Recently, Liberty Counsel had the privilege of helping save a life when a pregnant Florida teenager narrowly escaped a coerced abortion after Liberty Counsel intervened on her behalf. Today, she is holding a healthy baby girl in her arms because someone answered her plea for help before it was too late.

According to information provided to Liberty Counsel, the teen girl’s flights, hotels, and Lyft rides for the out-of-state abortion were being funded by the Chicago Abortion Fund (CAF), even after she told CAF’s Florida partner she was being forced into an abortion against her will by a family member.

The clinic even tried to hide her ultrasound photos to prevent her from seeing her own baby, and travel arrangements were made to take her hundreds of miles from Florida to Illinois for the abortion.

With only days remaining before the scheduled abortion, her teenage boyfriend reached out to Liberty Counsel for help on a Friday afternoon in November 2025. Liberty Counsel immediately worked alongside the Florida Office of Attorney General to intervene.

Within 24 hours, a demand letter informed the family that coercing a woman into an abortion is illegal in every state and reminded them that the expectant mother’s legal rights regarding her unborn child could not simply be overridden by other relatives.

The intervention worked. A family member soon provided a screenshot showing that the travel arrangements to Illinois — which would have amounted to forced abortion trafficking — had been canceled.

Shortly before the Fourth of July, the reason that intervention mattered became beautifully clear when the teenager gave birth to a healthy baby girl weighing nearly eight pounds.

Her story reminds us that timely intervention can change the course of a life — and even save a life. It also reminds us how many lives depend upon someone being willing to step into a crisis before it is too late.

READ: <a href="/news/abortions-dirty-little-secret-women-dont-choose">Abortion’s dirty little secret: Women don’t always choose</a>

Because this young mother chose life, more lives have been saved.

Liberty Counsel recently received another urgent call on a Saturday morning after a pro-life organization had heard about the Florida teenager who saved her baby through legal intervention. By the time Liberty Counsel became involved in this case, the young mom was reportedly already in an Uber on her way to the abortion facility against her will.

A Liberty Counsel attorney quickly sent her information about the Florida case and urged her not to go inside. When the adult accompanying her nevertheless forced her to enter the facility, Liberty Counsel intervened and warned Planned Parenthood that legal action would follow if it proceeded with an abortion against the girl’s wishes.

As a result, her baby was saved.

Then, just two days later, Liberty Counsel learned of yet another situation involving another baby at risk. Those involved had also heard about the Florida case and knew there was somewhere they could turn for help. Once again, swift legal intervention helped save this third baby’s life.

What began with one frightened teenager asking for help last fall has now helped protect three children. That ripple effect demonstrates why information, compassion, and action matter so deeply.

The little girl born this summer won’t remember the events that unfolded before she entered the world. She may never fully comprehend how close she came to never taking her first breath. Yet her life already has a remarkable legacy. Because she was saved, her story was told. Because her story was told, others knew where to turn, and two more children were spared from abortion.

In these cases, life won. While these are beautiful stories, they are also uncommon. This is precisely why we cannot remain silent.

Every person who shares the truth, supports a woman in crisis, equips a church, serves at a pregnancy resource center, provides legal assistance, or simply recognizes the signs of coercion can become part of protecting another mother and child.

Do you know of any expectant mothers in similar situations? Reach out to LC.org/legal-help for lifesaving legal intervention. What happened to these three babies shows just how much can change when someone is willing to step in and stand for life.

Key Takeaways:

• California is one of the most pro-abortion states in the country, and the Planned Parenthood facility in was in the state capital, Sacramento.

• Kenneth, a pro-life sidewalk counselor who ministers to abortion-minded women and Planned Parenthood employees, was the focus of the video.

• Though Kenneth said he and his group are able to save some lives, they also face regular harassment and threats of violence.

The Details:

Kenneth said has saved hundreds of lives from abortion, and stays in California because it's where he can make the biggest difference.

"They're killing babies here, they're perverting children, and so there's not a better place to be to try to reach the lost and to love your neighbor," Kenneth said. "We're seeing well over 100 babies saved every year. We're seeing babies saved every single week."

Thursday is the usual day that surgical abortions are reportedly committed at the facility, potentially as far along as 26 weeks. Kenneth attempted to minister to abortion-minded women with a loudspeaker that allows his words to be heard even inside the building.

" I had one young lady, she got up off the operation table and came out," Kenneth recalled. "She said that she could hear us all the way in the back room [while her abortion] was happening. She was just about to go through with it, and then she came out. She knew it was wrong, and then she could still hear us. And she's thinking about her baby. And that's how we got her up off the operation table."

Zoom In:

While some of the interactions were civil, others were hostile, aggressive, and borderline violent.

Two women approached Kenneth and not only verbally attacked him, but attacked his wife and children as well, who were present, saying of his children "Your wife should have killed them."

From there, the two women spoke directly to the children, repeatedly swore, and began circling Kenneth's wife and children, making the pro-life group fear for their safety.

Another man got angry and began screaming at Kenneth, even threatening to fight him, though he ultimately didn't. However, the man had a friend approach the facility on a bicycle, carrying a lead pipe in his pocket.

The Bottom Line:

Kenneth said that overturning Roe v. Wade wasn't enough to fight abortion.

"If we're going to say that America is a nation that's under God and it's a Christian nation, then the laws of this land should respect the Christian language, which says that a person is a human being and a human being is a person," he said. "So it doesn't matter what stage of development they are, you cannot murder them. The child inside of them deserves personhood rights."

Notably, he never stepped foot inside an abortion clinic. He never witnessed a woman seeking an abortion. Rather, his daily reality consisted of lines of code, browser compatibility issues, and user experience—until a profound spiritual awakening jolted him out of his complacency and set him on a path from corporate comfort in a pro-abortion setting to a pro-family and pro-life Catholic mission. 

Presently the founder of Traditio Designs, a Catholic enterprise creating sacred art and sacramentals to evangelize through beauty, his journey stands as a poignant testament that even those embedded deep within the abortion industry can experience true conversion—and that God is able to draw radiant light from the darkest places in ways beyond our imagining. 

“I had no idea what Planned Parenthood did."

In 2001, Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) hired Lorens for an IT role as a web developer. He had a degree in biology and had initially planned to become a doctor, even working as a medic and nurse in the US Army before college. Yet he discovered that his drive for programming and artistic work ran deeper, and the PPFA position allowed him to pursue the craft he loved while supporting his growing family. 

“I had no idea what exactly Planned Parenthood did or was involved in,” Lorens recounted to Live Action News. “My focus was on starting a family and being able to provide for it while doing the work I loved.”

In those early years of web development, the work was dominated by technical hurdles — ensuring sites functioned across browsers, optimizing user experience, and solving compatibility problems. His responsibility was to construct and maintain working websites, not to scrutinize the messages they carried. 

“I was not concerned with the content of the pages I was programming but with their functionality,” he remarked. “PPFA had editors for the text content and when I received any text that needed to be uploaded to a site, I would simply copy and paste it without paying too much attention to what was written.”

Lorens became a father to two children during his employment by Planned Parenthood, and he obtained three months of fully paid parental leave each time — a staff perk he pointed out was rare in the corporate world then, and even at the moment. 

Insulated from the horrors of abortion 

Based at the corporate headquarters of Planned Parenthood, Lorens remained insulated from the stark realities unfolding inside abortion clinics. 

“I have never seen a single potential mother who was seeking help or decided to abort her baby,” he admitted. “My work always came down to looking at thousands of lines of code on a screen.”

It was several years before he genuinely noticed the material he was helping to advance.

When a graphic designer at Planned Parenthood took maternity leave, he was tasked to fill the role and realized that Planned Parenthood was promoting contraception visuals, condom promotions aimed at teenagers, and the wider messaging of Teen Wire, a site crafted to attract young users with bright animations and playful graphics that presented contraception, masturbation, and LGBTQ ideology as normal, even desirable. 

“Looking back, I have to say that I was not paying enough attention to the abortion portion of PPFA’s mission,” he acknowledged. “And when I realized that abortion was a big part of the services they provided to women, I tried to justify to myself that that is only a part of what they do. They also do things like breast cancer testing and things that are good for women.”

As a Catholic who never supported abortion personally, he originally tried to persuade himself he  was not part of that portion of Planned Parenthood. “I also thought to myself, what difference would it make if I left this job? They would just hire someone else to take care of their websites.”

A conversion that changed everything

Lorens described himself as having been a “Catholic guy” but not an “authentic Catholic.” He attended Mass, but his faith was nominal.

That changed about two years before he left PPFA, when he experienced what he calls a profound conversion. “I saw my soul and heard, clear as day, that if I do not change my life, I will go to Hell,” he conceded. “This experience was very real.”

In the aftermath, he began to overcome a pornography addiction and started praying the daily Rosary — something he had never done before. He wanted to quit his job, but it wasn’t easy. “I needed a catalyst, and eventually it came.”

During this time, Planned Parenthood shifted its headquarters to a new location in Manhattan — directly across the street from the Catholic Church of St. Michael. Lorens began attending daily Mass in a small side chapel during lunch. “The tranquility of this church in the midst of a busy New York corporate life certainly helped me meditate on my life,” he revealed.

The cost of leaving

It took about two years from his first strong inclination to leave Planned Parenthood until he finally did so in 2011. The biggest obstacle for his departure was actually financial security instead of moral doubt.

“We lived in an expensive neighborhood, both making six-figure incomes, and losing that had me very worried,” he disclosed. “I did not know how long it would take me to find a new job, and even if I did, I did not know if it would pay enough to keep our status.”

The catalyst for his resignation came when Planned Parenthood denied his application for leave. “I finally told them that I am quitting. The real reason I quit was abortion, but at the time they did not know that,” Lorens divulged. 

Upon leaving Planned Parenthood, he did not secure new employment immediately. Instead, he commenced freelancing work while continuing his job search and, within a few months, accepted a role that offered higher pay than PPFA—though it came with a lengthier commute. To reclaim some of that lost time, he took up motorcycling. 

“I think I was the only biker praying the Rosary while riding,” he said with a laugh. “Praying the Rosary on a motorcycle while riding at 70 to 80 MPH is not easy. I had to do it with my fingers while holding the steering and navigating between cars. God always protected me.”

From slot machines to sacred art

After leaving Planned Parenthood, Lorens worked for two other companies before moving fully into sacred art. One of those roles was the web production and website maintenance and updates for a company that developed slot machine games.  

“While gambling is not as bad as abortion, I quickly realized that it is just as bad for the soul,” he told Live Action News. “I think I realized that no matter where we go or who we work for, there is almost always something wrong with every company to some degree.”

That clarity led him to start his own business. “I wanted to work for God and help advance His kingdom on earth. I realized that this is not something I can ever achieve working for someone else,” he commented. 

