THE CONFERENCE:

Candidate Survey (11/2006)

Legislative Issues

NCC/Publications:

  -NCC Statements &

   Current Issues

Medical Treat-      ment Decision-

making (1/06)

  -Bishops' Statements

    *Behavioral Health

     Statement (2/05)

  -Capitol 

   Correspondent:

    Columns-2007

    Past Columns

 

  *********

PRO LIFE:

Calendar of Events

Current Issues

NE Catholics for Life

  -NCL Newsletter

  -A People of Life Brochure

Life Insight: 

  Columns-2008

  Past Columns

Preg. Help Centers

Project Rachel

2007 PL Convention

Walk for Life 2008

Printed Resources

 

*********

Education Issues:

The NFCSP

Education/Legislation

Action Alerts!!

Newsletter: 

 Parent Advocate

Throughout this website, the NCC provides links to other websites solely for the user's convenience.  By providing these links, the NCC assumes no responsibility for, nor does it necessarily endorse the websites or organizations linked.

ABORTION Statistics & POLLS:

bullet

Abortion Linked to Anxiety Problems for Women (11/8/04)

bullet

American Catholics Back Pope John Paul II on Abortion, Poll Shows (4/15/05)

bullet

Americans Find Abortion and Human Cloning Morally Wrong (5/22/02)

bullet

Americans Ready to End Roe v Wade Abortion Decision (5/28/05)

bullet

Churches Should Show How Abortion Affects Christians, Pro-Life Group Says (12/30/05)

bullet Nebraska- Double Digit Decrease in Abortions (4/15/05)
bullet

New Zealand: Abortion Causes Severe Depression in Women, New Study Shows (1/3/06)

bullet

New Zealand Pro-Life Group: Tell Women About Abortion-Depressions Study (1/4/06)

bullet

Partial Birth Abortion Ban and Controversy (11/03)

bullet

Poll Finds High School Seniors Take a Pro-Life Position on Abortion (1/6/06)

bullet

Poll: 70% Support Parental Involvement on Abortion (4/28/05)

bullet

Risk of Psychiatric Hospitalization Rises After Abortion (5/13/03)

bullet

Study Finds:  Without Pre-Abortion Screening Abortion Endangers Women's Health (4/27/04)

bullet

Study Show Abortions Hurt Women's Physical Health (1/15/03)

bullet

Testimony in the Partial Birth Abortion Challenges (4/2/04)

bullet

U.S. Abortion Rate Hits 29 Year Low (1/21/03)

 

ABORTION STATISTICS AND POLLS

Abortion Linked to Anxiety Problems for Women
Springfield, IL (LifeNews.com, 11/8/04) -- A new study shows that women who have abortions of unexpected pregnancies are more likely to experience subsequent problems with anxiety than those who carry the pregnancy to term. Relying on data from the National Survey of Family Growth, researchers examined nearly 11,000 women between the ages of 15 and 34 who had experienced an unintended pregnancy but no previous reports of anxiety. They found that women who had abortions were 30 percent more likely to report symptoms associated with general anxiety disorder than those who did not have one. If the results of the study are applied to the general pool of women in the United States who have had an abortion, there may be as many as 40,000 cases of general anxiety disorder as a result of abortions. "Our study suggests that clinicians treating women with anxiety problems may find it useful to inquire about their clients' reproductive histories," said Jesse Cougle, M.Sc., the lead author of the study. Cougle added that, "Women struggling with unresolved issues related to a past abortion may benefit significantly from counseling that addresses this problem." Because the data associated with the National Survey of Family Growth includes women who have had abortions and did not report this to researchers, the percentage of women suffering from post-abortion anxiety and the number of women in the United States who suffer as a result of their abortions is probably higher.

 

American Catholics Backed Pope John Paul II on Abortion, Poll Shows
 Washington, DC (LifeNews.com, April 15, 2004) -- Another poll shows Catholics in the United States agree with Pope John Paul II's strongly pro-life position on the issue of abortion. The poll also shows that American Catholics don't want the church to change its long-standing position. The Quinnipiac Polling Institute poll found that two-thirds of Catholics oppose abortion in all or most cases. Eighty percent of Catholics said the pope's traditional stance on issues such as abortion should stay the same. “On right-to-life questions like abortion and the death penalty, they are thoroughly traditional and right in step with John Paul,” Maurice Carroll, the polling agency's director said. The Quinnipiac poll was conducted April 8-12 and involved 500 Catholics across the country. The survey squares with a Gallup poll, taken earlier this month, that found that a majority of Catholics in the United States want the next pope to have a similar outlook on key social issues as John Paul II. The pope took strong pro-life stands opposing abortion as well as euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research. More than half of those polled, 59 percent, said they want someone with the same views on political issues while just one-third wanted a more liberal pope. Some 4 percent of the 254 Catholics polled want a pope who is more conservative. Read the complete story.

 

|Back to Top|

Americans Ready to End Roe v. Wade Abortion Decision, Despite Polls
by Star Parker, May 28, 2005
 
Star Parker is a leading African-American observer o cultural issues and the author of "Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can Do about It." She is the president of the Coalition on Urban Renewal and Education.

