Pro-Lifers Fight "Web-Cam" Abortions
Part Two of ThreeBy Dave
Andrusko
Loaded
for bear, pro-lifers are preparing legislation to thwart Planned
Parenthood's latest initiative to increase its bottom line and the number of
abortions--so-called "web-cam abortions."
In use only in Iowa currently, it's a
plan to reach "clients" in the hinterlands. The abortionist is not actually
in the same room with the woman. He communicates by means of a video
conferencing system, electronically opening a drawer from which the woman
takes out the two drugs that make up the "RU-486" chemical abortion regime:
misoprostol and mifepristone.
Nebraska is one of those states which
is reacting pro-actively. According to the World-Herald newspaper, Planned
Parenthood of the Heartland has aborted more than 2,000 women in Iowa since
the summer of 2008 using the web-cam chemical abortion technique. Based in
Des Moines, Iowa, Planned Parenthood of the Heartland operates abortion
clinics in Iowa and Nebraska.
"The proposal would bar Nebraska
doctors from prescribing and dispensing abortion-inducing drugs via the
Internet," according to Martha Stoddard of the World-Herald.
And pro-life Nebraskans are not
waiting until web-cam abortions are practiced in their state. "The abortion
industry keeps coming up with new ways to kill unborn children, and this is
one of them," said Julie Schmit-Albin, executive director of Nebraska RTL.
"What happens in Iowa, I kid you not, is headed for Nebraska."
As is traditional, in response PPFA
tried to evade the issue by equating killing with healing. Kyle Carlson,
legal director for Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, told Stoddard that
restrictions on the use of web-cam abortions "could hurt the growing use of
Internet video hookups in medicine. 'To make an argument that telemedicine
is unsafe because the physician is not present is not an attack on abortion,
it's an attack on telemedicine,' he said."
Nonsense, says Dr. Randall K. O'Bannon, NRLC Director of Education.
"There is a fundamental difference
between a situation in which a person is dealing with some serious illness
or health risk in an emergency situation and has no immediate access to a
doctor versus one [a woman seeking an abortion] in which there is no
underlying health issue and the procedure is entirely elective," he said.
"If one is trying to save a life and there is no doctor available,
telemedicine is a risk worth taking. For elective, and certainly for
dangerous, procedures, it is an entirely different issue."
Part
Three
Part One |