All-or-nothing approach by some pro-lifers to force policy against ‘choice’ hasn’t worked
By Paul Ranalli
Special to The B.C. Catholic
Within the community of those who work to promote respect for the innocent unborn, few can claim to match the passion, commitment, and work ethic of Jakki Jeffs, executive director of Alliance For Life.
That said, what are we to make of her latest iteration of the “all-or-nothing” approach to pro-life political action?
Many of us share her unwavering gaze on the goal of “legislated protection of life for every Canadian citizen in or out of the womb.” Ah, but how to get there? How to translate undoubted conviction into concrete achievement?
Sadly, the answer, by any objective standard, would not be to follow the political tactics exhibited over the years by AFL. While these groups do much good work in pro-life education and awareness, their legislative achievements have been an utter failure.
The only thing “amazing” about the “45 years of struggle” by Ms. Jeffs’ stream of the pro-life movement is just how little has been achieved from so much effort.
Any successful social movement allows for the unfettered efforts of many different streams, effecting a sort of “parallel processing,” in engineering terms. A social campaign will not long survive, much less succeed, with the kind of internecine sniping expressed by Ms. Jeffs toward the “we needaLAW” campaign.
Sadly, this is just the latest example of the demoralizing top-down criticism of honest pro-life efforts in this country by those who appear more interested in hegemony than actual political success.
Most pro-lifers would never dream of interfering with the good work of others in the field. However their tactics may differ. Yet some members have never been shy about offering their unsolicited advice, or worse.
A Chinese proverb states that a 1,000-mile journey begins with the first step. Apparently some in the Canadian pro-life movement believe otherwise.
However consider these moments in history: while Mahatma Gandhi demanded freedom for the Indian people from their British colonizers, his pivotal action was marching his supporters to the coast to make salt without paying the salt tax.
While Martin Luther King demanded full personal and political equality for black people in America, a legendary first step was a request to be able to sit in any seat of a city bus in Birmingham, Ala.
Closer to home, a Montreal general practitioner who once demanded unrestricted legal access to abortion for women began to perform abortions one at a time, and he got himself thrown into jail repeatedly.
To some in the pro-life movement these individuals might be seen as betraying the cause, because they attempted to achieve their ultimate goal in incremental steps. They did not exhibit the purity of demanding nothing less than an instantaneous law proclaiming full victory for their cause.
They must have had their tails between their legs, too. After all, what did they ever achieve?
Paul Ranalli is a neurologist from Toronto. Reprinted with permission from the author.
Showing posts with label Dr. Paul Ranalli. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dr. Paul Ranalli. Show all posts
Sunday, June 3, 2012
Sunday, January 2, 2011
Promotion of abortion
During a recent posting of mine, Adoption instead of abortion, commenter "Ginny" said:
"pro-choice groups aren't opposed to women being informed”.
I disagree.
You see, "pro-choice" groups only selectively inform women and ignore any evidence that they don't like. Evidence that might make women think twice about having an abortion. Evidence that shows a link between abortion and breast cancer. Evidence that shows a fetus can suffer excruciating pain during an abortion. Evidence of the psychological and physical harm done to women from abortion. “Pro-choice” people debunk this evidence and tell women that they are being lied to, and that they are being misinformed, and deceived.
I've discussed this before, but it obviously bears repeating. Let’s start with the evidence of a link between abortion and breast cancer (ABC). In 2003, the National Cancer Institute conference concluded there was no ABC link. But one participant at that conference, Dr. Joel Brind (Ph.D., Professor, Human Biology and Endocrinology) disagreed. He said he was:
"convinced that the weight of available evidence suggests a real, independent, positive association between induced abortion and breast cancer risk."
Dr. Brind's report is here.
Other studies that support the ABC link here.
In fact one of the researchers and organizers of that conference, Dr. Louise Brinton, reversed her position on the ABC link in January 09.
The Pro-choice Action Network reported in their so-called "expose" on crisis pregnancy centres that a fetus:
"cannot feel pain until at least the third trimester".
But there is lots of evidence that a fetus does in fact, feel pain at 20 weeks gestation and even before that. Dr. K.S. Anand is a world authority on research into pain perception in fetal and neonatal children. His study was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1987. At the Partial Birth Abortion hearings in the Southern District of New York in 2004, Dr. Anand testified that:
"the human fetus possesses the ability to experience pain by 20 weeks of gestation, if not earlier, and the pain perceived by a fetus is possibly more intense than that perceived by term newborns or older children."
Dr. Anand's testimony is here.
Dr. Paul Ranalli, a Toronto Neurologist, in a public information meeting in Toronto, Canada in October 2008, sponsored by the deVeber Institute for Bioethics and Social Research agrees with Dr. Anand. Dr. Ranalli's talk is quite compelling--I suggest you listen to it and make your own conclusions on when a fetus feels pain here.