In 2018, Traditio Designs was born. Today, it offers the largest selection of Catholic holy cards in the world — over 1,000 unique designs. 

“Almost all the items I create are handcrafted and designed in my studio. I spend thousands of hours on research, and I take church tradition and the Bible very seriously,” Lorens said. 

A house fire and a new mission

In 2017, a devastating house fire destroyed almost everything Lorens and his family owned. At the time, he was working on an image of St. Uriel, the archangel whose name means “fire of God.” 

He saw the fire as a sign — a call to depend totally on God’s providence.

“We literally lost everything we owned in a matter of two to three hours. I was standing outside on a cold December day, not long before Christmas, watching my life go up in flames,” he recalled. “I do not regret what happened, because I already understand very well that every day we live could be our last.”

After the fire, the family moved into temporary housing while they grappled with insurance and rebuilt their home. Lorens began his business as a Catholic artist, going from a six-figure income to making just $400 in his first month.

“Being on both sides of the fence gives you a certain perspective. You realize that money is not everything, and you accept what God provides without asking any questions. In reality God has never, ever let me down. He always provides; we just need to learn how to trust Him.”

Today, his business provides holy cards, board games, medals, and other items.

His Catholic board games, including The Holy Quest, were inspired by his grandfather, who survived Auschwitz and was there with St. Maximilian Kolbe. “I thought to myself, now that I have created images of hundreds of saints, it would be great to make a Catholic game where children can be those saints in the game.”

“This is a 180-degree shift for me,” he said. “Creating Catholic board games does the exact opposite of what Planned Parenthood was doing with Teen Wire.”

Lorens' work is rooted in traditional Catholic imagery—statues, stained glass, and long-forgotten prayers. He chose to highlight Catholic Tradition because he believes real beauty brings people closer to God.

Lorens and his wife are also full-time caregivers for their son Michael, who lives with cerebral palsy and is unable to walk or hear. Through this daily act of love, his appreciation for the sacred worth of every human life has grown immensely deeper. 

“I am greatly honored that God chose me to be his father and allowed me to care for a saint. Most of us have never met a real saint — I have been living with one for the past 17 years,” Lorens said of his son.

Trusting God

For anyone currently employed at Planned Parenthood or a similar pro-abortion organization who feels a tug on their conscience, Lorens urges them to “Leave right away and put your entire trust in God. It may not be easy at first, but putting your trust in God means you are all in and you never look back.”

Looking back, Lorens sees God’s hand even in his time at Planned Parenthood. “If I never worked there and did not have my conversion, maybe I would not have had the understanding I have today. God works in mysterious ways. Maybe for me it was necessary to be exposed to that industry from the inside in order to do the work I do now.”

His message to pro-life supporters is simple: “Continue to fight the good fight. Do not give up or stop what you’re doing. Continue to reach out to those involved in the abortion industry, point them to stories like mine and assure people that there is an alternative, there is a God.”

Key Takeaways:

• Justus Kelley competed in the 2026 Miss USA pageant representing the state of Virginia.

• She was crowned Miss USA, the first ever mother to win the title.

• Kelley is also the first married woman to be named Miss USA (the rules were changed in 2023), as well as the first woman in her 30s.

The Details:

Miss USA held its 75th annual pageant last Thursday night, and Justus Kelley, representing Virginia, was crowned the winner. Miss Florida and Miss Pennsylvania were first and second runners up.

Kelley's win was historic: she is the first married woman, the first mother, and the first woman in her 30s to be crowned Miss USA.

In 2023, Miss USA removed the age cap requirement and also allowed married women, divorced women, and mothers to compete in the pageant.

Kelley is a foster mother and founder of Foster Footprints, a non-profit organization with the goal of supporting foster children and families in Virginia. When she arrived for the pageant, she intentionally used trash bags as her luggage to send a message of awareness.

"Heading to Miami for the 75th @MissUSA with the very type of bag I’ve seen children in foster care transition into my own home carrying," she wrote. "The trash bags I carry reflect a reality far too many foster children know all too well. A trash bag should never be a child’s suitcase. Every foster child deserves to carry their belongings with dignity — And I need you to help me make that possible. What is going to Miss USA, if not for raising awareness of issues that matter?"

Kelley has remained dedicated to proving that women can have families and still pursue their careers and dreams.

"I am all of those things; we can be all of those things," she previously said of her roles in business and as a married woman. "At a time where women have felt they had to choose between family and career and their wildest dreams, I'm here to send a message that we can be all of those things."

What Happened:

It's a message she reiterated during the interview portion of the Miss USA pageant. When asked what she hopes her year as Miss USA would tell women, she said:

"We are here tonight celebrating the 75th anniversary of Miss USA, but we also have an opportunity to make history tonight. I'm 31 years old, I'm married to my college sweetheart of nine years, and we are proud foster parents of two adorable siblings that absolutely have my heart.

What my year as Miss USA would mean and look like is no longer questioning if we have to choose between our ambitious careers, our families, and our wildest dreams. I'm standing on this stage embracing every part of who I am, and I believe that I can be your next Miss USA."

It's a message that resonated with the judges, as Kelley was crowned Miss USA 2026, and will compete in the Miss Universe pageant representing the United States.

"I'm Justus Kelley, and I just won Miss USA 2026!" she said after the pageant. "This opportunity means the world to me. Not only are we celebrating the 75th anniversary, but we made history tonight! The first married woman, the first mom, and first woman in her 30s! It's a great night."

The Bottom Line:

As Kelley said, women do not have to choose between being wives and mothers, and chasing their dreams.

Key Takeaways:

• Despite the fact that the manufacturers of the abortion pill are obligated to ensure that the FDA's safety rules are followed by prescribers of the drug and pharmacies dispensing the drug, it appears the manufacturers are sending mixed messages about whether or not they actually have this responsibility.

• It appears that when the rules are broken by prescribers, virtually no one is decertified, and that it is left to the non-compliant prescribers to report themselves for de-certification. In other words, no one is holding prescribers who break the FDA's safety rules accountable.

• The investigation and report revealed that in Danco's decades of operation as a sponsor under the FDA's safety rules, "[t]o date, no healthcare providers have been decertified from the REMS, and two pharmacies were decertified during the REMS assessment period of October 1, 2024 to September 30, 2025."

• Manufacturer GenBioPro reported that it also "has not had cause to decertify any certified prescriber or certified pharmacy since the launch of GBP’s generic mifepristone in 2019.

• Despite this, these drug manufacturers actually link to non-compliant prescribers on their own websites.

• Groups like AbortionFinder, Planned Parenthood, and Carafem are all publicly and openly flouting the FDA's rules and prescribing/dispensing outside these boundaries, yet they have never been decertified. These violations including prescribing to women "just in case" (without a confirmed pregnancy), advertising and prescribing mifepristone past the FDA-approved gestational age of 10 weeks, and more.

The Details:

'Mifepristone Without Guardrails'

The August 2026 report, led by Senator Bill Cassidy for the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, states that the Committee's investigation found "a consistent pattern of a lack of transparency regarding the operations of mifepristone sponsors," raising "critical questions about the effectiveness of their oversight of the supply chain for their drugs and prescribers to ensure compliance with REMS [Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy] requirements."

Despite the fact that the manufacturers of the drug are obligated to ensure that the rules are followed, it appears they have washed their hands of any involvement. In other words, no one is ensuring that the safety rules are being followed — and if rules are broken, no one is being decertified:

Under the current Mifepristone REMS Program, the mifepristone sponsors have the responsibility of ensuring REMS requirements are being complied with.

Yet that responsibility, by the sponsors’ telling, only extends as far as overseeing distributor and pharmacy behavior and simply making sure certification forms are submitted.

Given that these oversight requirements do not extend to the mifepristone prescribing patterns of certified prescribers, the lack of guardrails ensuring a sufficient provider-patient relationship creates accountability gaps for a product that carries risks of significant adverse health outcomes.

That not a single prescriber has been decertified in the entire history of the Mifepristone REMS Program solidifies this point.

Manufacturers required to de-certify non-compliant prescribers

The REMS safety rules for mifepristone (200mg)/Mifeprex were put in place in 2011, more than a decade after the abortion pill was originally approved by the FDA in 2000 and after multiple women had died in association with use of the abortion pill regimen.

The most recently published REMS for mifepristone is dated September 2025.

Sponsors (manufacturers) of the drug include Danco Laboratories, GenBioPro (GBP), and Evita Solutions, LLC. As Live Action News previously detailed, these businesses are tasked with training, certifying, and decertifying prescribers who are out of compliance with the REMS.

Mifepristone sponsors must:

Ensure that healthcare providers who prescribe their mifepristone are specially certified in accordance with the requirements…and de-certify healthcare providers who do not maintain compliance with certification requirements. 

Prescribers must agree to follow guidelines for use

Prescribers are approved and certified to dispense the abortion pill by one (or more) of the three U.S. sponsors (manufacturers) of the drug.

The REMS safety requirements for mifepristone state (emphasis added):

By signing a Prescriber Agreement Form, prescribers agree they have ability to:

a) assess the duration of pregnancy accurately

b) diagnose ectopic pregnancies

c) provide surgical intervention in cases of incomplete abortion or severe bleeding, or to have made plans to provide such care through others, and ability to assure patient access to medical facilities equipped to provide blood transfusions and resuscitation, if necessary

They must also agree that "they will follow the guidelines for use of mifepristone."

Pharmacy certification is a separate process and is also policed by the drug's sponsors.

According to the report:

• Danco has certified 5,250 prescribers and 5,297 pharmacies.

• GBP has certified 2,950 prescribers and 127 pharmacies.

• Evita has certified zero prescribers and only two pharmacies.

Report reiterates decertifying non-compliant prescribers

In his press release, Senator Cassidy pointed out how abortion pill sponsors told the Committee they have no role in policing the prescribers of the drug, contradicting the FDA's REMS agreement (emphasis added):

In the course of the investigation, Danco and GenBioPro told the Committee that they have no role in ensuring that doctors and other health care providers who prescribe chemical abortion drugs maintain compliance with the FDA requirements, implying that the onus is on the prescribers to police themselves. 

Given the lack of oversight, there are concerns that these sponsors are disregarding the safety risks of chemical abortions and either overtly or tacitly allowing their products to be sold to bad actors who seek to exploit women for profit.

And yet, contrary to what the Committee was verbally told in a hearing, a letter from Danco later acknowledged that it "is obligated to decertify healthcare providers who do not maintain compliance with the REMS certification requirements" and "is required to report to FDA any instances of prescriber decertification, including the reasons for decertification, and must alert its distributors not to ship to decertified prescribers."

