Abortion

PA Supreme Court Decision Sends Abortion Funding Case Back to the Lower Court

January 30, 2024By

HARRISBURG, PA –The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled that a lower court must decide whether to allow taxpayer funding of abortion in the Keystone State.

In Allegheny Reproductive Health Center v. Pennsylvania Department of Human Services, the PA Supreme Court issued a highly complex decision of more than 200 pages, remanding a Medicaid abortion case back to Commonwealth Court. The state Supreme Court’s 3-2 decision demonstrates the highly-divisive nature of the ruling, which involves when taxpayers will be required to pay for abortions. For decades, Medicaid abortions in Pennsylvania have been limited to the rare cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother.

“The vast majority of Pennsylvanians do not want to see their hard-earned tax dollars spent on abortion, which is the taking of an innocent, unrepeatable human life,” said Maria Gallagher, legislative director of the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation, the Keystone State affiliate of National Right to Life.

“Research clearly indicates that, when taxpayer funding of abortions occurs, abortion totals skyrocket. More than 34,000 abortions took place in Pennsylvania in 2022, according to statistics from the PA Department of Health. That’s truly alarming,” Gallagher added. “The women of the Commonwealth and their babies need comprehensive care and support, not a blank check for taxpayer-funded abortions.”

 

********************************************************************************************************************************************************************
The Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation is a grassroots right-to-life organization with members statewide.  As the state affiliate of National Right to Life, PPLF is committed to promoting the dignity and value of human life and to restoring legal protection for preborn children.

READ MORE
Abortion

Remarks Delivered Before The Magee-Womens Hospital Board

January 22, 2024By

Good afternoon. My name is Christopher Pushaw. I am the Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation. We thank the Board for allowing the Federation time to speak with respect to how Magee-Womens Hospital provides fetal tissue specimens to the University of Pittsburgh for its conduct of related experimental research. [1]

This concern arose from a 2020 FOIA request, which revealed that in a grant application made to NIH, the University noted [2] that it “record[s] the warm ischemic time on our samples and take steps to keep it at a minimum to ensure the highest quality biological specimens.”

One of the best procedures to preserve this “warm ischemic time” is through “labor induction” abortion, [3] which can occur during the third trimester. This procedure is considered desirable in order to obtain “high quality” samples, since other procedures can mutilate the tissue and render it unusable.

Specimens obtained through “labor induction” abortion raise the concern that at least some of them come from fetuses that survive an abortion and/or are delivered beyond the 24-week cutoff contained in the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act.  Section 3212 of the Act provides that any child that survives an abortion shall not be denied care or treatment. Section 3216(a) prohibits “nontherapeutic experimentation…upon any child born alive during the course of the abortion.” [4]

Induction abortion methods used for fetal collection purposes call into question whether the abortion doctor takes steps immediately to preserve the lives of delivered fetuses that show signs of life and/or whether a fetus that survives the abortion then loses its life by virtue of having its organs removed for research purposes.

To our knowledge Magee has not publicly shared how it gathers these fetal specimens, whether such collection involves labor induction abortion, or whether such procedures comply with state law.

For its part, the University hired a law firm at the end of 2021 to address concerns arising from its fetal experimentation practices in general. However, the firm’s findings only heightened concern regarding Magee’s role in providing fetal specimens.  A closing recommendation called for “enhanced oversight” by the University of its tissue collection protocol… “to ensure compliance with applicable laws and policies.” [5]

However, the report suggests that such oversight would not extend to how Magee obtains its fetal tissue specimens. The report [6] states: “…, we did not review the clinical decision-making or delivery of medical care, such as abortion, by individuals serving in their capacity as University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) employees. “

Moreover, the report states that formal review by the University’s Institutional Review Board over the “method by which the researcher will obtain human fetal tissue” can qualify for an exemption” provided such tissue is “de-identified.” [7] The report does not explain how the “de-identification process” works.