Polling on abortion reveals the complexities of the American psyche. On the one hand, the majority of Americans feel that abortion is morally wrong. Yet, at the same time, the majority of Americans poll in support of Roe v. Wade, which made abortion a legal procedure nationwide.

According to polling done over the past month by Gallup, 51 percent of Americans say that abortion is "morally wrong." Yet, according to a current poll done by Quinnipiac University, 63 percent of Americans support Roe v. Wade.

Support of Roe v. Wade, however, is by no means unequivocal. Further polling by Gallup shows support for legal abortion "under any circumstances" at only 23 percent. The majority of those who support abortion feel it should be legal "only in a few circumstances."

What this polling data tells me is that most Americans are not supportive of the spirit of Roe v. Wade. The legalization of abortion under this decision was under the rationale of a principle — a so-called "right to privacy." However, if most Americans agreed that legal abortion emerges as result of a fundamental right to do it, they would not respond in polls saying that it is immoral and should be legal "only in a few circumstances."

It's also sharp and clear from the Gallup poll that Americans are not happy about the moral state of our country. Only 19 percent feel that the current state of moral values in the country is "excellent/good", and 39 percent see it as "poor." With regard to the direction of our state of morals, 16 percent responded that things are "getting better" and 77 percent responded that things are getting worse.

I think the group of so-called moderate senators who cut the recent deal to defuse the nuclear device, which would have formally purged the Senate of the filibuster option on confirmation of judges, should pay attention to this information. That is, they should pay attention if they care about their political future.

It is crystal clear that Americans are unhappy and concerned with the moral state of affairs of our country. The central aspect of that concern, as it concerns our judiciary, is legal abortion, as defined by Roe v. Wade. This is what this fight over judge appointments is about.

The fact that most of our citizens see abortion as immoral, and that support for legal abortion is highly qualified, shows that there is underlying discomfort nationwide with today's legal regime governing abortion. Americans want change.

These sentiments were expressed when we elected a conservative Republican president and a Republican congress.

Yet a handful of senators who call themselves moderates want to thwart the leadership of the president and mute the sentiments of the American electorate. On the verge of losing the filibuster tool to prevent straightforward up or down votes to confirm judges, these handful of so-called moderates went into the backroom and came up with a band-aid that will allow a few votes, but leaves the core problem in place. As happens too often today, our politicians use every opportunity to avoid leadership and responsibility.

The Roe v. Wade decision was allegedly made in the spirit of American freedom. However, time has shown that this was mistaken and ill advised. The president is showing needed leadership in the judges he is nominating. We need to make clear that these handful of obstructionist senators are not moderates but elitists and feel that they know better than our president and our voters what America needs.

Americans are both a moral people and a freedom loving people. George Washington, in his famous farewell address, said that being a moral people is a necessary condition for being a free people. At times, when it appears that moral principle impinges on our freedom, our tendency is to yield to the latter. The test of time, however, reveals whether such concessions in what appear to be in the direction of freedom really, to the point of Washington, make us less free.

We learned that lesson with slavery. We became a greater and freer people by banning it.

Americans know today that Roe v. Wade has pushed that envelope. We live daily with wholesale abuse of human life that devalues America and Americans. This loss of value and perspective has weakened us and made us less free. Far and away the worse toll is taken in the most vulnerable community, the African American community, where black women are three times more likely to have an abortion than their white counterparts.

Our nation is entering a new era of global challenge and competition. We need to be physically and morally strong to meet these challenges. Americans know what needs to be done. Let's not allow a handful of senators, who pretend to be working in our interest, keep us from the challenges we need to meet.

|Back to Top|

Churches Should Show How Abortion Affects Christians, Pro-Life Group Says
 Colorado Springs, CO (LifeNews.com, 12/30/05) -- A leading pro-life organization is challenging churches during the month of January to present the latest statistics about abortions to their congregation as the nation mourns the 33rd anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Focus on the Family has challenged clergy members to consider recent statistics on abortion in the church when addressing their congregations. The group points to a survey conducted by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a Planned Parenthood research outfit, showing 20 percent of women who have abortions say they are evangelical Christians. Kim Conroy, Sanctity of Human Life Director for Focus on the Family believes that it's time for churches to be proactive on this issue. "Every post-abortive woman sitting in our churches needs to know that there is help and forgiveness available -- and it's our hope during this Sanctity Week that pastors and other clergy will extend that to her," Conroy said. Read the complete story.

 

New Zealand: Abortions Cause Severe Depression for Women, New Study Shows
 Christchurch, New Zealand (LifeNews.com, 1/3/06) -- A new study conducted in New Zealand finds women who have abortions are more likely to become severely depressed. The report confirms the results of a comprehensive study in 2004 in the U.S. showing abortion leads to a host of mental health problems. The New Zealand study found that having an abortion as a young woman raises the risk of developing mental health problems such as depression and anxiety. The findings come from the Christchurch Health and Development Study of 1265 children tracked since their birth in the 1970s. Some 41 percent of the more than 500 women in the study became pregnant by the age of 25 and 90 women had abortions. Some 42 percent of the women who had abortions had experienced major depression within the last four years. That's almost double the rate of women who never became pregnant. The risk of anxiety disorders also doubled. Read the complete story.