Pro-Can’s report also says:
"there is no evidence to suggest that women who have abortions experience any more or less sadness and regret than women who complete an unwanted pregnancy".
The report cites the American Psychological Association (APA) as one source. Andrea Mrozek, manager of research and communications at the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada, explains here why the APA research was flawed.
And here’s more research of the after affects of abortion here and here.
So to conclude, many “pro-choice” people are opposed to women being informed of all the information that would actually enable them to make a truly informed decision regarding having an abortion or not. Because if women were "informed" of this evidence, they might even change their minds and not have that abortion. And this would make a dent in the goal of the the pro-abortions’ continual and relentless promotion of abortion.
"pro-choice groups aren't opposed to women being informed”.
I disagree.
You see, "pro-choice" groups only selectively inform women and ignore any evidence that they don't like. Evidence that might make women think twice about having an abortion. Evidence that shows a link between abortion and breast cancer. Evidence that shows a fetus can suffer excruciating pain during an abortion. Evidence of the psychological and physical harm done to women from abortion. “Pro-choice” people debunk this evidence and tell women that they are being lied to, and that they are being misinformed, and deceived.
I've discussed this before, but it obviously bears repeating. Let’s start with the evidence of a link between abortion and breast cancer (ABC). In 2003, the National Cancer Institute conference concluded there was no ABC link. But one participant at that conference, Dr. Joel Brind (Ph.D., Professor, Human Biology and Endocrinology) disagreed. He said he was:
"convinced that the weight of available evidence suggests a real, independent, positive association between induced abortion and breast cancer risk."
Dr. Brind's report is here.
Other studies that support the ABC link here.
In fact one of the researchers and organizers of that conference, Dr. Louise Brinton, reversed her position on the ABC link in January 09.
The Pro-choice Action Network reported in their so-called "expose" on crisis pregnancy centres that a fetus:
"cannot feel pain until at least the third trimester".
But there is lots of evidence that a fetus does in fact, feel pain at 20 weeks gestation and even before that. Dr. K.S. Anand is a world authority on research into pain perception in fetal and neonatal children. His study was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1987. At the Partial Birth Abortion hearings in the Southern District of New York in 2004, Dr. Anand testified that:
"the human fetus possesses the ability to experience pain by 20 weeks of gestation, if not earlier, and the pain perceived by a fetus is possibly more intense than that perceived by term newborns or older children."
Dr. Anand's testimony is here.
Dr. Paul Ranalli, a Toronto Neurologist, in a public information meeting in Toronto, Canada in October 2008, sponsored by the deVeber Institute for Bioethics and Social Research agrees with Dr. Anand. Dr. Ranalli's talk is quite compelling--I suggest you listen to it and make your own conclusions on when a fetus feels pain here.
Pro-Can’s report also says:
"there is no evidence to suggest that women who have abortions experience any more or less sadness and regret than women who complete an unwanted pregnancy".
The report cites the American Psychological Association (APA) as one source. Andrea Mrozek, manager of research and communications at the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada, explains here why the APA research was flawed.
And here’s more research of the after affects of abortion here and here.
So to conclude, many “pro-choice” people are opposed to women being informed of all the information that would actually enable them to make a truly informed decision regarding having an abortion or not. Because if women were "informed" of this evidence, they might even change their minds and not have that abortion. And this would make a dent in the goal of the the pro-abortions’ continual and relentless promotion of abortion.
Friday, August 6, 2010
What would the Martians think? (Part 6...What success looks like)
Dr. Konia Trouton, of the Vancouver Island Women’s Clinic, details her quest to:
"set up a woman's clinic that included abortions, and not have a clinic that focused only on abortions. "
She struggles to accomplish this because of what she calls the:
"political challenges in trying to enhance abortion care."
The doctor tells about her troubles getting doctors and other health professionals to work with her, as well as having trouble getting office space:
"I sought to find family physicians who would be excited to have me work alongside their practice, offering surgical abortions, medical abortions and IUD care. Strangely enough, there are not many of those types of clinics, or doctors. I called the local birth control clinic, and their board did not want me to work, even just a day a week, doing pre-operative abortion assessments and scheduling the abortion in the hospital. Paradoxically, they supplied many referrals for abortion and provided after care. They were much more vigorously opposed than I ever expected, and while I continued to work there once a week doing IUD insertions, I knew to look elsewhere for office space. I called some physician colleagues in the peace and justice movement, whom I knew for many years, and I called some alternative health care facilities, but the doors were shut for office space."