If the IRB did not investigate how the fetal tissue was collected based on this exemption, it still begs the questions that would have been central to the investigation before it and the law firm– namely, what abortion procedures were used in the process of collecting these fetal specimens, whether some fetuses survived these abortions and whether continuing the procedure at that point induced fetal demise.

We would respectfully request that Magee Hospital address the issue of whether it in fact complies with Pennsylvania law in its fetal tissue collection practices. The Federation raises these questions on behalf of Pennsylvania citizens who deserve an answer and thank the Board for addressing them.

 

References:

 

Citations:

[1] – https://www.foxnews.com/us/pittsburgh-investigation-fetal-tissue-probe-cone-silence

[2] – https://www.judicialwatch.org/hhs-documents-organ-harvesting

[3] – https://thefederalist.com/2021/08/09/investigate-now-federal-grants-sponsored-possibly-live-baby-harvesting-at-university-of-pittsburgh/

[4] – https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&ttl=18&div=0&chpt=32

[5] – FN Hyman, Phelps & McNamara, P.C., Regulatory Assessment of Human Fetal Tissue Research at the University of Pittsburgh (December 21, 2021), at 26. Regulatory Assessment of Human Fetal Tissue Research (00877347-2)[4].PDF (pitt.edu)

[6] – FN Hyman, Phelps & McNamara, P.C., Regulatory Assessment of Human Fetal Tissue Research at the University of Pittsburgh (December 21, 2021), at 5. Regulatory Assessment of Human Fetal Tissue Research (00877347-2)[4].PDF (pitt.edu)

[7] – FN Hyman, Phelps & McNamara, P.C., Regulatory Assessment of Human Fetal Tissue Research at the University of Pittsburgh (December 21, 2021), at 2. Regulatory Assessment of Human Fetal Tissue Research (00877347-2)[4].PDF (pitt.edu)

 

Additional Reading:

Emails Suggest NIH, Pitt Colluded To Cover Up Experiments On Babies (thefederalist.com)

READ MORE
Abortion

Statement on Fetal Experimentation

August 28, 2023By

Dear Rep. Bernstine and Rep. D’Orsie,

Thank you for your steadfast commitment to protecting pregnant women, preborn children, people with disabilities, and the frail elderly. We appreciate your consistent support for safeguarding innocent human life.

The Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation has been a strong and clear voice in defense of the most vulnerable among us since 1979. Our members were instrumental in the successful passage of the 1989 Abortion Control Act, which became a model for the rest of the nation and was the basis of the 1992 U.S. Supreme Court case Planned Parenthood v. Casey. That groundbreaking legislation included an important provision regarding fetal experimentation in Pennsylvania.

The Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation strongly opposes the use of aborted baby body parts in gruesome scientific experimentation. We remain committed to ending this grisly practice, which represents a defilement of human remains and promotes abortion—the taking of an innocent, unrepeatable human life. We condemn the use of our hard-earned taxpayer dollars to pay for such inhumane experimentation. We continue to work toward ending federal grants from the National Institutes of Health which pay for this ghastly practice.

The Federation encourages the General Assembly to determine whether such experimentation at any academic institution in Pennsylvania violates the fetal experimentation section of the Abortion Control Act so that it can be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

We look forward to working with you to protect innocent human life in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

                                                                         Sincerely,

                                                                         Susan Rogacs

                                                                         President of the Board of Directors

READ MORE
Abortion

Gríma Wormtongue Sways Shapiro Government

August 7, 2023By

If you have watched The Lord of The Rings, you must be familiar with Gríma Wormtongue, the snake tongued advisor, who whispers poison into the ears of the king, weakening his resolve to rule justly. The effect of Planned Parenthood’s whisperings into our Governor’s ears is certainly evident in his latest announcement to defund Real Alternatives – an organization that provides real alternatives to abortion by offering maternity and baby care, counselling, adoption referrals and pregnancy resources.

The greed of evil lies in this: not only does it demand to exist but insists that good be destroyed for its sake. While the government pressroom celebrated the retiring of Real Alternatives contract as a “Major Win For Women’s Health”, it begs the question: how is this a win for women seeking to continue their pregnancies if their funding is taken away and given to those who have vowed to kill their babies for them?