 

New Zealand Pro-Life Group: Tell Women About Abortion-Depression Study
Wellington, New Zealand (LifeNews.com, 1/4/06) -- A pro-life group in New Zealand says a new study showing abortion strongly increases the chance of women suffering from severe depression and anxiety should prompt changes in the nation's abortion law. Ken Orr of Right to Life of New Zealand says he's not surprised by the study's finding because other surveys for the last 30 years have shown abortion causes considerable mental health problems for women and leads to increased drug or alcohol abuse. Orr says his group has requested studies in the past of New Zealand women only to be told by government officials it's unnecessary. Orr says he hopes the new study will prompt the government to pass a measure allowing women to be told of abortion risks before having one. Similar laws in the United States have been successful in helping many women avoid abortions and have reduced abortions by as much as 30 percent. Read the complete story.

 

|Back to Top|

Poll Finds High School Seniors Take Pro-Life Position on Abortion
 Hamilton, NY (LifeNews.com, 1/6/06) -- A new national poll finds high school seniors take a pro-life position on abortion saying it's morally wrong and supporting legislative proposals that would limit abortions and help women find alternatives. The poll also found 72 percent of females in the class of 2006 would not consider an abortion if they became pregnant. The Hamilton College poll found a majority of high school seniors do not believe abortions should be allowed for sociological reasons such as when women are too poor to afford another child or unable to have a baby at the time. Studies from the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the research arm of Planned Parenthood, find approximately 95 percent of all abortions are done for such reasons, while less than 5 percent are for rape or incest or to save the life of the mother. When asked, some 67 percent of high school seniors said abortion is either always (23%) or usually (44%) morally wrong. Just 31 percent said it was a morally correct decision. Some 72 percent of teen girls say they would not consider an abortion and, of all high school seniors, just 13 percent would counsel a pregnant friend to consider an abortion. Some 54 percent of seniors say they would suggest adoption and 26 percent say they would encourage a pregnant friend to keep her baby. Meanwhile, 69 percent of the male teens surveyed said they would not want their partner to consider an abortion. Read the complete story.

 

|Back to Top|

Poll: Seventy Percent Support Parental Involvement on Abortion
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com, 4/28/05) -- According to a new poll of the American public, both pro-life activists and abortion advocates strongly support laws that allow parents to be involved when their teenage daughter is considering an abortion. The results of the poll came on the day the House of Representatives approved legislation to enforce state laws on the subject. Opinion Dynamics Corporation conducted the poll for the Fox News Channel and found that there is strong support for laws that either require abortion facilities to obtain parental consent for an abortion on a minor teen or to, at least, notify them. Some 78 percent of those polled favor parental notification laws and 72 percent support parental consent laws. Pro-life respondents strongly favored the proposals with 95 percent backing notification measures and 93 percent favoring parental consent. Even those polled who favor legalized abortion still say parents should be allowed to know about their daughters' major medical decisions like an abortion. Some 64 percent of those who self-identified as favoring abortion back notification laws and 55 percent say parents should be required to approve a minor's abortion request. Read the complete story.

 

Risk of Psychiatric Hospitalization Rises After Abortion

Source:   Pro-Life Infonet; May 12, 2003

Springfield, IL - Is abortion a benign experience for women? Or can it cause or contribute to emotional problems, even severe ones?

The American Psychological Association (APA), which has consistently lobbied in favor of abortion rights, has frequently insisted that abortion is a benign experience that predominately
brings relief to most women. Some APA members, such as Nancy Adler and Brenda Major of the University of California, have even charged that those who say abortion can cause emotional problems are guilty of misleading the public. To support this view, Adler has argued that abortion is so common that if it did cause emotional problems, the nation's psychiatric wards would be filled with the evidence.

Now, a new study published in the latest issue of the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) shows that such evidence does exist. A review of the medical records of 56,741 California medicaid patients revealed that women who had abortions were 160 percent more likely than delivering women to be hospitalized for psychiatric treatment in the first 90 days following abortion or delivery. Rates of psychiatric treatment remained significantly higher for at least four years. A previously published study by the same authors revealed that women who had abortions were also more likely to require subsequent outpatient mental health care.
Depressive psychosis was the most common diagnosis.

According to the CMAJ study's lead author, David Reardon, Ph.D., a common complaint among participants in post-abortion recovery programs is that when they raised the issue of their past abortions while seeking mental health care, their therapists dismissed abortion as irrelevant. 

"Therapists who fixate on the 'abortion is benign' theory, either out of ignorance or allegiance to defensive political views on abortion, are doing a great disservice to women who need
understanding and support," said Reardon, who recently co-authored a book, Forbidden Grief: The Unspoken Pain of Abortion. "This study, based on objective medical records,
validates the claims of tens of thousands of women in post-abortion recovery programs."

In an invited commentary on the study appearing in the same issue of the CMAJ, Brenda Major, charged that the implication that abortion can cause psychiatric problems is misleading. She argued other factors, such as marital status or prior psychological
problems, may offer better explanations for the fact that psychiatric problems are more common among aborting women.  Reardon concedes that these other factors may also contribute to psychiatric illness but insists that abortion can both aggravate pre-existing problems and trigger new ones. 