In follow-up, Danco wrote:

"Danco does not automatically decertify prescribers in states where abortion is severely restricted by state law... In accordance with its REMS obligations as approved by FDA, Danco will decertify a prescriber if Danco becomes aware, and agrees, that the healthcare provider has failed to maintain compliance with the certification requirements for prescribing Mifeprex...

To date, no healthcare providers have been decertified from the REMS, and two pharmacies were decertified during the REMS assessment period of October 1, 2024 to September 30, 2025."

GenBioPro likewise wrote, "GBP has not had cause to decertify any certified prescriber or certified pharmacy since the launch of GBP’s generic mifepristone in 2019." It added:

GBP complies with its obligations under the REMS. If an actual or suspected instance of prescriber non-compliance were brought to GBP’s attention, GBP would investigate and respond appropriately, including by decertifying the prescriber if the prescriber will not comply with the REMS certification requirements.

The August 2026 report made it clear that sponsors of the drug are to not only police but decertify non-compliant prescribers and pharmacies. Yet, while manufacturers acknowledged to decertifying some pharmacies, they have never decertified any prescribers:

The REMS requires mifepristone sponsors to decertify health care providers and pharmacies that “do not maintain compliance with certification requirements.”

Danco has decertified two pharmacies, both between October 2024 and September 2025—the authorized representative for one pharmacy did not participate in a required audit and requested decertification, and the other pharmacy was determined to be an in-patient facility whose activities should be conducted under an individual prescriber certification and not a pharmacy certification, so that account was put on hold until the Prescriber Agreement Form was completed and received.

GBP has never decertified any pharmacies. GBP further stated that all instances of pharmacy noncompliance found through audits were able to be resolved through corrective actions.

Zero Prescribers Have Been Decertified

The report points out:

Notably, Danco and GBP both reported that neither has ever decertified a certified prescriber. GBP further stated that it has never identified any certified prescriber noncompliance with the REMS certification requirements.

Danco did not address whether it has ever identified any certified prescriber noncompliance with the REMS.

If GBP has never observed any noncompliance with the REMS requirements among its thousands of certified prescribers, this may indicate a lack of visibility into the prescribing patterns of certified prescribers to verify compliance. 

Authors of the report acknowledged:

"[I]t is no wonder that Danco has never decertified a single prescriber when it claims to never take steps to confirm that the prescribers are actually meeting the requirements they attest to."

The report noted that "GBP, similarly to Danco, refused to provide any information as to how it monitors prescribers and ensures the attestations made in the Prescriber Agreement Form are correct and complied with on an ongoing basis," adding that, "like Danco, GBP has never decertified a single prescriber in over seven years of having its drug on the market" (emphasis added).

Reality Check:

It strains credulity that when prescribers of the abortion pill are openly, publicly flouting REMS safety rules that the manufacturers somehow aren't aware of this... especially when the manufacturers' websites link directly to these prescribers in many cases.

Groups are openly and publicly flouting the requirements

Live Action News has previously documented that abortion drug companies themselves (Danco, GenBioPro, and Evita Solutions) are linking to websites that advertise abortions past the FDA-approved 10-week gestational limits under REMS, and which are, in some instances, failing to confirm pregnancy before prescribing the drug, among other unaccountable violations.

A few examples:

➡ AbortionFinder.org: "[S]ome [prescribers] will offer it through around 14 weeks of pregnancy ..."

➡ Planned Parenthood: Advertises the abortion pill past approved gestational limits: "In general, you can have a medication abortion up to 84 days (12 weeks) after the first day of your last period.” 

PP separately acknowledges that "The abortion pill... works less well when you’re more than 8 weeks pregnant.... After 12 weeks, there’s a bigger chance of stronger bleeding or cramps."

A news release announced one affiliate's launch of Just In Case Abortion Pills so women can "have them on hand if and when they need them." And this PP affiliate isn't alone (emphasis added):

"PPGNHAIK joins a growing number of sexual and reproductive health care providers offering this model of care."

Planned Parenthood’s general “abortion services” website page reiterates this: “Some Planned Parenthood health centers offer abortion pills before you’re pregnant — just in case you need them.”

➡ Carafem: A study site for abortion pill clinical trials, advertises “missed period pills” as “FDA-approved abortion medications..."

On a separate webpage, it claims, “Missed period pills are safe, evidence-based care." Yet, the drug has never been approved as a "missed period pill." 

Also mentioned in the report was a video posted by Dr. Christina Francis of the American Association of Pro-Life OBGYNs (AAPLOG), showing potential REMS violations. The HELP Committee noted that the video "demonstrates how multiple REMS requirements were likely violated by Aid Access’s participating prescribers."

While the report claimed, "Aid Access itself is not a certified prescriber," it suggested the group's doctors could be, because "the mifepristone that Dr. Francis received... from Aid Access was GBP’s generic mifepristone product."

The report stated (emphases added):

Aid Access’s prescribing and dispensing process raised a number of red flags....

If... the prescriber was not certified, the prescribing and dispensing of GBP’s mifepristone would themselves be violations of the REMS because the drug was accessed outside certified channels.

If this is the case, it indicates either that GBP does not have adequate insight into the supply chain and prescribing of its drug or, perhaps even more concerningly, that it may be aware of these types of arrangements and complicit in them...

...While this is just one example, it shows that prescribers, especially online-only prescribers, may not always comply with the REMS requirements they agreed to when signing the Prescriber Agreement Form.

... It is highly likely that Danco and GBP are aware of the existence of these types of websites, but do not conduct oversight into whether these websites operate outside of the certified prescriber process or, if they do rely on certified prescribers, if those individuals are actually complying with the requirements of the REMS and Prescriber Agreement Form.

Giving Women a 'False Sense of Security'

The report noted (emphases added):

These findings together demonstrate that once a prescriber submits a Prescriber Agreement Form to a mifepristone sponsor, instances of noncompliance with REMS requirements (beyond completion of required paperwork) are unlikely to be identified unless the prescriber self-reports the violation.

The fact that no prescriber has ever been decertified underscores this point further.

The report added that the way Aid Access and other sites present themselves as "FDA approved" is misleading, and "provides a false sense of security to patients and denies them the protections mandated by the REMS to ensure the drug is being prescribed in a way that minimizes the risk of adverse events" (emphasis added).

Not the Only Ones to Blame

Interestingly, the report didn't just lay blame on the manufacturers -- it called out the FDA, stating, "It is also an indictment of FDA that the agency would continuously approve a REMS that did not require any sort of oversight into the prescribers, given the well documented history of mifepristone marketing and access in violation of the REMS."

Dr. Hackney is not a disinterested observer. He is a very vocal supporter of abortion rights.

In 2022 he testified against the Ohio Heartbeat Act, and in 2023 he supported Ohio’s Issue 1 which placed legal abortion in Ohio’s state constitution. In 2019, Dr. Hackney also wrote an editorial for the Columbus Dispatch in favor of legal abortion.

In his StatNews editorial Hackney clearly states “many of the worst predictions have not come to pass.” He goes on to say that “a net increase in maternal morality has not been clearly identified.”

He is correct. Multiple analyses of maternal mortality rate trends find no statistically significant difference between pro-life states and states with permissive abortion policies. Hackney also agrees that relatively few practicing OBGYNs have left states with strong pro-life laws, saying, “The nationwide exodus that was feared has not occurred.”

Hackney does claim that pro-life laws have increased the incidence of infant mortality. However, several points are worth noting.

• First, overall infant mortality rates have declined since the first quarter of 2023.

• Second, some studies have found decreases in maternal mortality in states with pro-life laws.

• Finally, those studies that have found an increase in infant mortality report an increase in congenital deaths.

In short, the pro-life laws are preventing children with congenital defects from being aborted.

All in all, the public health trends that have persisted after the Dobbs decision are unsurprising.

Many developed countries with legal protections for the preborn have also had positive public health outcomes. Poland consistently has one of the lowest, if not the lowest, maternal mortality rate in Europe. When Ireland protected the preborn, that country consistently had better maternal health outcomes that [sic] England, Wales, and Scotland. Chile also saw a decline in maternal mortality after pro-life laws took effect in 1989.

Hackney encourages supporters of legal abortion to make arguments rooted in autonomy and human freedom. This is puzzling advice.

Typically, supporters of legal abortion like to present arguments involving public health outcomes. This is because they can easily get studies published in public health journals with a pro-abortion bias. The findings from these articles are often uncritically reported by the mainstream media. Furthermore, pro-lifers get little chance to respond.

Overall, even though Hackney’s advice is unsavvy, it is heartening to see a supporter of legal abortion publicly acknowledge that pro-life laws have not worsened certain public health outcomes.

Key Takeaways:

• Singapore Prime Minister Lawrence Wong announced a new financial program to support families and encourage births.

• The program will give S$70,000 (US $55,153) for each child 17 or younger along with increased paid child care leave and a reduction in monthly fees for subsidized day care.

• The move comes as the country experiences a plummeting birth rate of just 0.87 births per woman, far below the 2.1 replacement rate.

The Details:

Prime Minister Wong announced the new program during his recent National Day Rally Speech. The initiative will provide a total of S$70,000 (US $55,153) for each child through age 17, along with increased paid child care leave and a reduction in monthly fees for subsidized day care.

“Today, families everywhere are under growing pressure," Wong said. "We want to make a fundamental shift in how we support families.”

Additionally, families with children will be given preference when applying for their first subsidized public housing, which Bloomberg reports is "a key avenue for home ownership for most citizens."

“What we can do is make it easier for Singaporeans who want children to start and raise a family, and we want every family to know: If you choose to have children, the government will stand with you,” Wong stated.

Zoom In:

Like many other places around the world, Singapore has experienced a plummeting birth rate.

Last year, the rate was a record low 0.87 births per woman — far below the replacement level of 2.1. This translated to 27,500 resident births. Additionally, the nation is poised to become a "super-aged" society, as one-fifth of its population will soon be over age 65.

Because of this plummeting rate, the government indicated earlier this year that it will make family and marriage a priority. In April, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office, Indranee Rajah, was tasked with leading a Marriage and Parenthood Reset Workgroup to boost marriage and births in the country. Rajah said that a "marriage and parenthood reset" is needed to combat the falling population.

The Bottom Line:

In his address, Wong indicated that while he hopes the financial package helps incentivize people to have children, he expects it may not be enough to reverse the downward trend, and the country will also encourage immigration “at a measured and steady pace.”

Key Takeaways:

• Earlier this month, District Court Judge B. Lynn Winmill ruled that the 14th Amendment's Due Process and Equal Protection clauses allow for abortion in cases that threaten a woman's "life or health."

• Under the ruling, a woman could undergo an abortion if her "life or health" is at risk, or there is a risk she might self-harm.

• Other abortions remain restricted under Idaho law.