Seeking counsel from providers of death in his first week in office, Shapiro has continued to advance their agendas in the name of “women’s healthcare”. Pregnancy Centers do more for pregnant mothers than Planned Parenthood ever has. Women who choose to bring their babies into this world deserve care and support from those who care for them and their children. Real Alternatives centers do that.

To this day, the State of Pennsylvania has modelled what pregnancy resources can do for expectant mothers and has seen the benefit of having a state-funded program that help families thrive. Breaking “the pattern” that has been recognized by both parties over the years, is both unnecessary and unhelpful to thousands of women across the Commonwealth.

Governor Josh Shapiro declared, “Pennsylvanians made clear by electing me as Governor that they support a woman’s freedom to choose, and I will be steadfast in defending that right” (emphasis added). Do you think he knows that women choose pregnancies if help is available?

While we continue to fight this injustice, would you join our efforts to urge the Governor to reconsider retiring Real Alternatives’ Contract? You can send a message to PA State Representative and Senator here or email the Governor here

READ MORE
Abortion

Reproductive Justice or Entitlement?

April 10, 2023By

Since the overturn of Roe v Wade, the general outcry of the pro-abortion movement for women’s reproductive healthcare has heightened. Confusion seems to abound around the topic of available healthcare for women experiencing difficult pregnancies.

It is noteworthy that so many people have been indoctrinated into a culture of choice that primarily speaks death over their unborn, that we have forgotten what reproductive healthcare is really for.

Healthcare in every area is provided to re-establish health or improve any ailing physical or mental conditions. A good friend of mine, who is a gastroenterologist treats patients whose digestive organs fail or don’t function optimally. His job as a healthcare provider is to do everything in his power and expertise to restore health to the individuals who come to him. I imagine there would be serious outrage if he were to do surgery on a perfectly functioning digestive system.

Why does that not apply to reproductive healthcare? Pregnancy is a sign of a healthy reproductive system. It’s not a disease or an ailment to be treated. There are women who struggle with infertility seeking medical help and interventions because they know that their bodies are unable to do what it should be doing naturally.

Over the years, reproductive healthcare has expanded to include procedures and treatments to condition a woman’s body to perform contrary to normal functions. Hormonal pills which were designed to help regulate irregularities in menstrual cycles are recommended as birth control to young girls whose bodies are still developing.

The abortion industry is NOT reproductive healthcare as it targets a perfectly functioning reproductive system and kills the new life that is formed simply for the sake of business and profit. Veiling this horrible evil with terms like “reproductive healthcare” does not change the fact that abortion invades a well-functioning organ in a woman’s body, ripping out her child and scarring her physically and emotionally.

It is common knowledge that you can get pregnant if you have sex. There is no way to undo this natural law.  Reproductive healthcare must extend to every individual involved – the mother and the baby growing in her womb. That’s reproductive justice. “Justice” gained by the annihilation of the innocent is entitlement, not justice.

Since the Dobbs decision, there have been concerns among women that healthcare interventions will be withheld in the case of pregnancy complications that pose a threat to the mother’s life. An abortion ban does not restrict access to healthcare that could potentially cause the natural termination of the baby in the course of the treatment to save the mother’s life. This is different from inducing abortion for the sole purpose of ending the life of the unborn baby.

The demand of abortionists and activists is not for healthcare or choice, but for the right to live without responsibility from the moral and natural consequences of their choices. Choices that they have already made. Natural order follows that every choice has a consequence. To choose is to take responsibility for the consequences that ensue. Maybe it’s time they reconsidered using the word “pro-choice” and used “self-entitled” instead?

READ MORE
Abortion

Prevent Abortion in Lancaster!

February 15, 2023By

Planned Parenthood Keystone has asked the Commonwealth for an exception to the rule requiring a transfer agreement with a local hospital.

This situation potentially puts women at serious risk of harm should abortion complications arise.

We need to make it clear to the Pennsylvania Department of Health that Planned Parenthood does not deserve an exception.