Reardon called Major's commentary a product of "the abortion distortion effect." He particularly questioned Major's choice to omit from her comments any mention her own study recently published in the Archives of General Psychiatry. That study revealed that 1.4 percent of the women interviewed two years after their abortions suffered from post-traumatic stress
disorder solely attributable to their abortions.

Even such a low percentage, projected on the 1.3 million American women undergoing abortions each year, Reardon said, would result in 18,200 cases of PTSD each year, or over a half million cases since 1973. Including other types of negative reactions, he said, would increase the overall complication rate by twenty times or more.

This is the seventh study Reardon and his colleagues have published on abortion complications in the last eighteen months.  Among the other studies, also published in major peer reviewed journals, one revealed that among women with an unintended first pregnancy, those who had abortions were at significantly higher risk of clinical depression an average of eight years later compared to similar women who carried their unintended first pregnancies to term. Higher rates of suicide and substance abuse among women who had abortions were also revealed in the other studies published by the research team.

|Back to Top|


Study Finds:  Without Pre-Abortion Screening Abortion Endangers Women's Health

by Maria Gallagher
LifeNews.com Staff Writer, April 27, 2004

Springfield, IL (LifeNews.com) -- New research suggests that women could avoid a lot of needless suffering through more effective pre-abortion screening.

According to researcher Dr. David Reardon, most abortion centers fail to screen for risk factors that can lead to negative psychological reactions to abortion.

Reardon's research is based on a careful analysis of 63 medical studies identifying those risk factors linked to post-abortion depression and other abortion-related psychiatric illnesses.

"It appears that the cost of providing abortions has been kept low because individualized pre-abortion screening and counseling (have) been eliminated," Reardon said. Reardon is with the Elliot Institute, which monitors the after-effects of abortion on women.

"Instead of receiving personalized counseling, women face a brief, ‘one-size-fits-all' intake process. By means of this ‘assembly-line' processing, women are more efficiently slotted into tight surgical schedules" Reardon, director of the Illinois-based Elliot Institute, explained.

"But it also means that those women who would otherwise be identified as poor candidates for abortion are being exposed to unsafe abortions," Reardon said.

Reardon's research appears in the latest issue of the Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy.

Extreme cost-cutting measures at abortion centers have led to a sharp reduction in counseling.

According to the New York Times, the cost of a typical first-trimester abortion costs around $300 -- the same as it did in 1973. If the cost had risen at the rate of other health care services, the price would now run $2,250.

Numerous studies link abortion to increased rates of depression, suicide, substance abuse, and psychiatric illnesses.

Researchers already know what risk factors can lead to post-abortion problems, but screening has been extremely limited.

One of the most significant risk factors is when women feel pressured by other people -- such as boyfriends, husbands, parents, or employers -- to have abortions. In a number of cases, such women are going against their own maternal instincts or moral beliefs.

It is estimated that as many as 30 to 60 percent of all women undergoing abortions are coerced into making the decision.

With effective psychological counseling, these women might have the tools needed to resist pressure from others and make life-affirming choices for themselves and their children.

Post-abortive women often say that they would not have chosen abortion, if they believed that someone would have supported them in their decision to carry their babies to term.

For years, pregnancy resource centers have provided such support when friends and family members refused to do so.

A new Missouri law requires abortionists to evaluate patients "for indicators and contraindicators, risk factors, including any physical, psychological, or situational factors which would predispose the patient to or increase the risk of experiencing one or more adverse physical, emotional, or other health reactions."

Similar bills have been introduced in Mississippi. Such legislation is an effort to put a stop to abortions which threaten the emotional health of the mother.

If better pre-abortion screening were in place, the abortion rate is likely to fall, according to Reardon.

Reardon suggests that both judges and doctors should welcome such efforts.

"I can't imagine how the courts could oppose these efforts to protect women from unnecessary, unwanted, and unsafe abortions," he explained.

"No doctor has a right, much less a duty, to perform a contraindicated abortion, especially when the woman hasn't even been told that she is at a much greater risk of suffering negative reactions," Reardon said.

"Any court that upheld such a distorted right would set a precedent that would undermine the basis of all medical ethics. Even those judges who are most protective of easy access to abortion are unlikely to put the profit margins of the abortion industry ahead of the welfare of women," he added.

Related web sites:
Elliot Institute - http://www.afterabortion.org

  |Back to Top|

Study Shows Abortion Hurts Women's Physical Health

Pro-Life Infonet; January 15, 2003

Chicago, IL -- Abortion increases risks of premature delivery, maternal depression and suicide, and other serious health consequences, reports a new study by prominent medical researchers. The authors further conclude that more research is required, and that women need to be informed of these and other major long-term health risks of abortion.

The study, published in the January 2003 issue of the Obstetric & Gynecological Survey (OGS), assesses the long-term physical and psychological health consequences of abortion. The researchers, professors of medicine at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the University of Michigan, reviewed and analyzed 30 years of medical studies on the long-term medical risks of abortion.

Their research reveals a critical need for "a detailed study of the health effects of this common procedure."  Acknowledging that current data is sparse, and that current studies are flawed, the researchers recommend further studies to meet "the clear need for women to have accurate information" about the risks and potential complications of abortion. 