But Dr. Trouton's perseverance pays off. By finding nurses and midwifes who support "choice"; by winning doctors over; by getting the National Abortion Federation's stamp of approval; the doctor now has a "successful" clinic where two thirds of her work is for "women seeking termination".
She gradually increases the gestational age of her abortions:
"Moving to D&E required some gradual work, first to 16 weeks, and then six months later to 20 weeks."
(Dilation and Evacuation (D&E): Sharp-edged instruments are used to grasp, twist, and tear the baby’s body into pieces. This continues until the child’s entire body is removed from the womb. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Kennedy describes the procedure saying, “The fetus, in many cases, dies just as a human adult or child would: It bleeds to death as it is torn limb from limb.”)
In case you're curious to see what a 20 week old fetus looks like.
What strikes me as odd about the doctor's presentation, is that she seems genuinely puzzled why she encountered difficulties. She writes in a calm, composed and non strident manner. Very professional. Very matter of fact.
"There have been many challenges but when I look at why this has been a successful story, it is because it has been about establishing trust and working across disciplines. I have worked hard to get to know the hospital staff, the health authority personal and invited them into the clinic to see the work done and to convince them the clinic and hospital partnership benefits them in reducing wait lists, costs and increasing training opportunities and retention of excellent staff."
The doctor was successful. In setting up a clinic. To abort babies. Close to viability. Who feel pain.
Yes Mary. This is what we call success. In a pro-abortion world.
Part 1...Women's "Rights"
Part 2...When the truth isn't the truth
Part 3...Translating Dr. Henry Morgentaler
Part 4...Why late-term abortions are not inconsequential
Part 5...Does the fetus matter?
"set up a woman's clinic that included abortions, and not have a clinic that focused only on abortions. "
She struggles to accomplish this because of what she calls the:
"political challenges in trying to enhance abortion care."
The doctor tells about her troubles getting doctors and other health professionals to work with her, as well as having trouble getting office space:
"I sought to find family physicians who would be excited to have me work alongside their practice, offering surgical abortions, medical abortions and IUD care. Strangely enough, there are not many of those types of clinics, or doctors. I called the local birth control clinic, and their board did not want me to work, even just a day a week, doing pre-operative abortion assessments and scheduling the abortion in the hospital. Paradoxically, they supplied many referrals for abortion and provided after care. They were much more vigorously opposed than I ever expected, and while I continued to work there once a week doing IUD insertions, I knew to look elsewhere for office space. I called some physician colleagues in the peace and justice movement, whom I knew for many years, and I called some alternative health care facilities, but the doors were shut for office space."
But Dr. Trouton's perseverance pays off. By finding nurses and midwifes who support "choice"; by winning doctors over; by getting the National Abortion Federation's stamp of approval; the doctor now has a "successful" clinic where two thirds of her work is for "women seeking termination".
She gradually increases the gestational age of her abortions:
"Moving to D&E required some gradual work, first to 16 weeks, and then six months later to 20 weeks."
(Dilation and Evacuation (D&E): Sharp-edged instruments are used to grasp, twist, and tear the baby’s body into pieces. This continues until the child’s entire body is removed from the womb. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Kennedy describes the procedure saying, “The fetus, in many cases, dies just as a human adult or child would: It bleeds to death as it is torn limb from limb.”)
In case you're curious to see what a 20 week old fetus looks like.
What strikes me as odd about the doctor's presentation, is that she seems genuinely puzzled why she encountered difficulties. She writes in a calm, composed and non strident manner. Very professional. Very matter of fact.
"There have been many challenges but when I look at why this has been a successful story, it is because it has been about establishing trust and working across disciplines. I have worked hard to get to know the hospital staff, the health authority personal and invited them into the clinic to see the work done and to convince them the clinic and hospital partnership benefits them in reducing wait lists, costs and increasing training opportunities and retention of excellent staff."
The doctor was successful. In setting up a clinic. To abort babies. Close to viability. Who feel pain.
Yes Mary. This is what we call success. In a pro-abortion world.
Part 1...Women's "Rights"
Part 2...When the truth isn't the truth
Part 3...Translating Dr. Henry Morgentaler
Part 4...Why late-term abortions are not inconsequential
Part 5...Does the fetus matter?
Saturday, May 22, 2010
What would the Martians think? (Part 4...why late-term abortions are not inconsequential)
In my Martian series, I wanted to write next about what Dawn Fowler Canadian Director, National Abortion Federation (NAF) says about late-term abortions.
Ms. Fowler says:
"According to data obtained through CIHI, 0.08% of abortions in 2004 were provided after 20 weeks gestation. This percentage does not support the notion promulgated by abortion opponents that women in Canada routinely obtain abortion care up to nine months of pregnancy. In fact, nearly 80% of abortions are provided during the first trimester (12 weeks) of pregnancy."