• After a request from Attorney General Raul Labrador to either remove the block on the law entirely or restrict it solely to the Plaintiff in the case, Winmill narrowed the ruling to apply solely to the doctor who challenged the law.

The Backstory:

In 2020, following the fall of Roe v. Wade in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court ruling, the Idaho Defense of Life Act took effect.

Under the law, virtually all preborn children in the state were protected from abortion, with exceptions already included to protect the life of the mother:

The following shall not be considered criminal abortions for purposes of subsection (1) of this section:

(a)  The abortion was performed or attempted by a physician as defined in this chapter and:

(i) The physician determined, in his good faith medical judgment and based on the facts known to the physician at the time, that the abortion was necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman. No abortion shall be deemed necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman because the physician believes that the woman may or will take action to harm herself; and

(ii)  The physician performed or attempted to perform the abortion in the manner that, in his good faith medical judgment and based on the facts known to the physician at the time, provided the best opportunity for the unborn child to survive, unless, in his good faith medical judgment, termination of the pregnancy in that manner would have posed a greater risk of the death of the pregnant woman. No such greater risk shall be deemed to exist because the physician believes that the woman may or will take action to harm herself...

Additionally, the legislation states:

Medical treatment provided to a pregnant woman by a health care professional as defined in this chapter that results in the accidental death of, or unintentional injury to, the unborn child shall not be a violation of this section.

Dr. Stacy Seyb, a maternal-fetal medicine specialist at St. Luke's Health System in Boise, sued to have the law overturned, claiming it was unconstitutional.

Attorney General Raúl Labrador responded with a motion asking for the lawsuit to be dismissed.

The Idaho Supreme Court had previously ruled on the state's law in 2023, clarifying when abortion may be committed for the mother's health, and found hat there is no constitutional right to abortion in the state.

Labrador pointed out that Seyb admitted to never having read that Idaho Supreme Court decision, all while claiming to have no idea when he could or could not commit an abortion if a woman's life was at risk:

"The Idaho Supreme Court told doctors in 2023 they have broad clinical judgment to provide necessary care. Dr. Seyb did not educate himself on what Idaho law permits, which is required of every doctor in Idaho. His patients suffered from his lack of understanding, not because of our laws."

Earlier this month, Winmill ruled in Seyb's favor, striking down a narrow portion of the law. Winmill claimed that the 14th Amendment's Due Process and Equal Protection clauses support the right to an abortion "when a pregnancy threatens the woman's life or health."

“By banning health-preserving abortion, Idaho attempts to deny this fundamental right on the basis that the threat of harm comes from a fetus, which depends on the woman for survival," Winmill wrote. "But a pregnant woman’s health is not a state resource to be allocated at the legislature’s whim. The Fourteenth Amendment exists precisely to prevent subjugation like this.”

Though Winmill said it was "troubling" that other preborn lives remain protected from abortion in Idaho, the only portion of the law struck down was the portion regarding abortions deemed necessary if the mother's life or health — including mental health — is threatened.

The Details:

Labrador asked for the block on the law to be fully eliminated, and barring that, for it to apply solely to Seyb. While Winmill refused to reverse his decision, he did agree with Labrador and made it applicable solely to Seyb.

In his request, Labrador said judges cannot issue “universal injunctions” which go further than the plaintiffs in the case.

“[A]n injunction limited to Dr. Seyb will suffice to address the alleged harm," he wrote.

Labrador has, in the meantime, appealed Winmill's ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

“A federal judge has replaced Idaho’s law with his own abortion standard, broad enough to treat even the ordinary risks of a C-section as justification for an abortion,” he said in a press release, adding:

“He did so at the request of a doctor who admitted under oath he never bothered to learn what Idaho law permits, yet sent expectant mothers out of state when he could have cared for them here immediately.

Dobbs made clear that abortion policy belongs to the people and their elected state representatives, not the judiciary. We have appealed to the Ninth Circuit, and we will fight until this ruling is reversed and Idaho’s law is restored.”

The Bottom Line:

Despite Winmill's ruling, the reality is that it is not necessary to intentionally and directly kill a preborn child, while still providing interventions to protect the life of the mother.

Key Takeaways:

• The deaths of two 14-year-old teens from illegal, coerced abortions are under investigation in India.

• One case involving a girl who was repeatedly raped by her 42-year-old school headmaster, who then bribed the family to keep the rapes and pregnancy quiet. The girl's father agreed, and the girl was coerced to take a drug to end her child's life at five months gestation; the baby was stillborn, and the girl experienced complications and died.

• The second victim was in a relationship with a 19-year-old man. When the families learned of her pregnancy, they coerced her into an abortion at seven months gestation, which was reportedly committed by a midwife. The baby and the mother both died.

The Details:

Case #1

The first case involved a 14-year-old girl who was a student at a government middle school in Kishtwar, India, where her school’s headmaster repeatedly raped her for months, which resulted in the pregnancy. 

The schoolteacher reportedly sought to cover up his repeated sexual assaults by bribing the family with money, and ultimately violated his own baby’s right to life. 

The girl’s own father did not inform the police of the sexual abuse and even accompanied the abuser when seeking the abortion.

She was five months pregnant when her rapist forced her to take a drug to end the life of the baby, who was subsequently stillborn. When forced to take the fatal drug, the girl’s condition declined quickly. She was rushed to two different hospitals for care before succumbing to the complications and dying en route to the third hospital in Punjab.

The young girl hadn't even been aware of her pregnancy until two weeks before her death. 

When her parents brought her to a health facility to examine her stomach pains, she discovered she was pregnant and revealed to her parents the actions of the headmaster. 

Neither the young girl nor the baby conceived in her womb deserved the death penalty for the crime of the 42-year-old headmaster. 

Case #2

The second case involved a 14-year-old girl who was in a relationship with a 19-year-old man and living in Harraiya in northern India. 

When their families learned she was pregnant, both sides agreed that the girl should undergo an abortion of her seven-month-old preborn child. The illegal abortion was committed by a midwife who is now in police custody. 

After the abortion, the girl experienced excessive, uncontrolled bleeding — and she died. Upon hearing of the young teen's death, the 19-year-old man took poison and ended his own life.

While it is not known which procedure was used to abort the baby, dilation and evacuation, or D&E, is often used in later abortions to extract the baby from the womb body part by body part and has multiple devastating side effects to include hemorrhaging and uterine perforation. 

Another later abortion procedure is an induction abortion, typically used after 22 weeks gestation, in which a feticide injection is often administered to the preborn baby a number of days before labor is induced, resulting in stillbirth. Risks include hemorrhaging, infection, uterine rupture, and even maternal death.

The Bottom Line:

These two horrifying stories of death and coerced abortions are active investigations with police looking at the roles played by family members, medical staff, and pharmacists. 

But death for the mother or the baby is never the answer to rape, abuse, or unexpected pregnancies. 

Both girls desperately needed those around them to stand for life and protect them from injustice and abuse, as well as their preborn babies.

Key Takeaways:

• During the COVID-19 pandemic, a social media trend encouraging users to "romanticize your life" began, and continues to be popular today.

• This has spread to euthanasia, in which users portray physicians killing their patients in a gentle, attractive manner.

• The reality of euthanasia and the pain it causes is ignored.

The Details:

The "romanticize your life" trend took off on TikTok during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, encouraging users to promote the simple, routine things they do.

"It asks us to appreciate what we have right in front of us and to live with intention, no matter how mundane our daily rituals might be — a reminder to look for moments of beauty and embrace minimalism," Christina Caron wrote for the New York Times. The trend went viral, with hundreds of millions of views across tens of thousands of videos. It persists today, and has begun spreading into a far more disturbing realm: promoting euthanasia.

Nora Kenney Mitaga reported on the trend for Word on Fire, saying the videos often feature attractive content creators posing in an aesthetic environment, with a soft, sad song playing in the background.

One user, Ali Tate, documented her grandmother's assisted death. In one cheerful video, she shared a before-and-after style transformation of their last dinner together before her grandmother was killed. In another, she interviewed her grandmother about why she chose to be killed.

"It's like the light at the end of the tunnel," her grandmother said, and then explained what doctors ask her during the euthanasia process. "Your diagnosis, if it's fatal. How many more months do you have? They give you time to consider. They keep stressing the fact that you can always change your mind."

In an example of the "romanticize your life" trend, Tate lays in a bed looking beautiful and sad, as a soft, sad song plays.

Tate's videos got over 20 million views.

Another creator's video showed her seven-year-old daughter snuggling with her great-grandfather before his life was intentionally ended.

Zoom Out:

While the trend of promoting and romanticizing assisted dying on TikTok may be getting attention now, it is not first time.

La Maison Simons, a fashion retailer based in Canada, sparked international outrage after releasing a campaign called "All is Beauty," which featured the story of Jennyfer Hatch and her decision to be euthanized at the age of 37, which she called the "most beautiful exit."

The video presents a contrast between dying in a hospital (which is presented as stark, cold, and sterile) and dying via euthanasia (which is presented as beautiful and peaceful).

"Dying in a hospital is not what’s natural, that’s not what’s soft. In these kinds of moments you need softness. It can take dying to figure out what living is actually like. I spent my life filling my heart with beauty, with nature, with connection. So I choose to fill my final moments with the same," Hatch said.

“Last breaths are sacred. When I imagine my final days, I see music. I see the ocean. I see cheesecake. Even now, as I seek help to end my life, with all the pain, and in these final moments, there is still so much beauty. You just have to be brave enough to see it. And seeing the rhythms of what’s gonna keep going after I’m gone, bring a lot of comfort.”

The video closed with the caption, For Jennyfer, 1985-2022.

Hatch was not initially identified in the campaign, though she was named eventually.

Before dying, she spoke in an interview about “falling through the cracks” while struggling to get treatment for Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS), and it was seemingly for this reason that she considered 'assisted dying':

"I thought, ‘Goodness, I feel like I’m falling through the cracks so if I’m not able to access health care am I then able to access death care?’ And that’s what led me to look into medical assistance in dying (MAID) and I applied last year."

That reality makes the "All is Beauty" campaign even more dystopian and disturbing.

The Bottom Line:

Euthanasia is increasingly glorified, but the reality of what happens is overlooked and ignored. Those who choose it or advocate for it describe it as a peaceful, painless process in which a person suffering from unbearable pain gently goes to sleep, and then dies without any awareness.

The reality is far more disturbing; the drugs used in assisted suicide are the same as those used in death penalty executions and are known to cause incredible pain, only undetected by family and friends because a paralytic drug is given to the person first.

The paralytic means that even if the person is experiencing pain, they cannot show it, and will look still and serene.

According to one expert, Dr. Joel Zivot, the person may actually “end up drowning.”

