortion is called a “failed abortion”.  The separation did not fail to occur.  What “failed” to occur in a “failed abortion” is the guarantee of a dead baby.

There are rare circumstances in which a mother’s life is in jeopardy due to either pre-existing conditions or pregnancy complications.  It is extremely rare for this to occur prior to the point of viability (currently 22 weeks after last menstrual period, 20 weeks after fertilization). After 20 weeks fertilization age, it is NEVER necessary to intentionally kill the fetal human being in order to save a woman’s life.[5]  In cases where the mother’s life actually is in danger in the latter half of pregnancy, there is not time for an abortion, because an abortion typically is a two to three-day process.  Instead, immediate delivery is needed in these situations, and can be done in a medically appropriate way (labor induction or C-section) by the woman’s own physician. We can, and do, save the life of the mother through delivery of an intact infant in a hospital where both the mother and her newborn can receive the care that they need.  There is no medical reason to intentionally kill that fetal human being through an inhumane abortion procedure, e.g. dismembering a living human being capable of feeling pain[6] [7] [8](Also see Appendix A), or saline induction which burns off the skin (See Appendix B), or feticide with subsequent induction.

Obstetricians who abide by the Hippocratic oath strive, to the best of our ability, to save both lives when at all possible. There are two patients under our care.  We never intentionally target the unborn child during the separation procedure in order to guarantee that the baby is born dead.

Fact 3. No matter the circumstances of their birth, infants who are born alive must be given appropriate medical care.

Any infant who is born alive, at any stage of development, is a person entitled to the protections of the law and appropriate care as a new patient. There is no scientific or legal reason to distinguish between human beings born after an attempted abortion and human beings born after attempted live birth. A distressed newborn should get immediate emergency care and a professional evaluation to determine appropriate steps to promote his/her health and well-being. Obviously, a distressed newly born baby presents for emergency medical care at the moment of her or his birth, regardless of whether that birth results from an abortion attempt or attempted live delivery.  EMTALA mandates hospitals to examine and treat any person who presents for emergency medical care. 

These same principles apply in cases in which the human being in utero has a disability or has been given a life-limiting diagnosis, such as anencephaly.  Human beings who are disabled at birth deserve the same respect and dignity afforded to able-bodied children at similar gestational ages. The terms “incompatible with life” or “fatal fetal malformations” are not medical terms. For many children with medical conditions previously labelled as such, survival for years has been accomplished[9], and is very possible when supportive care is provided.

Additionally, as health care professionals, we are notoriously poor predictors of whether infants will live or die when supportive medical care is offered[10]. If a fetus has a potentially life-limiting diagnosis which is expected to result in death shortly after birth, families should be presented with the potential benefits of medical care and, accepting that such care might only prolong an inevitable death, be offered perinatal hospice. [11] [12]

Perinatal hospice respects the human dignity of the newborn and allows the family to hold and care for their child after birth, celebrating the precious time they have together as well as allowing them to grieve the brevity of this same gift. Perinatal hospice provides optimal care for the mother, honors the life of her child and allows the family the opportunity to acknowledge, love, and mourn its newest member. Literature comparing outcomes of delivery and perinatal hospice care with abortion in cases of anencephaly reveals significantly better mental health outcomes for mothers who do not abort. [13] [14] [15] Perinatal hospice is compassionate and comprehensive health care for women whose fetuses have life-limiting diagnoses.

S.311 provides a scientifically sound, medically accurate, and respectful approach to ensure that the innocent human being who survives an attempted abortion will be treated with the same human dignity and respect that similarly aged human beings receive in the course of good neonatal medical care.  S. 311 ensures that human beings with disabilities are not targeted for intentional killing at the moment of birth.

For all of these above reasons, we, the undersigned medical organizations and individuals, strongly urge you to pass S. 311.  Thank you for your consideration of these views.