Denise Burke, staff counsel for Americans United for Life (AUL), notes, "The current lack of comprehensive and trustworthy studies revealing the long-term effects of abortion is reminiscent of the lack of information we had about the dangers of smoking 30 years ago. Women deserve to know how abortion will affect their lives and health."

The study notes that 26 of every 100 known pregnancies end in abortion. Dorinda Bordlee, AUL staff counsel, says, "Twenty-eight states currently require some level of informed consent for abortion. Given the prevalence of this procedure, we are hopeful that this new study will encourage the remaining states to enact laws that give women considering abortion complete and accurate medical information."

Bordlee continues, "Women have been at the center of a 30-year social and medical experiment, and we should unapologetically insist on mandatory reporting of abortion complications for the sake of women's health, and in the interest of preventing a public health
crisis." 

The abstract and study are published in Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey 2003; 58(1):67-79 and may be found at http://www.obgynsurvey.com.

The study's authors are: 
bullet

John M. Thorp, Jr., M.D., Mcallister Distinguished Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

bullet

Katherine E. Hartmann, M.D., Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

bullet

Elizabeth Shadigian, M.D., Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Thorp and Hartmann are Co-Directors of the Women's Health Research Project at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Obstetric & Gynecological Survey reprint requests of this article may be directed to: John M. Thorp, Jr., M.D., Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC 27599. E-mail: jmt@med.unc.edu.

|Back to Top|

 

TESTIMONY FOR PBA CASES:  COURT TRANSCRIPT  (Sent from the USCCB office)

Date:  April 2, 2004

 

Subject: Snapshot of First 3 Days of Trial -- Horrific Testimony from Abortion Doctors

 

Trials in the 3 lawsuits against the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act began Monday, March 29th in three separate U.S. District Courts.  The primary plaintiff in the Southern District of New York is the National Abortion Federation (NAF); the plaintiffs in the District of Nebraska are Dr. Leroy Carhart and several other abortion doctors (Abortion Doctors), and the primary plaintiff in the Northern District of California is Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA).  The Attorney General of the United States is the defendant in each case. 

 

After opening statements from each side, plaintiffs began presenting their evidence.  Excerpts from the unofficial transcripts of  testimony from the first 3 days of trial appear below.    

 

NEW YORK CASE.

 

DAY TWO:  Tuesday, March 30, 2004.

Excerpts from NAF's re-direct examination of Dr. Amos Grunebaum:

 

THE COURT.  Doctor, you mentioned earlier today that you believe in full disclosure to your patients as to the procedures and the various possibilities that are available.

THE WITNESS.  Yes, I do.

THE COURT. And that you spell out for the woman just what is entailed in a D&E that involves dismemberment, correct.

THE WITNESS.  Yes, I do.

THE COURT.  You also spell out that if you are doing an intact D&E or D&X or partial-birth abortion, whichever term is used, that that entailed a partial delivery, and then the procedure you described of inserting the scissors in the base of the skull and using a suction devise to remove the brain.

THE WITNESS.  Yes, I do.

~

THE COURT.  And that some of them desire that because after the procedure if they want to see or hold the dead fetus, is that correct?

THE WITNESS.  Yes. 

THE COURT.  I believe you mentioned also take pictures, is that correct?

THE WITNESS.  Yes.  That is part of our common policy -- it changed about ten years ago -- that we take pictures.

THE COURT.  This is part of the grieving process?

THE WITNESS.  Absolutely.  We have been told by grieving counselors to take pictures of all dead fetuses and babies -- specifically babies, but also fetuses -- so there is a memory of the baby by the mother.

 

DAY THREE:  Wednesday, March 31, 2004

Excerpts from NAF's direct examination of Dr. Timothy Johnson:

 

Q.  Do you have an opinion, Dr. Johnson, as to which of the two D&E variations, the intact or the dismemberment variation, may best facilitate the extraction of the fetal skull during an abortion procedure?

A.  I think that the intact procedure is actually developed in part to deal with the problem of the fetal skull.  When one does a D&E, technically one of the challenges is to remove the fetal skull, partly because it is relatively large, partly because it is relatively calcified, and it is difficult to grasp on occasion.  So one of the common technical challenges of a dismemberment D&E is what is called a free-floating head or a head that has become disattached and needs to be removed.  This can lead to more passages of instruments through the cervix. And technically it is difficult to grasp the head; it is round, it slips out of the instruments that we generally use.  Either those instruments or the head can be extruded outside the uterus and cause perforation.

~

Q.  Did you make any observation of the way the physician performing that intact D&E effected the incision into the skull?

A.  In the situations that I have observed, they either -- actually, the procedures that I have observed, they all used a crushing instrument to deliver the head, and they did it under direct vision. 

Q.  Thank you, Doctor.

THE COURT:  Can you explain to me what that means.

THE WITNESS:  What they did was they delivered the fetus intact until the head was still trapped behind the cervix, and then they reached up and crushed the head in order to deliver it through the cervix.

THE COURT:  What did they utilize to crush the head?

THE WITNESS:  An instrument, a large pair of forceps that have a round, serrated edge at the end of it, so that they were able to bring them together and crush the head between the ends of the instrument.