A study in the medical journal Anaesthesia analyzed data and found that prolonged deaths were far from rare, with a third of patients taking 30 hours to die, while 4% took seven days to die. Additional experiments to find other methods have been painful as well, with one drug cocktail reportedly “burning patients’ mouths and throats, causing some to scream in pain."

Euthanasia is not gentle or romantic, but the murder of a human being at their most vulnerable moment.

Key Takeaways:

• In 2020, the patient — identified only as FHR — suffered a catastrophic brain injury that left him severely disabled.

• For five years, he lived under his mother's care until the Court of Protection ordered his removal to a care home in 2025.

• His mother, identified as FN, was barred from seeing him for 16 months.

• Mr. Justice McKendrick has now ruled that FHR should be deprived of nutrition and hydration until his death, which witnesses say is an indescribably horrific way for someone to die.

The Backstory:

According to the Christian Legal Centre, which is representing FN, FHR suffered a catastrophic hypoxic brain injury in 2020, leaving him in a state of "Prolonged Disorder of Consciousness." For five years, FN cared for FHR in her own home, until in 2025, the Court of Protection ordered his removal to a care home.

This was allegedly so an assessment of his neurological condition could be conducted, but FHR was never returned to his home.

Shortly after being removed from her care, FN raised concerns about the quality of care FHR was receiving, and eventually had to call for an ambulance when staff refused to act, even as she pointed out his oxygen saturation levels were dropping.

It turned out she made the right call; FHR was suffering from aspiration pneumonia.

"In four-and-a-half years at home, including in hospital settings, there was no pneumonia," FN said. "Three days of being in the care home, he’s got aspiration pneumonia."

The NHS seemingly retaliated by blocking her from being able to see him at all for 16 months.

"When I arrived to see him, I was asked to leave and told the police would be called, so I left and that was it," she said. "Since that day, I’ve not seen my son in that care home."

Zoom Out:

Some experts say this is not unusual.

Jacqui Shurlock, CEO of the Challenging Behaviour Foundation (CBF), which supports children and young adults with severe learning disabilities, told the Daily Mail:

"We just don’t know how far this extends; there’s no figures or database. But our sense is that more and more people are experiencing contact orders. There’s a definite tendency towards blaming parents when they raise concerns.

I can’t comment on this case but we know from past cases, parents who have raised legitimate complaints have had orders placed on them."

Hanna Whitehead, a lawyer who specializes in the Court of Protection, agreed, and said care homes use the orders as a way to avoid dealing with the relatives of their patients:

"It’s becoming increasingly prevalent. I’ve worked in this area for quite a while and I’ve never had so many orders come through where contact has been restricted.

It’s easier for care homes that way because they just don’t have to deal with it. As care homes are private property, they are the landlords and they do technically have the right to restrict who can enter onto the property.

I don’t want to tar them all with the same brush; there are very reasonable care homes and carers out there, and there are family members that are problematic. But you do see cases where family members have raised concerns and carers get to the point where they don’t want to deal with this person any more, so they just restrict contact."

Throughout this ordeal, FN has fought efforts to have her son declared brain dead, which would allow for him to be more hastily killed. "He experiences life. He experiences love," she said. "He can hold his head up, he can focus… He’s not a vegetable. He’s not brain dead."

The Details:

In a new press release, the Christian Legal Centre announced that Mr. Justice Kendrick has ruled that FHR is in a "vegetative state" and should be denied nutrition and hydration until his death.

In addition, Kendrick said keeping FHR alive would cause him to live in "an existence of distress." FHR, he claimed, has "such limited consciousness and communication that his life is devoid of comfort or pleasure. There is little prospect of that ever changing.”

But FN had expert testimony saying that FHR is not in a vegetative state.

Dr. Judith Allanson, an expert in neurorehabilitation and prolonged disorders of consciousness, said that not only is FHR not in any pain or distress, but that he has the potential to regain brain function.

Allanson said he smiled when his father talked to him about football, the World Cup, and his favorite team, Arsenal. She additionally said his level of consciousness could be due to heavy sedation, and that he should receive a tracheostomy and have his sedation medications reviewed before determining what his mental status might be.

But Kendrick denied the accounts from FHR's family and from Allanson, saying, “FHR’s devoted parents and sister – and the wider family – yearn for responses and reaction and of course, naturally, they must hope and pray for awareness and some form of pleasure. Love has the power to impair our objectivity. There is no reliable evidence before the court of awareness leading to joy, comfort or pleasure.”

Rehabilitation consultant Ajoy Nair said “spending more time, effort and resources, and tinkering with his medications when he has a catastrophic brain injury are meaningless." Nair recommended that Kendrick withdraw FHR's nutrition and hydration.

FN released a statement in response through her lawyers:

"I do not want to prolong my son’s life artificially, but it is unacceptable to bring about his death in the way the system has done. Even murderers and rapists do not get death sentences from the court, but my son now has it – for no other crime than being severely disabled.

All I wanted was for my kid to be allowed to live naturally and to die naturally.

The system has treated my son with unbelievable cruelty. My son was stable and happy at home, he was surrounded by love from his family, and I believe his condition was gradually improving.

The system then abducted him, locked him up, isolated him from his family, ruined his physical health, drugged him up with sedatives, and has now obtained a court order to starve him to death.

I believe that ending his life was always their agenda and the only thing standing between death and my son was the love and protection of his family – so that was brutally removed by force.

It is probably too late now to save my son, but if so, the system which has done this to him should be held to account."

The Big Picture:

Dying through the deprivation of nutrition and hydration, even with palliative care, is not a peaceful, compassionate death.

Bobby Schindler, the brother of Terri Schiavo, knows what it’s like to see a loved one killed in this manner despite a family's battle to save them. This is precisely what happened to Schiavo, who, despite a massive effort to save her, was sentenced to slowly die, deprived of food and water over a period of 13 days. Schindler described the horror of his sister’s final days:

After almost two weeks without food or water, my sister’s lips were horribly cracked, to the point where they were blistering. Her skin became jaundiced with areas that turned different shades of blue. Her skin became markedly dehydrated from the lack of water. Terri’s breathing became rapid and uncontrollable, as if she was outside sprinting.

Her moaning, at times, was raucous, which indicated to us the insufferable pain she was experiencing. Terri’s face became skeletal, with blood pooling in her deeply sunken eyes and her teeth protruding forward. Even as I write this, I can never properly describe the nightmare of having to watch my sister have to die this way.

What will be forever seared in my memory is the look of utter horror on my sister’s face when my family visited her just after she died.

The Bottom Line:

It is acceptable to remove someone from life support to allow them to die a natural death. But food and water is not life support; it is basic life-sustaining care that every human being requires to survive.

Slowly starving and dehydrating someone until they die is horrific and should never be allowed.

Karlen told Live Action News, “My husband and I decided we wanted to change her heart and offered to help her out financially. We thought our efforts were working until one night she stood us up for dinner. She later called us and tearfully told us she had the abortion.”

Karlen was expecting her first child at the time.

The woman eventually transferred to another office, but the blinders had fallen off Karlen’s eyes. She and her husband got involved with their local 40 Days for Life campaign.

“The pro-life cause became very dear to us,” Karlen said. “We even brought our baby son to the events. We were on fire for life.”

Miracles and miscarriages

For Karlen, having a baby was truly a miracle. She had been diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome and was told she wouldn’t be able to get pregnant.

Karlen reflected, “After having our son, I truly believed we’d have more children.”

While she got pregnant with another child, she woke up bleeding heavily early into the pregnancy.

“I was shocked to discover I was having a miscarriage,” Karlen said. “I was devastated. Fortunately, I was connected to a caring pro-life community that helped me get through such a challenging time.”

A funeral was arranged and a burial plot identified so the couple’s second child could have a final resting place.

Karlen noted, “At first, my in-laws said they couldn’t attend the funeral because they had to work but then decided to come. I think the funeral of their grandchild helped them face their own grief from the loss of a child before my husband was born.”

READ: <a href="/news/media-bullies-jessa-duggar-seewald-miscarriage-dc">Media bullies Jessa Duggar Seewald, claiming post-miscarriage D&C was an ‘abortion’</a>

Memorial garden

Two priests in the community collaborated to create a miscarriage memorial, “The Miracle of Life Rosary Garden,” to give parents the dignity of burying their babies.

When Karlen suffered a second miscarriage, she was urged to have a dilation and curettage (D&C) but she chose to wait until her body naturally expelled her child's remains.

She said, “I carried around a container everywhere I went until the miscarriage finally occurred a month later. I was then able to recover the remains of my baby and bury my child in the memorial garden.”

People generously made tiny caskets for these miscarried babies which helped ease the sorrow knowing every child’s life was worthy of a respectful burial, even those who never took a breath outside the womb.

“When I heard of couples suffering due to miscarriage loss, I prayed for them,” Karlen said. “I know the Lord had more to do regarding this issue.”

Karlen’s husband had received burial vessels from Heaven’s Gain, and as she drove to a friend’s home to give her the vessel, she felt the Holy Spirit convicting her to do something more systematic.

An idea began to form that would allow her to administer to families who have lost babies from miscarriages.

St. Catherine Ministry is formed 

In 2022, Karlen met with her bishop to get his blessing to offer free miscarriage kits and burial vessels to women in the diocese who experienced miscarriages. Thus, the foundation of Karlen’s charter, St. Catherine Ministry, was formed.

“So we partnered with a Catholic doctor who practiced at Our Lady of Hope clinic," she said. "He was dealing with women having miscarriages and we wanted to offer these free miscarriage kits and burial vessels to them.”

Karlen explained that women experiencing miscarriages often do not have the means to capture their babies' remains; by providing the miscarriage kits and burial vessels, it relieves them of the burden of figuring out how to do so. 

“This ministry is a huge opportunity to witness and to educate others on the devastation families go through when losing a child to miscarriage,” Karlen noted. “Essentially, this ministry grew out of my pro-life convictions.”

The St. Catherine Ministry supplies the miscarriage kits and burial vessels, along with demonstrating how to use the kits and showing women where to bury their babies’ remains. It also provides emotional support groups in partnership with Red Bird Ministries, which offers many online resources, particularly for areas across the country that don’t have local miscarriage support groups.

Karen said:

“Experiencing two miscarriages myself gave me the understanding and compassion for women who are undergoing the same challenges I experienced. I want to help them deal with the physical and emotional trauma of pregnancy loss and I want them to know the Lord is always with them, especially during times like this.”

Whenever Karlen receives a call or an online form from a woman experiencing a miscarriage, she prays with and encourages her, while explaining what the miscarriage process might look and feel like.

“I tell them when to seek medical attention but also caution that she might not necessarily need to be forced to expedite a miscarriage by taking misoprostol or by having a D&C,” Karlen said. “Most women want someone to acknowledge their loss, a simple ‘I’m sorry’ or ‘I’m praying for you,’ is appreciated.”