Please email ra-paexcept@pa.gov and let them know it would be dangerous to grant an exception to Planned Parenthood and that the plan needs to be stopped for the well-being of women in Lancaster.

READ MORE
Abortion

Pro-Abortion Takeover of PA House

February 9, 2023By

             Recent special elections in Pennsylvania have helped to usher in a new era in the Keystone State—an era in which, sadly, preborn children and their mothers face new legislative attacks.

             With Democrats winning all three February special elections, the leadership of the PA House of Representatives is now in pro-abortion hands. As a result, citizens are bracing for a pro-abortion legislative assault from the lower chamber.

             Pro-abortion legislative leaders would like to dismantle the Abortion Control Act. That landmark law was the basis of the U.S. Supreme Court case Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992. The law not only served as a model for the rest of the nation, but also gave rise to hundreds of additional protections for preborn children and their mothers throughout the various states.

            The Abortion Control Act is a common sense law which provides for informed consent, parental consent, a 24-hour waiting period for abortions, a late-term abortion ban, and a ban on sex selection abortions.

             It will be incumbent on pro-life advocates in Pennsylvania to contact their state representatives and make the case that the ACA is a time-tested law and should not be changed. Ironically, the move to dismantle the ACA comes at a time when abortions are on the rise in PA—fueled by a dramatic increase in chemical abortions.

            Abortion facilities throughout the Commonwealth are also openly marketing to women in other states, hoping to boost their bottom lines with customers beyond Pennsylvania’s borders. Abortion business executives have made it clear—they want to expand abortion in Pennsylvania.   

  Statistics show 33,206 abortions took place in Pennsylvania in 2021, an increase of 1,083 abortions over the 2020 total of 32,123. Imagine how many kindergarten classes the number 1,083 represents. We mourn the loss of these precious children, who never got the chance to see their mother’s face.

             Thankfully, the Pennsylvania state Senate stands as a firewall against pro-abortion initiatives coming from a hostile PA House of Representatives and Governor’s Office. The upper chamber will no doubt be playing defense against what is expected to be a flurry of pro-abortion legislation coming from the PA House.

            Gratefully, PA is also home to a vibrant, energetic pro-life movement which stands ready to defend the most vulnerable among us—no matter what the political odds.

READ MORE
Abortion

Hyde Amendment Saves Lives

February 6, 2023By

They had both been born in the same country, but never met until after each had migrated to the U.S. They were young and filled with hope when they married—a union which would lead to seven children.

He supported his family as a barber, but he found that, in times of economic downturn, customers could be hard to come by. At Christmastime, a local firehouse would provide gifts for his beloved children, who well knew the poverty of their state in life.

These were my Italian grandparents, Leonard and Theresa. They may have had little in material goods, but they had plenty of love to spare.

I think of them often when pro-abortion politicians threaten to take away the Hyde Amendment, which ensures no taxpayer funding of abortion except in the rare cases of rape, incest, and to save the life of the mother.

I think of my grandparents because, while materially poor, they were rich in principles. And they viewed each of their children as a treasure.

It is condescending and classist to claim that low-income people “need” abortion. What they need is material and emotional support for themselves and their families. It seems especially revolting if a pregnant woman needs help with her rent payment and she is instead extended a cold-hearted offer to take the life of her preborn child.

It has been estimated that 2.5 million Americans are alive today because of the Hyde Amendment. It has stood the test of time and should not be tampered with. Attacking the Hyde Amendment is an attack on people who lack basic resources. It is unconscionable, and should not be permitted in a civilized society.

READ MORE
Abortion

PA Lawmaker Seeks to Expand Abortion

August 12, 2022By

The days of the slogan “safe, legal, and rare” are long gone in Pennsylvania. Some lawmakers make no secret of the fact that they do not want abortion to be rare–in fact, they are making every effort to increase abortions in the Commonwealth.

A co-sponsorship memo by state Rep. Dan Frankel (D-Allegheny County) is the latest example of this disturbing trend.

The proof lies in the subject line of the memo: “Expanding Access to Abortion.”