Respectfully submitted,

Donna J. Harrison M.D.  Executive Director
American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists[16]

Michelle Cretella M.D. Executive Director
American College of Pediatricians[17]

John Schirger, M.D. President,
Catholic Medical Association[18]

Dr. Carolyn Laabs, PhD, FNP-BC, RN
Chair, Ethics and Spirituality Committee 
National Association of Catholic Nurses, USA[19]

David Stevens, CEO
Christian Medical Association[20]

Jane Orient, Executive Director
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons[21]

Janice L. Benton, Executive Director
National Catholic Partnership on Disability[22]

Robin Pierucci, MD, MA
Neonatologist
Catholic Medical Association

Martin J McCaffrey, MD, CAPT USN (Ret)
Professor of Pediatrics
Division of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine
Department of Pediatrics
UNC School of Medicine
Chaple Hill, North Carolina



[1] Condic M. When Does Human Life Begin? The Scientific Evidence and Terminology Revisited. University of St. Thomas Journal of Law and Public Policy 8(1) Fall 2013 Article 4. Available at embryodefense.org/MaureenCondicSET.pdf (accessed 2019 02 18)
[2] Greene-Foster D and Kimpart K. Who Seeks Abortions at or After 20 weeks? Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 2013 45(4):210-218 doi:10.1363/4521013.
[3] Stulberg D, Dude A, Dahlquist B, Curlin F.  Abortion Provision Among Practicing Obstetrician-Gynecologists  Obstet Gynecol. 2011 September ; 118(3): 609–614. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e31822ad973.
[4] Gonzales v Carhart USSC. Available at supremecourt.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-380.pdf (accessed 2019 02 18)
See page 9: “Yet one doctor would not allow delivery of a live fetus younger than 24 weeks because “the objective of [his] procedure is to perform an abortion,” not a birth. App. in No. 05–1382, at 408–409. The doctor thus answered in the affirmative when asked whether he would “hold the fetus’ head on the internal side of the [cervix] in order to collapse the skull” and kill the fetus before it is born. Id., at 409; see also Carhart, supra, at 862, 878. Another doctor testified he crushes a fetus’ skull not only to reduce its size but also to ensure the fetus is dead before it is removed.”
See also page 11:  “(b) As used in this section— “(1) the term ‘partial-birth abortion’ means an abortion in which the person performing the abortion— “(A) deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother, for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus; and “(B) performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus;…” [emphasis added]
[5] Dublin Declaration on Maternal Health. Available at dublindeclaration.com (accessed 2019 02 13).
Excerpt: As experienced practitioners and researchers in obstetrics and gynaecology, we affirm that direct abortion – the purposeful destruction of the unborn child – is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman. We uphold that there is a fundamental difference between abortion, and necessary medical treatments that are carried out to save the life of the mother, even if such treatment results in the loss of life of her unborn child. We confirm that the prohibition of abortion does not affect, in any way, the availability of optimal care to pregnant women.
[6] Testimony of Dr. Maureen Condic, District of Columbia H R.179J, 2013 05 23. Available at: govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-113hhrg81175/pdf/CHRG-113hhrg81175.pdf, pp 36-46
[7] American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists Practice Bulletin 2: Fetal Pain. Available at  aaplog.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/PB-2-Fetal-Pain.pdf (accessed 2019 02 18).
[8] American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists Fetal Pain Fact Sheet. Available at aaplog.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/2019-02-13-AAPLOG-fact-sheet-fetal-pain.pdf (accessed 2019 02 18).
[9] Wilkinson DJ, Thiele P, Watkins A, De Crespigny L. Fatally flawed? A review and ethical analysis of lethal congenital malformations. BJOG. 2012 Oct;119(11):1302-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2012.03450.x.
[10] Meadow W et al. Just, in time: ethical implications of serial predictions of death and morbidity for ventilated premature infants. Pediatrics. 2008 Apr;121(4):732-40. doi: 10.1542/peds.2006-2797.
[11] Perinatal Hospice and Palliative Care. Available at perinatalhospice.org (accessed 02 18 2019).
[12] American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists Practice Bulletin 1: Perinatal Hospice. Available at aaplog.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/PB-1-Perinatal-Hospice.pdf (accessed 2019 02 18).
[13] Cope H, Garrett ME, Gregory S, Ashley-Koch A. Pregnancy continuation and organizational religious activity following prenatal diagnosis of a lethal fetal defect are associated with improved psychological outcome. Prenat Diagn. 2015 Aug;35(8):761-768. doi: 10.1002/pd.4603.