Then out of the sky drops Margaret Wente’s, tired timeworn throwaway pro-abortion comment regarding this very subject. Ms. Wente says "Virtually no late-term abortions – the rarest and most contentious kind – are performed here".
In other words, that pretty much takes care of the notion of late-term abortions--what other pro-life concerns can we dispense with?
Not so fast ladies.
Let’s look at the statistics from Statistics Canada. Ms. Fowler says that only .08 or 401 late-term abortions were done in 2004. (my more recent 2006 statistics say 464 so I will use these stats).
We know that Canada had at least 464 late-term abortions in 2006. That’s equivalent to a large elementary school of laughing screaming having fun children. Dead. Yanked out of their mother’s womb with a pick-ax to the brain or some such hideous "procedure" (another in a long line of pro-abortion euphemisms).
The reason I say "at least" is because--and you'll never hear an abortion advocate talk about this--Statistics Canada says in a foot note next to the number 55,006:
"Note the large number of induced abortions with an unknown gestation range."
That is correct. There were fifty-five thousand and six abortions in 2006 for which we do not know the gestational age of the fetus. How many of these were late-term abortions? Well it could be one. Or it could just as easily be that all 55,006 were late-term.
Dr. Paul Ranalli is a neurologist and brain physiology researcher at the University of Toronto. He testified as an expert witness on fetal pain before the House Judiciary. Dr. Ranalli worries about the pain felt by the unborn child in late term abortions, and in fact, Nebraska has approved a bill to ban abortion beyond 20 weeks gestation on the basis of fetal pain.
Tell me, pro-abortion people with your disinterested comments about late-term abortions--does the extreme pain suffered by these unborn children during their late-term abortions bother you even a little bit?
Our Martian friends asks incredulously:
"You mean to say, you destroy between 464 and 55,006 of your offspring yearly, that are fully formed viable human beings, in an excruciating painful manner, and then tell people it is of no consequence?" Yes.
Part 1...Women's "Rights"
Part 2...When the truth isn't the truth
Part 3...Translating Dr. Henry Morgentaler
Part 4...Why late-term abortions are not inconsequential
Ms. Fowler says:
"According to data obtained through CIHI, 0.08% of abortions in 2004 were provided after 20 weeks gestation. This percentage does not support the notion promulgated by abortion opponents that women in Canada routinely obtain abortion care up to nine months of pregnancy. In fact, nearly 80% of abortions are provided during the first trimester (12 weeks) of pregnancy."
Then out of the sky drops Margaret Wente’s, tired timeworn throwaway pro-abortion comment regarding this very subject. Ms. Wente says "Virtually no late-term abortions – the rarest and most contentious kind – are performed here".
In other words, that pretty much takes care of the notion of late-term abortions--what other pro-life concerns can we dispense with?
Not so fast ladies.
Let’s look at the statistics from Statistics Canada. Ms. Fowler says that only .08 or 401 late-term abortions were done in 2004. (my more recent 2006 statistics say 464 so I will use these stats).
We know that Canada had at least 464 late-term abortions in 2006. That’s equivalent to a large elementary school of laughing screaming having fun children. Dead. Yanked out of their mother’s womb with a pick-ax to the brain or some such hideous "procedure" (another in a long line of pro-abortion euphemisms).
The reason I say "at least" is because--and you'll never hear an abortion advocate talk about this--Statistics Canada says in a foot note next to the number 55,006:
"Note the large number of induced abortions with an unknown gestation range."
That is correct. There were fifty-five thousand and six abortions in 2006 for which we do not know the gestational age of the fetus. How many of these were late-term abortions? Well it could be one. Or it could just as easily be that all 55,006 were late-term.
Dr. Paul Ranalli is a neurologist and brain physiology researcher at the University of Toronto. He testified as an expert witness on fetal pain before the House Judiciary. Dr. Ranalli worries about the pain felt by the unborn child in late term abortions, and in fact, Nebraska has approved a bill to ban abortion beyond 20 weeks gestation on the basis of fetal pain.
Tell me, pro-abortion people with your disinterested comments about late-term abortions--does the extreme pain suffered by these unborn children during their late-term abortions bother you even a little bit?
Our Martian friends asks incredulously:
"You mean to say, you destroy between 464 and 55,006 of your offspring yearly, that are fully formed viable human beings, in an excruciating painful manner, and then tell people it is of no consequence?" Yes.
Part 1...Women's "Rights"
Part 2...When the truth isn't the truth
Part 3...Translating Dr. Henry Morgentaler
Part 4...Why late-term abortions are not inconsequential
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)