THE COURT:  Like the cracker they use to crack a lobster shell, serrated edge?

THE WITNESS:  No.

THE COURT:  Describe it for me.

THE WITNESS:  It would be like the end of tongs that are combined that you use to pick up salad.  So they would be articulated in the center and you could move one end, and there would be a branch at the center.  The instruments are thick enough and heavy enough that you can actually grasp and crush with those instruments as if you were picking up salad or picking up anything with --

THE COURT:  Except here you are crushing the head of a baby.

THE WITNESS:  Correct.

~

THE COURT:  Was the body outside the woman's body to an extent?

THE WITNESS:  Some of it.  It can be or not.  Some of it can be or -- it depends on where the cervix is.  It depends on where the uterus is.  It depends how long the baby is.  It depends how long the mother's vagina is.

THE COURT:  At some times that you observed it was?

THE WITNESS:  Right.  And sometimes during the procedure the cervix can actually be brought down so that -- the cervix and the uterus can be moved up and down relative to the opening of the vagina.

THE COURT:  An affidavit I saw earlier said sometimes, I take it, the fetus is alive until they crush the skull?

THE WITNESS:  That's correct, yes, sir.

THE COURT:  In one affidavit I saw attached earlier in this proceeding, were the fingers of the baby opening and closing?

THE WITNESS:  It would depend where the hands were and whether or not you could see them.

THE COURT:  Were they in some instances?

THE WITNESS:  Not that I remember.  I don't think I have ever looked at the hands.

THE COURT:  Were the feet moving?

THE WITNESS:  Feet could be moving, yes.

~

THE COURT:  If you are all finished let me just ask you a couple questions, Dr. Johnson.  I heard you talk a lot today about dismemberment D&E procedure, second trimester; does the fetus feel pain?

THE WITNESS:  I guess I --

THE COURT:  There are studies, I'm told, that says they do.  Is that correct?

THE WITNESS:  I don't know.  I don't know of any -- I can't answer your question.  I don't know of any scientific evidence one way or the other.

THE COURT:  Have you heard that there are studies saying so?

THE WITNESS:  I'm not aware of any.

THE COURT:  You never heard of any?

THE WITNESS:  I'm aware of fetal behavioral studies that have looked at fetal responses to noxious stimuli.

THE COURT:  Does it ever cross your mind when you are doing a dismemberment?

THE COURT:  Simple question, Doctor.  Does it cross your mind?

THE WITNESS:  Does the fetus having pain cross your mind?

THE COURT:  Yes.

THE WITNESS:  No.

THE COURT:  Never crossed your mind.

THE WITNESS:  No.

THE COURT:  When you have done D&Es or when you have done abortions, do you tell the woman various options that are available to her?

THE WITNESS:  Yes, sir.

THE COURT:  And do you explain what is involved like in D&E, the dismemberment variation?  Do you tell her that?

THE WITNESS:  We would describe the procedure, yes.

THE COURT:  So you tell her the arms and legs are pulled off.  I mean, that's what I want to know, do you tell her?

THE WITNESS:  We tell her the baby, the fetus is dismembered as part of the procedure, yes.

THE COURT:  You are going to remove parts of her baby.

THE WITNESS:  Correct.

THE COURT:  Are you ever asked, Does it hurt?

THE WITNESS:  Are we ever asked by the patient?

THE COURT:  Yes.

THE WITNESS:  I don't ever remember being asked.

THE COURT:  And although you have never done an intact D&E, do you know whether or not the incision of the scissors in the base of the skull of the baby, whether that hurts?

THE WITNESS:  Well, I guess my response would be I think that the baby feels it but I'm not sure how pain registers on the brain at that gestational age.  I'm not sure how a fetus at 20 weeks or 22 weeks processes and understands pain.

THE COURT:  You have never done one of these procedures but did you ever ask what -- you say you know about it clinically, did you ever ask one of those who perform them whether it hurts the fetus?

THE WITNESS:  No, sir.

THE COURT:  When you describe the possibilities available to a woman do you describe in detail what the intact D&E or the partial birth abortion involves?

THE WITNESS:  Since I don't do that procedure I wouldn't have described it.

THE COURT:  Did you ever participate with another  doctor describing it to a woman considering such an abortion?

THE WITNESS:  Yes.  And the description would be, I would think, descriptive of what was going to be, what was going to happen; the description.

THE COURT: Including sucking the brain out of the skull?

THE WITNESS:  I don't think we would use those terms.  I think we would probably use a term like decompression of the skull or reducing the contents of the skull.

THE COURT:  Make it nice and palatable so that they wouldn't understand what it's all about?

THE WITNESS:  No.  I think we want them to understand what it's all about but it's -- I think it's -- I guess I would say that whenever we describe medical procedures we try to do it in a way that's not offensive or gruesome or overly graphic for patients.

THE COURT:  Can they fully comprehend unless you do? Not all of these mothers are Rhodes scholars or highly educated, are they?

THE WITNESS:  No, that's true.  But I'm also not exactly sure what using terminology like sucking the brains out would --

THE COURT:  That's what happens, doesn't it?

