in this issue:
abortion: MISOPROSTOL AFTER MIFEPRISTONE (RU-486)
in vitro fertilization: EUGENICS, ‘GENOPHOBIA’ OR ETHICS? / RISKS and MORAL RELATIVISM
morning-after abortion pills: BRITAIN / PROOF THEY KILL
politics: LEICHTER CONFIRMED
population elimination: UNFPA
vaccine: SMALLPOX and PRO-LIFE VICTORY
reflection for prayer: THOMAS A KEMPIS
abortion
MISOPROSTOL AFTER MIFEPRISTONE (RU-486): Two studies in the current issue of Contraception indicate that when misoprostol is administered orally rather than vaginally, the resulting death and expulsion of the baby’s body are not as efficient produced. It is reported that women prefer the oral route, but the vaginal administration produces the better results. The purpose of the two studies was to determine whether or not a faster timetable could be followed for the completion of a mifepristone abortion. As one study suggested, though efficacy is a concern, “side effects rates may vary with different timing intervals, which may influence acceptability.”
(Reading: “Randomized trial of oral versus vaginal misoprostol at one day after mifepristone for early medical abortion,” Contraception, 64 (2001) 81-85, subscription only; “Mifepristone followed on the same day by vaginal misoprostol for early abortion,” Contraception, 64 (2001) 87-92, subscription only)
in vitro fertilization
EUGENICS, “GENOPHOBIA” OR ETHICS? Citing the facts of the Adam/Molly Nash case (see “And Then There Was One“) once again, ethicists argue that it is acceptable to “select” embryos in IVF treatments so that the resulting live birth provides the best match in stem cells (from the umbilical cord) suitable for treating a family member. In the case of the Nash couple, nine embryonic people were destroyed; one was born alive. The British Medical Journal quotes two doctors who support preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). “Who is harmed by allowing PGD to be performed solely for the benefit of a relative? Not the couple who wish to produce an embryo. Nor the child who would not otherwise have existed. Nor the person who receives the stem cell transplant that might save his or her life. We must avoid the trap of interfering with individual liberty by preventing such procedures for no good reason, simply out of the ‘genophobia’ that grips much of society today. “
(Reading: “Ethics of preimplant embryo gene test debated,” Reuters Health, 11/26/01; “Ethics of using preimplantation genetic diagnosis to select a stem cell donor for an existing person,” British Medical Journal, 11/24/01, pp. 1240-1243, search by author or title)
RISKS and MORAL RELATIVISM: Researchers studied the awareness of 200 women who sought treatment for infertility at Northwestern University Hospital in Illinois and found that most of the women were not aware of the risks associated with multiple gestations after in vitro fertilization treatment. The researchers conclude that counseling methods should be provided that “best allow patients to understand medical situations and make decisions most congruent with their own beliefs.”
COMMENT: No absolutes are considered, such as the FACT that a human being is a person at fertilization.
(Reading: “Patient perceptions of multiple gestations: An assessment of knowledge and risk aversion,” American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 10/01, pp. 920-924, summary for non subscribers, search by title)
morning-after abortion pills
BRITAIN: Two major Catholic newspapers have sided with a British pro-life organization, and published ads which call the morning-after pill an abortifacient. The Advertising Standards Authority ruled that the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children should make it clear in their advertisements that it is their “opinion” that the morning-after pill regimen aborts since “most readers [of the advertisements] would understand ‘abortion’ to refer to the expulsion of the fertilized egg [sic] from the womb post-implantation.” Therefore the ASA considered the SPUC claim that abortion can occur before implantation to be “misleading.” The standards authority’s recommendations are not binding, but could have an influence if the papers are taken to court over the ads.
COMMENT: Poppycock!
(Reading: “Newspaper groups fight morning-after pill advertising ruling,” Cybercast News Service, 12/3/01; Adjudication text, 11/14/01; “SPUC granted judicial review on morning-after pill,” Society for the Protection of Unborn Children news release, 5/2/01, search “health and beauty”)
PROOF THEY KILL: Family Health International recently published “Network,” an online newsletter in which the following statement, relating to the morning-after pill regimen mechanism of action, is published, “they may interfere with implantation of the fertilized egg in the uterus. Pills cannot disrupt an established pregnancy — the pills have no effect after implantation has been established.”
COMMENT: “Fertilized egg” dehumanizes the child and is inaccurate. The correct scientific words are “human zygote.” An “established pregnancy” is a rhetorical caveat used by those who do not wish to admit that a person is a person from his beginning — which is conception/fertilization, NOT implantation. So much for accuracy from FHI.
(Reading: Network: Emergency Contraceptive Pills,” Vol. 21, No. 1, 2001. The indisputable facts are available at Morning After Pill)
politics
LEICHTER CONFIRMED: The Senate Banking Committee unanimously confirmed the re-nomination of Franz Leichter (see Communique, 10/26/01) to the Federal Housing Finance Board. Leichter is pro-abortion. Senator Rick Santorum sits on the committee and supported Leichter.
(Reading: “US Senate confirms three to housing finance board,” Reuters, 11/29/01; e-mail Senator Santorum online)
population elimination
UNFPA: Background material exposing the involvement of UNFPA and allied agencies in the effort to abort babies through so-called reproductive health care such as the morning after pill regimen is available on the internet at http://www.unfpa.org/tpd/emergencies/manual/. This is a field manual for “Reproductive health in refugee situations” and is also available on the International Planned Parenthood Federation web site (http://www.ippf.org/), a fact that should surprise no one.
vaccine
SMALLPOX and PROLIFE VICTORY: In developing a vaccine for smallpox, Acambis PLC of Great Britain intended to use a cell line derived from cells of aborted babies. The firm has now abandoned that plan and intends to use animal cell lines. This is a major victory for pro-life leaders such as Debi Vinnedge of Children of God for Life.
(Reading: “No fetal cells in new smallpox vaccines,” World Net Daily, 12/4/01)
reflection for prayer
THOMAS A KEMPIS: Fear God, and thou shalt have no need of being afraid of man.
What can anyone do against thee by his words or injuries? He rather hurts himself than thee, nor can he escape the judgment of God whoever he be. [2 Mach. 7:35]
See thou have God before thine eyes and do not contend with complaining words. [2 Tim. 2:14]
(Reading: Imitation of Christ, Book 3, Chapter 36, Section 3.)