To fight a Texas bill banning one type of abortion, abortionists have been forced to admit the dangers of late-term abortion.
Yesterday, Operation Rescue reported that infamous late-term abortionist Curtis Boyd is joining other Texas abortionists, reportedly “including Planned Parenthood, Whole Women’s Health, and others” in challenging Senate Bill 8, which seeks to ban dismemberment abortion — otherwise known as a D&E, or dilation and evacuation, commonly used in second-trimester abortion procedures.
However, it appears that Boyd and his colleagues have determined that in order to fight against this Senate bill, they must uncharacteristically explain just how dangerous late-term abortions are when compared to abortions committed before 18-20 weeks gestation. Boyd owns Southwestern Women’s Options (which has facilities in New Mexico and Texas), whose staff has been recorded expressing willingness to abort a child at 30 weeks because of the mother’s “stress,” and recorded offering to abort a 37-week-old preborn baby for $17,000 — so Boyd is very familiar with late-term abortions.
The arguments made by the abortionists… against this multi-day [late-term induction abortion] process… make it clear that the risks associated with killing the baby prior to dismemberment is so bad for women that the only real option is to continue dismembering living children in order to protect the “patients’ right to bodily integrity.”
It never occurs to them that perhaps they should simply not kill the baby.
The dismemberment abortion procedure (D&E), is typically done between 13 and 24 weeks gestation, and is explained below by former abortionist, Dr. Anthony Levatino (who, according to Texas Right to Life, explained this procedure before the court in this case):
These children in utero are still alive when this procedure takes place, and according to recent research, may have the ability to feel pain starting at eight weeks gestation. In other words, abortion is not a humane act. A D&E “dismemberment abortion” does exactly what it sounds like: tears a growing human child limb from limb in his mother’s womb.
According to court documents, the abortionists opposing the dismemberment bill admit that “[i]nduction abortions can last from five hours to three days; are extremely expensive; entail more pain, discomfort, and recovery time for the patient than a standard D&E procedure; and are medically contraindicated for some patients.”
Those opposing the bill also admit in these documents that use of the heart drug Digoxin in a late-term induction abortion is an off-label use of that drug, stating that “causing fetal demise by the State’s suggestion of injections of either digoxin or potassium chloride, neither of which is labeled for that purpose, would violate Texas law prohibiting off-label prescription of an abortion-inducing drug,” along with the assertion that these injections are not “safe, studied, or medically appropriate,” and that they would “impose risks with no medical benefit to the patient” because they are “untested, ha[ve] unknown risks, and [are] of uncertain efficacy.” OR explains that such an injection may not work the first time, requiring a second, which increases the woman’s chance of an infection or early delivery (prior to arrival at the abortion facility).
Women’s health is, however, likely a smokescreen for the abortionists’ real motive in telling the world of the dangers of late-term abortion. Operation Rescue points out that in Texas, a late-term induction abortion must be done in a hospital setting, meaning an abortion facility could not profit from it, and many abortionists are unable to obtain hospital privileges. “That means,” says OR, “if the dismemberment provision was allowed to stand, abortionists in Texas would practically be prevented from conducting any second trimester abortions.”
According to an email from Texas Right to Life, Judge Lee Yeakel issued a temporary restraining order on the bill; however, Yeakel is reportedly “not expected to have the final ruling on this landmark case.” Texas RTL adds that “Yeakel’s anti-Life rulings are routinely appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals where Pro-Life legislation typically receives a fair assessment” and says the judge’s final ruling is expected on or before November 22, “when the temporary restraining order on the… law expires.”