|
|
|
|
More About Baby
Elizabeth and the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection
Act By Dave Andrusko I will repeat here what I said when I talked about this tragic case one week ago today: “There are no villains in this story, outside of an abortion chain which is dropping broad hints it might be eager to exploit a tragedy for its own purposes. I am referring to Danielle and Robb Deaver, a Nebraska couple, whose story first broke over the weekend in the Des Moines Register, Iowa’s largest and most influential newspaper” (www.nrlc.org/News_and_Views/March11/nv030711.html). Last December the couple wanted to induce a delivery but were told they not under Nebraska’s Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. That is to grossly simplify a very complex case. Let’s fill in the details. As Dr. Sean Kenney explained in an op-ed that appeared in the Omaha Herald that we reprint in Part Two, “Danielle Deaver was diagnosed with pre-viable premature rupture of the membranes (Pre-viable PPROM) at 22 4/7 weeks.” The most important point he makes in a very thorough op-ed that is highly sympathetic to the Deavers is that the information the couple had that led them to desire an abortion was incomplete, incorrect, and out-dated. “Tragic as the outcome was, the pessimism that predicted inevitable death for the baby was certainly unwarranted.” Dr. Kenney knows of what he speaks. A maternal-fetal specialist from Lincoln, Nebraska, he has had success in saving babies facing the condition Mrs. Deaver was diagnosed with. Beyond the sad, sad story of baby Elizabeth, who died just eight days after doctors told the Deavers they could not abort their child, there is the role this case might play in other states attempting to pass legislation similar to Nebraska’s Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. Opponents are already attempting to use the Deavers’ tragedy to undermine these proposed laws. Let me make two additional comments. First, at the time her mother’s water broke Elizabeth was already on the cusp of being able to live outside her mother’s womb. If Mrs. Deaver had delivered Elizabeth at 24 weeks, “the baby’s chance of survival without profound neurodevelopmental impairment would have increased to 50 percent, 65 percent if she had received steroids,” according to Dr. Kenny. Second, “ABC News/Health ran a story over the weekend by Susan Donaldson James. It signifies that the baby’s death will continue to reverberate. “Danielle Deaver has contacted Planned Parenthood,” James writes. “She said that so far she is not contemplating a challenged to the law.” It is very important to understand that after verbally training its sights on Nebraska’s first-of-its-kind law immediately after it took effect, the Abortion Establishment, to this point, has veered off from a legal challenge. As I began with the opening sentences from last week, let me close today with the final paragraph of that blog. “It is a sad reality that some unborn babies are so injured that they do not survive,” said Mary Spaulding Balch, NRLC Director of State Legislation. “Abortion falsely promises to give us ‘control ,’ but abortion would not have changed the outcome for baby Elizabeth.” Balch ended by observing that it is the very same Nebraska law that the Deavers are so passionately criticizing “ensured that Danielle Deaver would be able to hold her precious Elizabeth in her arms.” I need your feedback on both Today's News & Views and National Right to Life News Today. Please send your comments to daveandrusko@gmail.com. If you like, join those who are following me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/daveha. |