The case that could overturn Roe v. Wade is just around the corner. The Pro-Life Generation needs to be present, needs to be talking about this, and needs to be ready to act!
June Medical Services v. Russo will begin oral arguments at the Supreme Court TOMORROW, Wednesday, March 4th. We need to be out there in full force! The nation, and the world, will be watching closely. We want them to see the Pro-Life Generation at the doors of the Supreme Court cheering and standing with women.
We need you to do three things:
- Join us at SCOTUS on the 4th! RSVP on our Facebook event page.
- Get to know your stuff…
We’ve seen it before… Planned Parenthood & the abortion lobby PAYS protesters! Just like the abortion industry, its followers are in it for the money. When you ask them about a case, we’ve found that they know little. We expect nothing different this time around.
Let’s be different! Let’s be equipped! Below is everything you need to know.
A Brief Overview
It’s all about one word: SAFETY! We care about women and we care about their health. Abortions are invasive surgical procedures that should be closely watched and regulated. We’ve seen time and time again dirty facilities stay open too long, women receive minimal/neglectful care, and a plethora of medical complications arise repeatedly at the same facility.
States should be allowed to set medical standards; however, this unfairly seems to be challenged when it comes to abortion.
Here’s a little background…
This happened during Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt. That 2016 case reversed a Texas law requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital, and abortion facilities to be surgical level care centers. The Supreme Court decided this law would limit abortion access and concluded that the medical benefits did not outweigh the burden this would place on women seeking abortion (1), thus, building off of the precedent of “undue burden” established during Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992.
This year, June Medical Services v. Russo, a similar law, will be presented to the Supreme Court. It all originated with Act 620 in Louisiana. Act 620 requires abortionists to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of abortion facility (2) and undergo regular inspections. The pro-abortion movement is arguing that this is no different than Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt and putting it to the “undue burden” test.
This is about basic health and safety rules. What they are fighting against is common sense. We are taking about regular inspections that would determine whether equipment is sterilized, if blood, human tissue, and medical records are being handled correctly, and whether fraud is taking place. The abortion industry has been caught filing MILLIONS of dollars in false claims to Medicaid in the past.
What are admitting privileges and why do they matter?
Hospital admitting privileges allow a doctor to speed up the admittance of a patient at a hospital and continue care for them. This is best because the abortionist, who ideally already knows what’s going on with the patient, can help her receive further medical attention quickly and efficiently. (3)
Anyone who has had any kind of medical procedure understands there are risks. Other ambulatory surgical centers are held to a higher standard. Abortionists should not be exempt from having arrangements for their dying or severely injured patients who need medical attention at the hospital. If abortionists are real doctors, why aren’t they being held to the same standard?
Why fight over commonsense law?
Emergency plans reflect the reality that sometimes, things go wrong. The other side is afraid to admit that. They will also argue that admitting privileges create an “undue burden,” as three out of four of their abortionists probably don’t qualify to receive such certifications. Why? Admitting privileges require paperwork, proof that they have actual licensed professionals doing abortions, and a good track record that assures hospitals that granting admitting privileges to an abortionist wouldn’t be a liability for them. Unnecessary? We would beg to differ. We want to put women first.
Abortions aren’t safe!
A recent study found that there have been 27,941 abortion-related hospital emergency department visits. 20% of these visits were deemed “major incidents,” requiring admission. (4) The most common form of abortion in the U.S., vacuum abortions, or aspiration suction / dilatation & curettage (D&C) abortion, has risks that would need medical intervention. Common risks include cervical lacerations, perforation, & incomplete abortion. (5) The abortion lobby would rather spend money on lawyers and protesters fighting laws to protect abortion, and not women. It’s time they cleaned up their act – literally!
The abortion industry has been cutting corners and putting women in danger for far too long. We have to talk about this!
Tweet, post, message, and share about how abortion advocates claim they value the safety and well-being of women, yet they rush to oppose any legislation that works to provide proper medical care. We should consider what it means that the abortion industry can’t meet bare-minimum safety standards. We don’t want to put women’s lives in danger.
Follow @StudentsforLife on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter and repost!
(4) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6000974/ Upadhyay, U. D., Johns, N. E., Barron, R., Cartwright, A. F., Tapé, C., Mierjeski, A., & McGregor, A. J. (2018). Abortion-related emergency department visits in the United States: An analysis of a national emergency department sample. BMC medicine, 16(1), 88. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-018-1072-0
(5) Paul, M., Lichtenberg, E. S., Borgatta, L., Grimes, D. A., Stubblefield, P. G., & Creinin, M. D. (2009). Management of Unintended and Abnormal Pregnancy: Comprehensive Abortion Care. John Wiley and Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444313031
Share this post