Miscarriage and abortion are not the same

When a woman loses her child to miscarriage, Karlen gives her a precious gift with the baby’s name engraved on it which can be hung on the wall as a remembrance.

“I’ve created different gifts because one woman may have multiple miscarriages and I want to give her a remembrance for every child she has lost,” she explained.

Karlen added that, often, the terms “abortion” and “miscarriage” are intertwined — yet the two are vastly different.

“I testified before the legislative committee at the state capital in an effort to stop conflating miscarriage with abortion,” she said. “It’s extraordinarily hurtful to a woman when doctors say she had a spontaneous abortion.”

She feels that women are being deceived and manipulated by a pro-abortion culture that seeks to normalize abortion by likening miscarriages as the same.

Karlen said, “This ministry is a way to fight against abortion by illustrating the personhood of the baby in the womb and highlighting the trauma families experience when losing a child to miscarriage.”

Key Takeaways:

• Senator Bill Cassidy has announced a new report on the investigation into the distribution and policing of the abortion pill in the U.S.

• What the HELP Committee's investigation found is disturbing, and includes information regarding abortion pill manufacturers' claim that they don't believe it is their responsibility to police prescribers or to de-certify them when prescribers violate the FDA's REMS requirements on the drug.

• However, according to the REMS agreement, these manufacturers are supposed to do this very thing.

The Details:

In a press release, Cassidy said the abortion pill report is the result of a "months-long investigation" into these companies, which Cassidy states are "fail[ing] to properly oversee the prescription and distribution of their products," adding that previous pro-abortion administrations "recklessly removed the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Mifepristone Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) Program requirements for reporting non-fatal adverse events and in-person dispensing of chemical abortion drugs, among other important safeguards."

This, as Live Action News has reported, has led to the illusion of safety surrounding the <a href="/videos/1st-trimester-abortion-the-abortion-pill-what-is-abortion">abortion pill regimen</a> (mifepristone and misoprostol), despite a lack of reporting and even systematic efforts to cover up adverse events by urging women to <a href="/news/abortion-activists-tell-women-lie-abortions">mislead medical personnel</a> when seeking emergency care for abortion drug complications.

In addition, Cassidy noted something shocking in the press release (emphasis added):

Ending these [REMS] requirements has led to horrific instances of coerced abortions and the proliferation of chemical abortion drugs outside FDA-approved channels in ways that mislead pregnant women and seriously endanger their health and safety.

Despite these dangers, Danco, GenBioPro, and Evita do not take sufficient steps to ensure that their drugs are only available through REMS-compliant channels and that certified prescribers and pharmacies comply with the few remaining FDA requirements, especially when pills are sold online and without the in-person oversight of a medical professional....

In the course of the investigation, Danco and GenBioPro told the Committee that they have no role in ensuring that doctors and other health care providers who prescribe chemical abortion drugs maintain compliance with the FDA requirements, implying that the onus is on the prescribers to police themselves. Given the lack of oversight, there are concerns that these sponsors are disregarding the safety risks of chemical abortions and either overtly or tacitly allowing their products to be sold to bad actors who seek to exploit women for profit.

But, according to the FDA's REMS agreement modified as recently as September of 2025, it actually is their job to police prescribers:

The agreement states: "Mifepristone Sponsors must 'Ensure that healthcare providers who prescribe their mifepristone are specially certified in accordance with the requirements described above and de-certify healthcare providers who do not maintain compliance with certification requirements'" (emphasis added).

The report itself discusses:

• the history of the abortion pill's approval and "mechanism of action" in the U.S.

• how the REMS safety requirements came to be and what they are today

• background on the abortion pill's manufacturers and their locations

• the distributors, third-party administrators, and certified prescribers and pharmacies dispensing the abortion pill

• third-party websites selling the abortion pill

• adverse events and deaths associated with the abortion pill

... and more.

The Bottom Line:

It appears from this report that, in fact, the distribution of the abortion pill in the U.S. is essentially a "free-for-all" with little to no accountability from the abortion industry — and it is women and children who are paying the cost with their health and lives.

Note: Live Action News will publish an in-depth look at the report in a future article. Special thanks to Live Action Research Fellow Carole Novielli for her contribution to this article.

Since the beginning of the summer season AbortionFinder.org through its X account has been on a mission to disparage the pregnancy help movement with an online anti-pregnancy help campaign.

The abortion activist group points women to abortion providers and is committed to posting negative opinions about pregnancy centers, claiming things such as centers “spread(ing) disinformation and cause real, lasting harm to real people. Delayed care. Emotional trauma. Life-threatening consequences.”

The AbortionFinder X posts began June 22 with a five-part video series, “Exposing Fake Clinics,” to attack pregnancy help by assuming the only real help for pregnant women is an abortion.

Among the false claims made in the posts:

"Crisis pregnancy centers" exist to stop people from getting abortions, birth control, real sex education, and honest information about their sexual health.”

CPCs are designed to trick you. Professional websites, exam rooms, staff in white coats — and a goal of blocking your access to abortion and birth control.

"Crisis pregnancy centers" exist to manipulate abortion seekers. They lure pregnant people in with the promise of free services and then use scare tactics and lies to pressure them to STAY pregnant.

The first post in the series started out with “How can you avoid fake clinics? Know the red flags.”

The woman in the video sets the scene by saying pregnancy centers give the false appearance of a medical facility, and how some “even have ultrasound machines,” and then warns, “They are traps.”

The woman tells viewers that these “scary” pregnancy centers are outnumbering abortions clinics by three times.

“The bad news is, there are a lot of them,” she states.

Yes, there are. In fact, pregnancy help centers do outnumber abortion facilities. The post does [sic] was accurate on that one point.

That the well-funded abortion industry is closing brick-and-mortar sites amid the surge of chemical abortion and its all but unregulated status meaning anyone can get abortion drugs without an in-person visit to an abortion provider speaks to the industry’s focus on abortion provision and not actual healthcare services.

But it sure sounds like the pro-abortion side is a little nervous about life-affirming alternative care, doesn’t it? Therefore, they must go on the attack.

While AbortionFinder is out to spew lies about pregnancy help on its way to promote abortion, there is another site that shares the truth: PregnancyCenterTruth.com.

The website addresses the various claims made by abortion advocacy groups, such as that pregnancy help medical clinics are unlicensed, they have insufficient oversight or accountability, centers rely on deception, they provide no medical, and frighten patients with myths about abortion, among other things, responding with the truth of pregnancy help.

In that first post in its five-part series, the AbortionFinder mouthpiece runs down supposed “red flags” so women can spot these “fake clinics,” by urging the viewer to be skeptical about free services and to be wary of terms like pre-abortion counseling, Abortion Pill Reversal, and abortion healing.

“None of these are real medical services,” she states.

That skewed opinion aside, PregnancyCenterTruth.com explains that women need all the information necessary before committing to an abortion:

“Women should have access to medical information regarding all risks associated with a procedure, no matter what that procedure might be. It is absolutely crucial to ensuring informed consent. Pregnancy centers rely on scientific studies about the short and long-term effects of abortion in order to ensure that clients are empowered with facts before making a life-altering decision.”

Another last “red flag “on the X post is that there are no birth control pills or abortions offered at pregnancy centers.

It has been shown in research that women who use birth control pills are still likely to become pregnant and have an abortion. Guttmacher Institute, the pro-abortion research group formerly affiliated with Planned Parenthood, has conducted research finding that more than half of women having abortions were using contraceptives like the pill.

Day two of the AbortionFinder posts goes over “fake clinic tactics” and tries to debunk information provided by pregnancy centers, such as risks and safety and the option for Abortion Pill Reversal.

The woman in the video attempts to create doubt in the use of progesterone to reverse the process of the abortion pill after the first abortion pill is ingested.

Conversely, a page on the Abortion Pill Reversal website is dedicated to the testimonials of the lives saved through this process, proving APR has been successful. To date, more than 8,000 lives have been saved thanks to APR.

Day three criticizes funding related to pregnancy centers.

The woman claims the funds are “funneled away from programs that are actually dedicated to public health," listing the Title X Family Planning Program and Covid Relief dollars. She later claims much of the money given to pregnancy help is “untraceable.”

The truth is that there is extraordinarily little funding from a federal level that goes to any pregnancy centers and only 11 states offer Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Ninety percent of funding for pregnancy centers comes from charitable donations.

On the other hand, “taxpayer funding in the form of government grants, contracts, and Medicaid reimbursements hit $832 million, nearly $2.3 million per day,” for Planned Parenthood as of the abortion giant’s most recent annual report, “an increase of $39.8 million from the previous report and representing 39% of Planned Parenthood’s overall revenue.”

Those stats are courtesy of Charlotte Lozier Institute. Additionally, “Planned Parenthood’s taxpayer funding has increased by 50% since 2014.”

Day four’s post in the five-part series is mysteriously no longer visible on the site.

But, by day five, the woman was telling listeners to “fight back” and contact lawmakers about the funding of pregnancy centers. She also notes that these centers are “dangerous” because “people don’t know they exist.”

All of these claims designed to denigrate pregnancy help and promote abortion aside, more and more women are finding pregnancy centers for life-affirming help.

This is why websites like AbortionFinder are trying so desperately to destroy the image of pregnancy help. Not every woman truly desires an abortion. They desire assistance. Women are finding hope and healing in pregnancy help centers.

Websites like OptionLine.org assist women who are seeking such help.

Scrolling the X site for the AbortionFinder group one will see nothing but ugliness.

A June 25 post defines a pregnancy center as “a dangerous organization with a hidden agenda to lure in and then pressure into not having an abortion.”

The reality is the pregnancy help movement has been busy and successful at letting their services speak for themselves.

AbortionFinder’s series on X was a feeble attempt to turn women away from pregnancy help. Upon reviewing the posts, the “likes” and sharing were minimal.

The creators of this content are living on the lie that every woman who approaches an abortion provider wants to end the life of her baby.

The head of the largest network of pregnancy help organization in the U.S. and the world weighed in on the abortion activist group’s campaign to defame life-affirming alternatives to abortion.

“The sad thing about mixing so many lies in with intentionally half-truths is that women who are genuinely undecided about their unintended pregnancy will then be sold an abortion they don't really want,” said Jor-El Godsey, president of Heartbeat International. “Abortion advocates are willing to say anything to advocate for the abortion industry at the expense of women who deserve better.”

“Pregnancy help centers don't profit from a woman's decision,” Godsey added, “making them safe places to talk through all the options."

It's a decision that went viral.

Key Takeaways:

• Personal trainer Jenna Foster has gone viral for breastfeeding her son while running a 5K race.

