This commentary is by Renee Brodowski, a resident of Addison County.

Pro-life and moderate pro-choice proponents who support abortion in instances in which the life of the mother is at risk or in cases of fetal “incompatible with life” diagnoses are supporting a mythical “medical necessity.”

Pro-life OB/GYNs testify to this, yet this information is routinely omitted or suppressed in public pro-life/pro-choice discussion and media outlets.

In her national expert testimony on Article 22/Prop 5, Dr. Christina Francis, MD, Board Certified OB/GYN, and chair of the Board of American Association of Prolife Obstetrics and Gynecologists writes,

As an OB/GYN, I can respect the dignity and autonomy of my female patients without condoning the killing of their children. In fact, I am respecting their autonomy more by informing them of the potential risks of abortion as well as the humanity of their unborn children. The abortion industry does not provide the same respect for their ability to make an informed decision by honestly divulging the potential risks of abortion and also demeans women by telling them the only way for them to truly succeed is to hold tightly to the “right” to kill their children. This is a bold-faced lie that I, as a woman and as a physician, strenuously object to. If you truly care about the citizens of this state, you will oppose this amendment and focus, instead, on measures that will truly improve women and children’s lives.

From the Charlotte Lozier Institute we learn:

There is never a reason to take the life of an unborn child since there is no maternal condition that requires the death of the fetus to save her life. The infant may need to be delivered prematurely and die as a result of that, but it is not necessary to take the infant’s life. Further, if a fetus has an adverse prenatal diagnosis all patients should be offered perinatal hospice care since this is far better for maternal health than any elective abortion. Perinatal hospice allows the parents to be parents and provide all the love they can for their child. – Dr. Byron Calhoun, M.D., perinatologist.

Planned-Parenthood-funded organizations and legacy media are spreading misinformation and fearmongering over the potential loss of access to abortion and birth control, never presenting the fact that there are medical alternatives to abortion.

This NPR article from March 1, 2022, attempts to instill fear regarding strong pro-life legislation such as the Texas Heartbeat Bill. Texas law allows abortions only in cases of rape, incest, fatal fetal anomalies, or risk of death or severe impairment to the mother when fetal heartbeat is detected. The article tells the story of a Texas woman whose water broke at 19 weeks. The baby’s heart was still beating. Doctors gave her the choice of either seeking an abortion out-of-state or waiting until she developed sepsis or hemorrhaged, out of fear of being prosecuted for violating the law due to alleged vague language of the Texas statute. Doctors did not offer to induce labor to deliver the baby intact.

Abortion induction (feticidal injection and induction), or dilation and extraction/evacuation are not the only two late-term pregnancy medical options available to parents who are either faced with serious maternal physical distress or are told their unborn baby has fatal deformities and should be aborted. UVMMC abortion provider Lauren MacAfee coolly describes abortion induction as “similar to labor induction for vaginal birth” in her testimony during a Vermont Human Services Committee meeting January 21, 2019. Why not skip the feticidal injection, induce labor, deliver the baby, and provide perinatal hospice?

We do not have marches in the streets over any other “medical procedure,” and that is because terminating the life of an unborn baby is never a legitimate, humane, moral medical procedure.