Rep. Frankel wants to expand the “pool of providers” by having non-doctors perform abortions. As he states, “I am introducing legislation that would allow physician assistants, nurse-midwives, and certified registered nurse practitioners to prescribe medication abortion.”

He is referring to chemical abortions, which are rapidly eclipsing surgical abortions as the leading cause of death of preborn babies in Pennsylvania. A number of legitimate safety concerns–both physical and psychological– have been raised about chemical abortions for mothers.

Rep. Frankel is in the minority in the PA House of Representatives, but abortion giant Planned Parenthood is doing its best to change that, pouring countless dollars into campaigns to replace pro-life lawmakers with pro-abortion zealots. This is why it is incumbent upon voters to know the stands of office-seekers when it comes to the life-or-death issue of abortion.

Pennsylvania is home to a staggering 32,000 abortions each year.
We cannot afford policies that seek to expand that number even further.

READ MORE
Abortion

Op-Ed: Setting the Record Straight – Senator Judy Ward

August 8, 2022By

Over the past few weeks, my Senate colleagues have had to continually correct false and misleading statements regarding the recently passed Senate Bill 106. Sadly, the misrepresentations have continued, and it has become increasingly necessary for me as a sponsor of one of the bill’s amendments to join them in their efforts.

Senate Bill 106 consists of five different amendments to the Pennsylvania constitution with the subjects being the election of the Lieutenant Governor, legislative disapproval of regulations, voter ID, auditing of elections by the Auditor General, and taxpayer funding of abortions.

These amendments become part of the Pennsylvania constitution if the legislature passes Senate Bill 106 in two consecutive legislative sessions followed by a majority of voters approving each of the amendments individually at the ballot box.

To correct what has been reported in numerous media outlets, if this legislation is approved by voters, it would not be the result of undemocratic procedures and a General Assembly that was deaf to the will of the people. Rather, Senate Bill 106 gives the people of Pennsylvania a voice. It would be the most democratic and fair method for lawmaking that is available to us as citizens, as it requires both representative democracy when our legislature votes on the amendment and direct democracy where the people get the final say at the ballot box.

There have been many falsehoods circulating about what the amendments would do. The most egregious are the reports on the amendment relating to abortion.

For background, Allegheny Reproductive Health Center is suing the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, arguing that there is a right to abortion in our Constitution. This is despite previous court precedent and state and federal law that indicate otherwise. This “right” they are asking the court to find would apply to all nine months of pregnancy and would force taxpayers to pay for abortions.

The amendment would simply preserve the status quo, keeping the fate of abortion policy out of the hands of the courts and in the hands of those who are accountable to the people, their elected representatives in the legislature.

There have been claims that the amendment is an abortion ban. This is completely false. Unfortunately, the falsehoods don’t stop there. Some have reported that if this amendment goes into effect, people’s ability to use in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatments will be at risk. Others state that ectopic pregnancies will be forced to term regardless of if doing so would kill the mother, or that D&C procedures will be outlawed, forcing those who have miscarriages to risk serious infection and disease. None of those statements are true.

Here are the facts. Should the abortion provision of Senate Bill 106 be approved by the voters, Pennsylvanians will continue to have a statutory right to an abortion under Pennsylvania’s Abortion Control Act. That Act would remain in place and unchanged.  Medicaid will continue to cover both non-elective abortions and voluntary abortions involving cases of rape or incest but will still withhold funding for all other elective instances. IVF, ectopic pregnancies, and D&C procedures would be allowed under the same rules that exist today, and doctors will continue to save women’s lives in the event of life-threatening complications during pregnancy.

With Senate Bill 106, the fate of abortion law in Pennsylvania will be left up to the people’s elected representatives through the legislative process. Policymaking on abortion will be taken out of the hands of the courts and placed exactly where it belongs; in the hands of the people, first through a ballot referendum and then through their elected officials.

Our job as elected representatives is to create public policy that represents the will of the people. I can think of no better way to do that than by putting these issues in front of the voters through Senate Bill 106.

READ MORE