Even in the third trimester, they will abort healthy babies carried by healthy mothers. And then they'll falsify health justifications in the paperwork.
Carr signed papers claiming Atkins needed a 6 month abortion to avoid "substantial & irreversible harm" to her physical health. Carr meant only that pregnancy takes physical tolls & "changes your path in life."
When pressed, Carr agreed that her claiming Atkins would have suffered irreversible physical harm was inaccurate.
Carr signed papers claiming Atkins needed a 6 month abortion to avoid "substantial & irreversible harm" to her mental health. Carr later said that was speculation and she had not conducted any kind of mental health assessment.
Carr signed papers claiming Atkins needed a 6 month abortion to avoid "substantial & irreversible harm" to her family's health. Carr later agreed that claim was pure speculation. She never talked to anyone in Atkin's family.
Carr signed papers claiming Atkins needed a 6 month abortion to avoid "substantial & irreversible harm" to her safety. Carr later said she had only been speculating. She conducted no assessment of Atkin's safety.
Finally Carr signed papers claiming Atkins needed abortion to avoid "substantial & irreversible harm" to her well-being. Carr suggested if Atkins had her baby she might "just work at Applebee's for the rest of her life." This apparently is reason enough to abort a viable child.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
If you make it to paragraph 35, the article acknowledges the charge wasn't related to abortion bans.
>Marsh gives birth to a live premature infant daughter in a toilet, calls 911
>Emergency dispatcher repeatedly tells Marsh to take her daughter out of the toilet, she doesn't. She says "I couldn't because I couldn't even keep myself together."
>Infant still has signs of life when medical responders arrive and they try to perform life-saving measures, but she does not survive.
>Marsh is arrested for not moving her daughter from the toilet at the urging of the dispatcher which the warrant lists as "a proximate cause of her daughter's death."
>A grand jury decides there isn't probable cause to proceed with a criminal trial, and the case is dropped
This is really only related to abortion if the fact that live premature infants are human beings who merit any kind of consideration or protection...is a threat to abortion.
I mean what's the argument here? If society says we shouldn't leave live babies drowning in toilets, is that "criminalizing pregnancy outcomes"?
Sitting in on the Quitters panel at the National Pro-Life Summit. Panelists include @TheRealMayraRdz, Kara Germon, Caroline Strzesynski, and Lupita Aguilar.
Mayra is the former Planned Parenthood director from Arizona. She blew the whistle on deficiencies at the center and was let go. She subsequently won a lawsuit for wrongful termination of whistle blowers.
Kara is also a former Planned Parenthood employee from Connecticut. She's now a director of a CareNet pregnancy center.
In January, we attended the March for Life, where we spoke at the Rehumanize meetup and networked at the National Pro-Life Summit. Later that same month we endorsed the Post-Roe Future vision statement, and Kelsey spoke on a panel at St. Thomas University School of Law.
In February, Monica was published in Narrative Inquiry in Bioethics & spoke on Support After Abortion’s webinar “Meeting Clients Across Different Belief Systems.” We joined a broad coalition for #StopAbortionRX, protesting CVS and Walgreens for their plans to sell abortion drugs.
First, we don't even call for the investigation of every woman who aborts, much less every woman who miscarries. In general pro-lifers want to ban abortion, but not criminalize women seeking abortions. I touched on some reasons for that in this vid: 2/tiktok.com/@secular_pro_l…
Second, we'd know in advance these investigations would involve harassing and potentially re-traumatizing hundreds of thousands of parents at the very moment they are going through the emotional crises of losing their children through miscarriage. 3/
Pro-choice and pro-life people view abortion in cases of fetal anomaly very differently. Here are some of the major points of disagreement (speaking generally, of course there will always be exceptions). 🧵
Pro-choicers often don’t view fetuses as people or children, but as *potential* people. Pro-lifers view fetuses as people and children *right now.*
Pro-choicers generally view abortion for fetal anomaly as a kind of euthanasia and a mercy to prevent future suffering. Pro-lifers view it as choosing to kill children because they have certain disabilities.