• Though not every mom is able to exercise while postpartum, Foster said she wanted to show "that you can still exercise and train hard after having kids."

The Details:

Foster, who lives in Maryland, gave birth in July. Though she is recently postpartum, she said she regularly exercised through the duration of her pregnancy, and was given clearance from her doctor to participate in a 5K.

As the race started, Foster pushed her infant in his stroller, but things didn't go quite as planned. She detailed what happened in an Instagram post.

"I thought for sure he’d fall back to sleep once we started moving, but around 1 mile into the race he made it very clear that it was time to eat," she shared. "We set out to finish the race, so that’s what we did. With a fed baby."

She further detailed the experience in an interview with PEOPLE.

“I knew he needed to eat. There’s a distinct cry when he’s hungry, and I didn’t want to make him wait that long,” she said. “I also knew I had to stay with my daughter, and she really wanted to finish the race. She pushed the stroller while I nursed my son, and we walked together towards the finish.”

Foster didn't stop to feed her infant; instead, she picked him up and nursed him while continuing the race. She crossed the finish line at a light jog while still feeding her baby, as the crowd cheered her on.

Zoom In:

Many women may not be able to run a 5K in the weeks after giving birth — and that's ok. But Foster's example shows that life doesn't always have to slow down when you have kids.

"I run for the challenge. For my mental health. To encourage others to move. To set an example for my children," she said. "And to remind other parents that you can still exercise and train hard after having kids."

After a successful citizen initiative petition, another Texas city council is set to consider an ordinance outlawing abortion trafficking.

Exceeding the necessary support

On Monday, July 27, a citizen-initiative petition with 475 signatures was filed with the City of Snyder, Texas (pop. 11,251), proposing a Sanctuary City for the Unborn (SCFTU) ordinance further outlawing abortion. According to Article VII, Section 67 of the Snyder City Charter, to have a successful citizen initiative petition, petitioners had to obtain signatures of “qualified voters of the city equal in number to at least twenty-five percent of the number of votes cast at the time of the last general municipal election, or by two hundred fifty qualified voters, whichever is greater.”

Twenty-one days later, on Monday, August 17, City Secretary Shai Green confirmed that the initiative petition met the requirements outlined in the Snyder City Charter.

While only 250 signatures of registered voters were required, the initiative exceeded that number, with 302 of the 475 submitted determined to be qualified signatures of registered voters living within the city limits of the City of Snyder. As a result of the successful initiative, the proposed Snyder Sanctuary City for the Unborn ordinance would be on the next regular city council meeting agenda on September 14.

Following Scurry County

The Snyder SCFTU Ordinance is identical in substance to the ordinance outlawing abortion and declaring Scurry County a Sanctuary County for the Unborn that was unanimously adopted by the Scurry County Judge and Commissioners’ Court on Tuesday, July 21.

At the meeting, Scurry County Commissioner Shawn McCowen stated, “This is a no-brainer. I don’t even know why we are discussing it.” If the Snyder City Council follows Scurry County and adopts the proposed Snyder SCFTU Ordinance, the incorporated City of Snyder will have the same level of protections against abortion currently in place in the unincorporated area of Scurry County.

The proposed Snyder SCFTU ordinance will:

1. Prohibit elective abortions and the aiding or abetting of elective abortions within the City of Snyder by extending the private enforcement mechanism of the Texas Heartbeat Act from the point of detectable heartbeat to the point of fertilization.

2. Prohibit elective abortions on residents of the City of Snyder – regardless of where the abortion takes place.

3. Prohibit abortion traffickers and abortion trafficking organizations from trafficking women, including minors, through the City of Snyder for abortions across state lines.

4. Prohibit abortion-inducing drugs from being mailed into the City of Snyder by the creation of a localized private right of action, serving as an additional deterrent against out-of-state abortion pill distributors.

5. Recognize any organization involved in the mailing and receiving of abortion inducing drugs and abortion paraphernalia as criminal abortion organizations in violation of the federal Comstock Act and prohibit such organizations from doing business within the City of Snyder.

6. Prohibit Texas waste management companies from transporting through the City of Snyder the remains of dead babies that have been aborted at abortion facilities outside the State of Texas and brought back into Texas for disposal as trash in landfills.

The ordinance is enforced the same way the Texas Heartbeat Act is enforced, through a private enforcement mechanism that allows private citizens to file suit against any individual or organization in violation of the ordinance. The ordinance DOES NOT, however, allow any action to be taken against the mother of the unborn child. According to the proposed Snyder SCFTU Ordinance: 

Notwithstanding any other law, a civil action under this section may not be brought: against the woman upon whom the abortion was performed or induced or attempted to be performed or induced in violation of this ordinance, or against a pregnant woman who intends or seeks to abort her unborn child in violation of this ordinance.  ​

Measure Has Support of Texas Legislators​

In August 2023, 20 Texas Senators and Representatives penned a letter supporting cities and counties passing such measures across the State of Texas. The letter read:

While it is true that abortion is outlawed in the entire State of Texas, from the point of conception, our work is far from over. Right now, throughout the State of Texas, women are being trafficked across our borders by abortion traffickers funded by abortion trafficking organizations still operating in our state. As a result, these women are being abused and traumatized by abortion across our Texas–New Mexico border and sent back to Texas for our cities and counties to deal with the aftermath taking place in our homes, our schools, our churches, and our hospitals.

The Sanctuary for the Unborn ordinances seek to protect these institutions by putting safeguards in place to protect men, women, and their children for years to come. These ordinances, which seek to close as many loopholes as possible, do not penalize women who seek or undergo abortions, but place the penalty on the party who most deserves it – the abortionist and the industry profiting from the unjust procedure, including abortion traffickers.​​

Since August 2023, over 50 political subdivisions have passed ordinances identical in substance to the proposed Snyder SCFTU ordinance.

Successful Citizen Initiative Petition Processes in Texas

Following Brownfield, Muleshoe, Ranger, Seminole, and Denver City, the Snyder SCFTU petition is the sixth successful citizen-initiative petition filed in Texas this year seeking to further protect pregnant mothers and their unborn children from the violence of abortion. 

To date, 13 city councils in Texas have considered SCFTU ordinances as a result of a successful citizen-initiative petition process. Six of those cities have already seen the measures on citywide ballots voted on by the residents. One city, the City of Seminole, will see the measure on a citywide ballot this November. Of the six cities that have already voted, only one has rejected the measure. The six cities that considered a SCFTU ordinance on a citywide ballot are:  

1. Lubbock (pop. 264,000): Adopted by voters May 1, 2021, with 62% voter approval.  

2. Athens (pop. 13,121): Adopted by voters November 8, 2022, with 58% voter approval.

3. Abilene (pop. 124,407): Adopted by voters November 8, 2022, with 53% voter approval.

4. San Angelo (pop. 101,612): Adopted by voters November 8, 2022, with 56% voter approval.

5. Plainview (pop. 22,343): Adopted by voters November 8, 2022, with 69% voter approval.

6. Amarillo (pop. 202,408): Rejected by voters November 5, 2024, with 59% of voters rejecting the measure.

The one city that will consider a SCFTU ordinance on this November’s ballot is:

• Seminole (pop. 7,952): Voters will decide during the midterm election on November 3, 2026.

Six city councils chose to adopt the measure themselves as a result of successful citizen-initiative petitions, thereby avoiding additional costs incurred by a citywide election:

1. Slaton (pop. 6,235): Instead of the ordinance going to the May 7, 2022 ballot, the Slaton City Commission adopted the ordinance in a 4-1 first-reading vote on November 15, 2021, and a unanimous 5-0 second and final reading vote on December 13, 2021.

2. Lindale (pop. 6,730): Instead of the ordinance going on the November 8, 2022 ballot, the Lindale City Council adopted the ordinance in a unanimous 4-0 vote on March 24, 2022.

3. Brownfield (pop. 9,976): Instead of the ordinance going on the November 3, 2026 ballot, the Brownfield City Council adopted the ordinance in a 5-3 vote on May 7, 2026.

4. Muleshoe (pop. 5,158): Instead of the ordinance going on the November 3, 2026 ballot, the Muleshoe City Council adopted the ordinance in a 4-1 vote on May 11, 2026.

5. Ranger (pop. 2,469): Instead of the ordinance going on the November 3, 2026 ballot, the Ranger City Commission adopted the ordinance in a unanimous 4-0 first-reading vote on May 26, 2026, and a unanimous 3-0 second and final-reading vote on May 28, 2026.

6. Denver City (pop. 4,911): Instead of the ordinance going on the November 3, 2026 ballot, the Denver City Council adopted the ordinance in a unanimous 6-0-1 vote on August 17, 2026.

Time will tell whether the Snyder City Council will go the route of Brownfield, Muleshoe, Ranger, and Denver City, or if they will go the route of the City of Seminole.

However, if the Snyder City Council rejects the measure like the Seminole City Council, the ordinance would not fall on the November 2026 ballot, but on the May 2027 ballot – as the August 17, 2026, deadline for local ballot measures has already passed. 

Scurry County Republican Party Chairman Zachary Gafford is optimistic that the Snyder City Council will adopt the measure. Gafford shared:

“This is a common sense measure with overwhelming support among Snyder residents. The county has already spoken clearly on this, and we are confident the city will do the same.” 

The Republican Party of Texas has been extremely supportive of local efforts to further outlaw abortion. During the Republican Party of Texas 2026 State Convention in Houston, 97.41% of Republican delegates from across the state voted in support of a party plank supporting the pro-life measures. Plank #216(l) reads:

“Abortion is not healthcare; it is homicide. Until the abolition of abortion is achieved, we support laws that restrict and regulate abortion, including but not limited to . . . Supporting the right of Texas municipalities to protect mothers and their preborn children in their communities by passing enforceable city ordinances that further ban abortions within their city limits, closing loopholes in state abortion laws.”

Since June 2019, 123 political subdivisions (99 cities and 24 counties) have passed local measures outlawing abortion throughout the United States, including 104 (82 cities and 22 counties) in Texas.

Citizens who wish to see their city or county pass an ordinance to further protect pregnant mothers and their unborn children from the violence of abortion are encouraged to sign the online petition – regardless of what city, county, or state they are located in.

Key Takeaways:

• Baby Raelynn Kubiske was born on July 28, 2025, by C-section at 23 weeks and six days. She weighed just 12.5 ounces at birth.

• She spent over a year in the hospital before she was allowed to go home with her family.

• Her mother has lupus and suffered complications as a result of this disease, some of which are ongoing.

• Both baby Raelynn and her mother continue to have ongoing medical needs, though Raelynn is home with her family and is reportedly doing well.

The Details:

On July 28, 2025, Raelynn Kubiske was born by C-section at the American Family Children’s Hospital in Madison, Wisconsin, at 23 weeks and six days gestation.