THE WITNESS:  Well, in some situations that might happen.  There are different ways that an after-coming head could be dealt with but that is one way of describing it.

THE COURT:  Isn't that what actually happens?  You do Use a suction device, right?

THE WITNESS:  Well, there are physicians who do that procedure who use a suction device to evacuate the intercranial

 

Excerpts from NAF's direct examination of Dr. Cassing Hammond:

 

THE COURT:  Do they give full disclosure as to the various procedures available and what is entailed, such as the dismemberment, in some forms of D&E?

THE WITNESS:  If they do not and then the patient is referred to me for D&E, we do tell the patient what's entailed in a D&E.

THE COURT:  In simple, clear English?

THE WITNESS:  I think so, your Honor, yes. Now, there are variations, depending on the patient's own kind of psychological situation that we clearly take into consideration, but we actually have a large number of patients who look at us and say, let me get this straight.  What you will be doing is dismembering the fetus.  And we say, yes, that's exactly what we are doing.

THE COURT:  Do you tell them what happens when they do an intact D&E?

THE WITNESS:  If the patient --

THE COURT:  The brain is sucked out?

THE WITNESS:  Well I don't -- as a point of fact, your Honor, I don't usually do the suction part.  I do compress the calvarium and I do some other procedures.  I don't actually do suction so I don't explain that part.

THE COURT:  You don't explain that to them?

THE WITNESS:  Well I explain the method.

THE COURT:  You explain what a compression of the calvarium is?

THE WITNESS:  Yes, sir; that I do explain.

THE COURT:  That that's crushing the skull?

THE WITNESS:  I explain that, yes.

 

 

NEBRASKA CASE. 

 

DAY TWO:  Tuesday, March 30, 2004.

Excerpts from Abortion Doctors' direct examination of Dr. William Fitzhugh: 

 

Q.  All right.  Going back now, I think you said in some instances when you use a suction cannula, that part of the fetus or the umbilical cord will come out through the cervix.  Then what do you do at that point?

A.  Well, if the umbilical cord comes down, I unattach that from its integrity.  I just break it and pull on it.  If a foot comes down, I grab the foot and pull down on that.

Q.  If no part comes down, as a result of the suction, what do you do?

A.  Then I have to place the ring forceps up into the uterus and find a part.

Q.  And is there a particular part that you're trying to grasp, at that point?

A.  I take whatever I can get, because I have really -- I have a feel of when you feel the cranium of the head, but that's about the only thing I have a feel of when you grasp until you pull it down. … I just pull down with the forceps and, you know, see what part you have, and see if you can get more of that part out.  If you get more of the part out, you twist to try to get more tissue out.  If that doesn't happen, then you pull hard enough that it will disarticulate at that point or break off at that point.

~

Q.  Do you have other concerns, when you find yourself in that situation, to cause you to use forceps to compress the skull?

A.  As I mentioned earlier, my preference is that when I use a suction, my preference is that I obtain the umbilical cord and separate the umbilical cord.  The one thing that I want--and I don't want the staff to have to deal with is to have a fetus that you remove and have some viability to it, some movement of limbs, because it's always a difficult situation.

Q.  So one of the reasons that you use the forceps is to compress the skull is to ensure that the fetus is dead when you remove it?

A.  That's one of the reasons.

~

Q.  ....what actions do you take during a D & E that would be fatal to the fetus?

A.  Well, number one, I like to interrupt the umbilical cord.  Number two, we are working on a young gestation, but that's not to do it.  And we break up parts in the uterus and we crush skulls.

~

Q.  Can you tell the Court how often the fetus comes through entirely intact, without you having to do anything more to remove it?

A.  It happens about two to five times a year.  And in those situations, it will occur one of two ways.  One is that the ladies has had some labor up to that point.  And when I remove the speculum, the laminaria and sponges from the vagina, she'll already have a foot in the vagina or two feet in the vagina.  That's one of the times it happens.  And the other time it happens is when I reach up and deliberately grasp for something.  I will get a foot, bring it down, and the whole body will come down.  And it happens about two to five times a year.

Q.  And in that situation, is the entire fetus coming out or is it any part of it remaining in the uterus?  Is the head -- 

A.  It can happen either way.  I would say one time out of those that I will pull and everything will come out.  I'll pull and twist and everything will come out.  And probably two or three times, I'll have to pull and the head will get stuck against the cervix.  So I'll have to use my ring forceps and crush the skull.

~

Q.  So other than drugs or making incisions in the cervix, could you simply detach the head at that point?

A.  I guess you could, but then you would have to find it.  …

Q.  Does it every happen that you would disarticulate a piece of the fetus, and then on the next pass, bring out the remainder of the fetus, except for the head?

A.  Its happened that way, disarticulated up to a knee joint.  You grab the next grasp and you brought most everything out.

~

Q.  But some of them are alive at the time you do the procedure?

A.  The majority of them are alive at the time.

 

Excerpts from the Government's cross-examination of Dr. Fitzhugh:

 

Q.  So when you're doing the D & E procedure that you do, you expect dismemberment to occur; is that correct?

A.  It happens in the majority of cases, not expected, but it sure would be nice if it happened more often.

~

Q.  When there have been instances where the -- you have been doing a D & E and the fetus has come out intact, have you been aware of reactions from others in the operating room?