[14] Calhoun BC, Reitman JS, Hoeldtke NJ. Perinatal Hospice: A Response to Partial Birth Abortion for Infants with Congenital Defects. Issues in Law and Medicine 1997; 13(2):125-143.
[15] Calhoun BC, Hoeldtke NJ, Hinson RM, Judge KM. Perinatal Hospice: Should all centers have this service? Neonatal Network 1997;16(6):101-102.
[16] The American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists is a 4,600 member organization consisting of OB/GYNs and other physicians and medical professionals who work in the field of reproductive health, and who practice according to the Hippocratic Oath. The mission of AAPLOG is to provide an evidence-based defense of both our pregnant patient and her unborn child.
[17] The American College of Pediatricians is a Hippocratic medical organization dedicated to using the best available science to promote the optimal health of all children from their conception until natural death.
[18] The Catholic Medical Association is a national, physician-led community of over 2,300 healthcare professionals consisting of 109 local guilds. CMA mission is to inform, organize, and inspire its members, in steadfast fidelity to the teachings of the Catholic Church, to uphold the principles of the Catholic faith in the science and practice of medicine.

[19] National Association of Catholic Nurses, USA gives nurses of different backgrounds, but with the same Roman Catholic values, the opportunity to promote moral principles within the Catholic context in nursing and stimulate desire for professional development.  This approach to Roman Catholic doctrine focuses on:  educational programs, spiritual nourishment, patient advocacy, and integration of faith and health.

[20] The Christian Medical and Dental Associations is a 19,000+ member organization in the United States, consisting of healthcare professionals from multiple disciplines including medicine, dentistry, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, physiotherapists, optometrists, pharmacists, and many others. The mission of CMDA is to motivate, educate, and equip Christian healthcare professionals to glorify God by serving with professional excellence as witnesses of Christ love and compassion to all peoples and by advancing biblical principles of healthcare within the church and to our culture.

[21] AAPS was founded in 1943 to preserve and promote the practice of private medicine. It upholds the sanctity of the patient-physician relationship and the ethical principles in the Oath of Hippocrates.

[22] Rooted in Gospel values that affirm the dignity of every person, the National Catholic Partnership on Disability (NCPD), founded in 1982, works collaboratively to ensure meaningful participation of people with disabilities in all aspects of the life of the Church and society.


Thursday, January 31, 2019

Christian Medical Association on NY, VA late-term abortion legislation: Medically and morally bankrupt



Washington, DC, January 31, 2019—The Christian Medical Association (CMA, www.cmda.org), the nation's largest faith-based association of doctors, today condemned New York's new law allowing abortions up until delivery and Virginia's similar legislation as "medically unnecessary" and "morally bankrupt."
CMA Executive Vice President Dr. Mike Chupp noted, "This is where the deceptive devaluing of human life leads. Abortion advocates began by saying a developing baby is just a 'blob of tissue'—ignoring the scientific evidence of ultrasound images that show us babies with beating hearts moving in the womb. Abortion advocates said a woman has the right to control her own body—ignoring the inalienable right to life of the second little body in her care. And now they say that no one can restrict abortion even at the point of birth—ignoring how utterly repulsive this is to the American people. This position is based upon lie after lie after lie and is morally bankrupt."
CMA Senior Vice President Dr. Gene Rudd, an Obstetrician-Gynecologist, added, "Any physician who ascribes to the Hippocratic oath pledges to protect patients and to not perform an abortion. As an Ob-Gyn physician, I recognize that in a pregnancy, I have two patients—the pregnant mother and the developing baby. If a pregnancy needs to come to an end in the late months, the only reason to do an abortion is to produce a dead baby. Otherwise, a delivery can be accomplished. Has our society become so heartless that we will condone the killing of babies capable of living apart from their mothers?"
CMA VP for Government Relations Jonathan Imbody added, "Abortion organizations like Planned Parenthood—a billion-dollar business that rakes in over half a billion tax dollars while performing nearly a third of a million abortions every year—are radicalizing legislatures across the country. They are using their immense profits from immoral actions to elect and control politicians nationwide. Those politicians are so beholden to and entrenched in the abortion lobby that they will support and even celebrate legislation that a huge majority of Americans find gut-wrenchingly abhorrent. Remember this next time you go to the polls."