[Here counsel for the plaintiffs entered an objection, which the Court overruled.]

A.  Yes, they certainly show more interest in that when it happens than they do on a routine situation.

Q.  In fact, they gasp, don't they, when that kind of thing happens?

A.  Some of them gasp, yes, sir.

Q.  Your impression in those situations is that they were probably having a harder time dealing with that situation; is that correct?

A.  Yes, sir.

 

Excerpts from Abortion Doctors' direct examination of Dr. Jill Vibhakar:

 

Q.  And after the grasp part passes through the cervix, what typically happens then?

A.  At some point, the more proximal part of the fetus that remains in the uterus becomes too large to fit through the cervix, and so it becomes, pulls apart from the rest of the body and becomes -- or it becomes disarticulated.

Q.  Okay. Is there an average number of times that you reach into the uterus? ....

A.  No.  It generally requires multiple passes.

~

Q.  And have you had any situations where the fetus is not necessarily coming out feet first but where  part of the fetal trunk past the naval has come outside the mother?

A.  Yes, . . . the upper extremity is removed included [sic] the shoulder area, and sometimes when--sometimes when we are doing the D & E, some of the first things that are removed are maybe a portion of skin from the trunk or even ribs or other trunk contents.

~

Q.  And can the fetus still be living in that it has a heartbeat or other signs of life at that time?

A.  Possibly, yes.

~

Q.  Do you know when the removal of the fetus, fetal demise occurs?

A.  No, I don't.

Q.  Is there any clinical significance to when you cause fetal demise during the procedure?

A.  Not in my opinion.

 

Excerpts from Government's cross examination of Dr. Vibhakar: 

 

Q.   Okay.  When the head was struck, you disarticulated the body from the head; is that correct?

A.  Yes.

Q.  And you removed the body, compressed the head and removed the head;  is that correct?

A.  Yes.

Q.  And in decompressing the skull, you're trying to reduce its sides [sic] so it can fit through the cervix?

A.  Yes.

Q.  And when you are doing this, you're trying to remove skull pieces so the liquid brain will empty from the cranium and the head will decrease in size;  is that correct?

A.  And in compressing it, if it doesn't fit, and in my experience it hasn't fit without decompressing it in the process of crushing it or grasping it, it becomes punctured enough so that the cranial contents will drain, and then it will fit through the cervix.

~

A.  ....There was one instance where one of our faculty who doesn't normally perform them agreed to perform one on the labor floor, and then her mother needed emergency surgery, and in order to allow her to be with her mother, I came off my maternal leave to complete the D & E, …

 

DAY THREE:  Wednesday, March 31, 2004.

Excerpts from Abortion Doctors' direct examination of Dr. William Knorr:

 

Q.  Can you tell the Court approximately how many abortions you performed last year?

A.  Somewhere between five and six thousand.

Q.  Of those, can you estimate how many were second trimester abortions?

A.  Somewhere between 12 and 15%.

~

Q.  Dr. Knorr, before you begin to remove the fetus during a D & E procedure, is the fetus typically alive?

A.  . . . . the majority of the fetuses are alive.

Q.  And you don't routinely induce fetal demise, as part of your second trimester abortion procedures, is that right?

A.   That's right.  Very rarely.

Q.  And why not?

A.  I just don't believe in it .  I think that it's an extra procedure and, you know, we first have to remember, don't do any harm.

~

Q.  When it happens and the fetus comes through the cervix except for the head, how do you proceed?

A.  I first evaluate the cervix to see if I have enough room to slip a finger between the cervix and the fetal head, and if I can do that, I can then insert my crushing forcep around the head, crush the head and extract it.  If the cervix if very tight, I can't do that, I will use a craniotomy procedure, will turn the fetus so the back is up and find the area that I want to open, and either with a finger, dialator or a scissor will open that area and gently pull down. That pressure alone is enough to empty the cranium and extract the head.

~

Q.  And why don't you routinely do second trimester abortions by induction?

A.  I don't really have the ability to do that.  I cannot put a woman in the hospital where I have privileges and admit her for an elective abortion beyond 12 weeks of gestation, and even if I wanted to do 12 weeks and under, I can usually never find a nurse that will accompany me to the OR to do it.

 

Excerpts from Government's cross examination of Dr. Knorr:

 

Q. Also when you bring out a fetus in pieces, you make sure that  you have got all the parts that you want;  right?  You kind of --

A.  Yes.

Q.  You try and lay them out and put them back together as best you can to see if you have everything?

A.  Not necessarily.  Some of us keep track on the way out.

~

Q.  Dr. Knorr, is the procedure you perform consistent with this definition in DX 651?

A.  No.

Q.  In what way?

A.  … Breech extraction of the body excepting the head, well, according to the way I do my procedure, that sometimes occurs.  Partial evacuation of the intracranial contents of a living fetus to effect delivery of a dead but otherwise intact fetus, yes, I do do that.

~

Q.  Doctor, when you do have an intact extraction and the head gets stuck at the cervical os and then you do something to bring the head out, you testified on direct that sometimes the fetus is alive before you open the skull?