Saturday, January 26, 2019

Declarations of Faiths in Times of Persecution: What the West Can Learn From Chinese Christians and Dietrich Bonhoeffer



In the United States of America, most battles between our government and our faith take place within courtrooms. However, not all Christians in the world are granted the right to an attorney. In China, under the governance of a communist atheist government, Chinese Christians are facing a type of persecution that most Americans will only ever read about in news articles or watch on tv: churches bulldozed, crosses and pictures forcibly removed from private citizen’s homes, Christians banned from freely gathering.

In response to these injustices, hundreds of Chinese pastors composed and signed a declaration of faith in which they affirm the core tenets of Christianity and condemn their government’s blatant attacks upon their ability to practice their beliefs. The statement reads,

“For the sake of the Gospel, we are prepared to bear all losses—even the loss of our freedom and our lives.”[1]

These powerful words are reminiscent of a similar declaration of faith, signed many years ago by German Christians in response to the horrific deeds committed by Adolf Hitler and his Nazi regime.

In 1934, German theologians and pastors signed the Barmen Declaration in order to declare their allegiance to God before State and the authority of Holy Scripture over National Socialism.

The federation of churches who signed the declaration became known as the Confessing Church; they believed the church in Germany was in a state of “confessing” meaning, a state of crisis in which the “confession of the gospel was at stake.” German Christians had become unwilling to not only publicly profess their faith but authentically live it as well. The Confessing Church was an attempt the wake up their fellow Christians to the reality of Hitler’s evil regime.

One particular individual, at the forefront of this movement, was the German pastor and theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Many know Bonhoeffer for his involvement in the many plots to assassinate Adolf Hitler. Ultimately, Dietrich Bonhoeffer was arrested by the Nazis and shortly before the war ended, climbed the steps to the gallows where he took his last breath. The declaration of faith made by Dietrich Bonhoeffer was not just a signed piece of paper but an actualized commitment solidified by his actions and sacrifices.



Bonhoeffer’s story of faith and his fight for freedom involves espionage, assassination attempts, and executions. However, more important than his heroic deeds was the driving force behind them: his personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Bonhoeffer’s relationship with Christ and understanding of the true essence of Christianity was the ever burning flame which sparked his boldness and fearlessness. For Bonhoeffer, it all boiled down to a willingness to “take Christ seriously.” He wrote,
“Understanding Christ means taking Christ seriously. Understanding this claim means taking seriously his absolute claim on our commitment.”[2] 

During Hitler’s rise to power and even during his reign of terror, the majority of German Christians were unwilling to stand with men like Bonhoeffer. For some time, Christians had been exiling Christ
to their Sunday mornings, excluding Him from the rest of their day to day lives. This greatly frustrated Dietrich Bonhoeffer; he believed that the Christian life requires a full and unreserved commitment of oneself. The choice was simple: give Christ everything, or give Him nothing. 


To give oneself to Christ entails choosing Christ in the present moment and serving His kingdom here on earth. Bonhoeffer preached,

“If you want to find eternity, you must serve the times.” [3]

For many of his fellow Germans, Bonheoffer was demanding too much of them. When the “times” in which one lives are as morally depraved as Nazi Germany, accomplishing God’s will could imply making the ultimate sacrifice. Essentially, German Christians had only two options: either take a stand against Hitler or make compromises against one’s conscience and one’s faith.


Bonhoeffer believed every Christian was called to take up their cross and walk the road to Calvary with Christ. He believed that in order to find God, one must go to the cross of Christ.

He wrote, "… whoever would find him must go to the foot of the Cross, as the Sermon on the Mount commands. This is not according to our nature at all, it is entirely contrary to it. But this is the message of the Bible, not only in the New but also in the Old Testament …"[4] 


In no short measure did Bonhoeffer pick up his cross and respond to God’s call. Bonhoeffer made the difficult decision to fully commit himself to combat Hitler. Already a co-conspirator in the plots to assassinate Hitler, Bonhoeffer joined an anti-Nazi resistance and became a double agent. 

Bonhoeffer’s participation in the resistance was short-lived, however. In early 1943 the Gestapo caught wind of Bonhoeffer’s plans to help Jewish refugees escape and consequently, Bonhoeffer was arrested. Fortunately, they had not yet discovered his association with those who were conspiring to assassinate Hitler. 

In an essay he wrote a few months before his arrest, he writes,
“Who stands fast? Only the man whose final standard is not his reason, his principles, his conscience, his freedom, or his virtue, but who is ready to sacrifice all this when he is called to obedient and responsible action in faith and in exclusive allegiance to God -- the responsible man, who tries to make his whole life an answer to the question and call of God.” [4]

On July 20th, 1944, the famous Valkyrie plot was executed. Unfortunately, Hitler would survive the assassination attempt unscathed, quite satisfied and amused by his luck.  A few days later, the Nazis began arresting and executing many of Bonhoeffer’s brave co-conspirators, many of whom were family members.  In October of that year, Bonheoffer was transferred to a Gestapo prison where he would remain for four months. Upon his arrival, Bonhoeffer was interrogated in regards to his knowledge of the conspiracy and the identities of his co-conspirators. Needless to say, Bonhoeffer revealed nothing.  On the 7th of February 1945, Bonhoeffer was moved again but this time to the infamous Buchenwald concentration camp where he would join a band of 15 misfit prisoners, ranging from army generals and aristocrats to a prostituted woman and a concentration camp “doctor”.

As the war was nearing an end, only a few weeks before Hitler would take his own life, Hitler demanded the execution of all the remaining conspirators. Bonhoeffer was on that list. Bonhoeffer was taken to Flossenburg and on the 8th of April, Bonhoeffer was hung. Bonhoeffer thought of death as “the last station on the road to freedom.” The Flossenburg camp doctor, who witnessed Bonhoeffer’s execution, recalled, “In the almost fifty years that I worked as a doctor, I have hardly ever seen a man die so entirely submissive to the will of God.”

Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s story serves as a well-timed “reality check” for the modern day Christian. We may not be so dissimilar from the German Christians whose complacency and lukewarm faith paved the way for Hitler’s rise to power. In 21st century America, it is rare that we are forced to make formal declarations of faith in the public sphere. Yet, what of our interior declarations of faith? Bonhoeffer made his commitment to Christ clear not merely through his role in the Confessing Church or his participation in espionage. But rather, Bonhoeffer strived to foster a commitment to Christ always and in all ways.


Almost every day I’m confronted with a news headline regarding the continued persecution of my fellow Christians around the world: Christians in China, Indonesia, Syria, and Africa. However, my responses to these stories are not entirely sympathetic but rather, more so, envious. I want what they have. Like many other Christians, I desire to glorify my God through the gift of my complete and total commitment, obedience, and faithfulness. I do not envy their suffering per se, but I desire the opportunity they are given; the opportunity to experience the faithfulness of God during times of great persecution. Those Christians, resistant to their government’s coercion and attacks, are being given the grace necessary to accomplish God’s will on earth. They are experiencing what it truly means to be a serious Christian. What it means to walk the road of Calvary with Christ, to share in His sufferings and take comfort in the reality that they have already been saved.

The excesses we are granted in the western world are at times a blessing and at other times a curse. Our material excess has the ability to numb our spiritual senses. We eventually lose sight of the central message of the Gospel and its serious claim upon our lives. Heroic tales, like that of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, read almost like fairytales rather than the timely wake-up calls they ought to be.

God is calling all Christians to heroic virtue in the here and now. But are we “ prepared to bear all losses” for the sake of the Gospel?   
_______________________________

[1] http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/cwn/2018/september/more-chinese-pastors-sign-statement-affirming-religious-freedom-as-us-govt-holds-hearing-on-persecution
[3] Ibid, 81.
[4] Ibid, 137.



Featured Post

The Equality Act would trample on doctors' religious freedom

Published in The Washington Examiner by Jonathan Imbody  | March 29, 2021 Imagine you are a family physician who entered medical school mot...