Just 45 minutes later after Aubree Winnekens gave birth, she and Raelynn's father, Aaron Kubiske, received a devastating prognosis and were told to “prepare for the worst."

“They had come down and said that they were going to bring her down to see us for us to say goodbye to her,” Kubiske said. 

Dr. Claudette Onyelobi, known around the hospital as "Dr. O," is a neonatoligist at UW Health Kids and an associate professor of pediatrics at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health.

Dr. O is also the Director of Small Baby Care at American Family Children’s Hospital and UnityPoint Health-Meriter. The family went to her for help, asking her to "do everything in your power to help save her," Onyelobi told WMTV 15.

She stated that she has cared for many small babies, but none like Raelynn. "This became a life and death situation,” said Onyelobi.

Onyelobi recalled her conversation with Winnekens, Raelynn's mother:

“She said, ‘I heard everything you said, Dr. O. I need you to do everything in your power to give my baby a chance at life and please provide her a trial at life and give her every medical intervention that you have at your avail.’ And that’s what we did.”

To further complicate the situation, Winnekens has had serious health issues of her own, including a lupus diagnosis at age 11. She has battled health issues throughout her life due to this chronic autoimmune disease, including two bouts with sepsis at age 22.

Not long after, she found out she was pregnant, which can be a high-risk situation for a mother with lupus.

Winnekens was admitted to the hospital three weeks before her delivery. While there, she experienced complications due to the lupus, and needed dialysis for both her kidney and heart.

“The day before I had her was my last dose of dialysis,” Winnekens told WMTV.

After Raelynn was born so early and so small, she was sent to the NICU for immediate care.

Raelynn’s eyes were still closed and her skin was practically transparent when she was born, according to her parents. Her first year of life in the NICU was filled with a myriad of medical interventions, ranging from the insertion of a breathing tube the size of a drinking straw to open heart surgery.

“It was very unreal,” Kubiske told Live News Five. “Even though you know what’s going on and you know the situation, it still doesn’t feel like something you’re supposed to see.”

Looking Ahead:

After over a year of a hospital stay, Raelynn was able to go home with her family. She is growing and doing wonderfully, and also requires around the clock care.

She has a breathing tube, which the family is hopeful will be removed in a year. They then hope to move back to live near family in Northern Wisconsin.

Dr. Onyelobi said:

“Raelynn has her work cut out for her. She has beat several odds to come to this point. To not only survive past the first 24 hours of life, the first month of life, but now we’re talking the first year of age.

And so that’s an amazing feat when you are born so small for gestational age. And so she is a walking miracle. I mean, she isn’t walking yet but she is a real life miracle."

Raelynn's mother is also still in need of medical care. Her kidney function is reportedly at 8% and she is facing another round of dialysis... and more.

“Now I’m facing those consequences of now needing a transplant,” she said.

The family has a GoFundMe set up to help cover medical expenses for both Raelynn and her mother.

Key Takeaways:

• The pro-life Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) has detailed five issues it hopes lawmakers will consider when they return from their summer recess.

• These items include criminalizing abortion coercion, ending telehealth abortion, increasing palliative care, expanding the Scottish Child Payment to low-income pregnant women, and rejecting efforts to expand abortion.

• Last year, abortions in Scotland were at an all-time high.

The Details:

In a press release, SPUC detailed that in the upcoming session, it hopes Parliament will consider legislation to criminalize abortion coercion and end telehealth abortion. It also hopes lawmakers will increase palliative care funding and expand the Scottish Child Payment to low-income pregnant women from the 24th week of pregnancy.

Additionally, it is calling on lawmakers to reject legislative efforts to expand abortion, as MSP Gillian Mackay announced last fall that she hopes to decriminalize abortion completely, effectively allowing it up to birth.

“We urge Holyrood to reject expansions of the abortion law, invest heavily in compassionate palliative care, and implement these safeguards to defend human dignity," SPUC Executive Director Michael Robinson, said, adding:

"We are very hopeful that an overwhelming consensus can be reached across the Scottish Parliament in regard to making it a specific standalone criminal offence in Scotland to coerce a woman into having an abortion. Reproductive coercion occurs predominantly behind closed doors within abusive relationships, meaning the true scale is highly underreported.

Last year over 11,000 abortions were carried out at home using pills by post without any medical supervision, this leaves the door wide open to abusive partners coercing women into having an abortion they do not want.”

The Big Picture:

Earlier this year, Scotland officials released data showing that the country's abortion rate is at an all-time high, with 18,783 preborn children killed in 2025. 

Those figures came after the nation passed a law considered "the most extreme buffer zone law in the world," which prohibits all pro-life activity within 200 meters of a hospital or abortion business — even signs and displays located on private property.

At the same time, Mackay — the MSP behind the "buffer zone bill" — is seeking to decriminalize abortion, which she has called "a very normal part of healthcare."

Lawmakers return from their summer recess on August 31.

Key Takeaways:

• Jacqueline C. Colyer was formerly the vice president of human resources for Planned Parenthood Great Rivers in Illinois.

• She claims an illegal 28-week late-term abortion was committed in the basement of a Planned Parenthood facility after hours, and she reported the incident anonymously through Planned Parenthood's tip line.

• Two weeks later, she was disciplined, and then within a matter of months was fired, with her employer citing "insubordination and dishonesty."

• Colyer is now suing for wrongful termination.

The Details:

In a complaint from Jacqueline C. Colyer, formerly the vice president of human resources for Planned Parenthood Great Rivers in Illinois, she alleged that an illegal 28-week abortion was committed after hours in the basement of Planned Parenthood's facility in Fairview Heights, Illinois.

The abortion was allegedly committed in 2022 by Colleen McNicholas, the former chief medical officer for Planned Parenthood Great Rivers.

According to Colyer's lawsuit:

During her employment, Colyer was informed by Defendants’ employee Kris Winkleman that an unauthorized abortion had been performed at the Planned Parenthood Fairview Heights, Illinois, location on a Sunday in 2022.

Winkleman received this information from her direct report, Jamia Swift, who was called to unlock the door to access the facility.

Swift received the call from Colleen McNicolas, M.D., the Chief Medical Officer of PPGRMO, sometime around 7:00 PM on a Sunday in 2022.

Upon information and belief, shortly after the call, Swift arrived at the facility and unlocked the door to provide McNicholas with access.

Upon information and belief, Swift alleges that McNicholas required access to the facility to perform an abortion on an individual who was around 28 weeks.

Winkleman reported this violation to Colyer in early 2024.

Colyer noted that Planned Parenthood policy requires employees to report suspected illegal activity, and that they can do so confidentially and anonymously through a tool called "ReportIt." Anyone who reports is supposed to be protected from retaliation.

She requested that an investigation into the incident be opened, and openly stated she feared retaliation, despite the abortion corporation's policy:

On July 10, 2024, Colyer anonymously reported the unauthorized abortion through ReportIt, a third party reporting system, stating that she feared she would be fired if the report were not truly anonymous and asking that the investigation review the facility’s cameras and after-hours key-fob access and determine who admitted the physician, who administered anesthesia, and who locked the building.

When the report reached Planned Parenthood, Colyer was immediately removed from it, contrary to Defendants’ own Whistleblower Policy.

Richard Muniz, the interim President/CEO, General Counsel, and Chief Compliance Officer, allegedly conducted the investigation.

On July 31, 2024, a second, independent ReportIt complaint concerning the same incident was anonymously submitted by an unknown party, describing an abortion that had been “provided in the basement of our clinic on a Sunday,” in violation of law and late in the woman’s pregnancy.

The independent report of the same misconduct corroborates that it was real and known within the organization. On that same date, Muniz responded to Colyer’s original ReportIt complaint.

READ: <a href="/news/planned-parenthood-sues-whistleblowers-fraud">Planned Parenthood sues to overturn law that allows whistleblowers to report fraud</a>

What Happened Next:

Ten days later, Colyer was disciplined for the first and only time during her career at Planned Parenthood. "Colyer received the only written discipline of her employment: a 'First written warning' signed by Richard Muniz charging her with 'insubordination and dishonesty,'" the lawsuit said.

However, she kept trying to report the alleged illegal abortion; she contacted Sheila Greenbaum, President of the Board, on September 4, and made another report about the illegal abortion, reiterating her fear of retaliation.

Two days later, she began FMLA and ADA leave, and claimed that Muniz immediately began disconnecting her employee access.

After extending FMLA, Colyer finally returned to work on December 9, 2024; she was fired the same day.

Muniz only stated the reason for the termination was, “I’m sure you know what’s happening. You are not a good fit.”

Muniz pressured her to sign a separation agreement, including a waiver of claims.

Plaintiff, during her entire tenure, was only written up on one occasion.

Following December 9, 2024, Colyer’s position was immediately filled.

In her lawsuit, Colyer reiterated that she was fired for exposing an illegal abortion:

Although Missouri is an at-will employment state, the at-will doctrine is subject to a public-policy exception. An at-will employee may not be terminated for refusing to violate the law or any well-established and clear mandate of public policy or for reporting wrongdoing or violations of law to superiors or public authorities.

The abortion that Plaintiff reported was illegal and constitutes a violation of the law and clearly mandated public policy.

The conduct Colyer reported — an unauthorized abortion at approximately 28 weeks, after the point of viability and outside the facility’s operating hours — violated a clear mandate of public policy. Because the procedure occurred at Defendants’ Fairview Heights, Illinois facility, Illinois law governs.

Under the Illinois Reproductive Health Act, after fetal viability, a health care professional may provide abortion care only if, in the professional’s judgment, it is necessary to protect the patient’s life or health.

An abortion at approximately 28 weeks, outside operating hours, with no indication it was necessary to protect the patient’s life or health, was contrary to that Act and to the Illinois Medical Practice Act of 1987. Defendants’ own General Counsel acknowledged the standard, stating that Illinois law “allows abortions up to ‘fetal viability,’ which is usually not before 29 weeks.”

Evaluated under Missouri law, the conduct likewise contravened the public policy reflected in RSMo § 188.017 and Missouri’s abortion restrictions; even if it predated Missouri’s June 24, 2022, ban, it remained contrary to public policy as a post-viability, after-hours procedure placing the patient at risk. Whether a reported act violated public policy is a question of law for the Court.

READ: <a href="/news/planned-parenthood-rejected-defunded">Why Planned Parenthood must be REJECTED and DEFUNDED</a>

The Big Picture:

Though Illinois does not have a fixed limit on viability — instead letting the abortionist determine if the baby is viable or not, and Colyer's suit defining it as 29 weeks — the widely-accepted medical standard definition of viability is 24 weeks gestation.

Yet, premature babies have survived earlier, as early as 21 weeks gestation. An abortion at 28 weeks kills a baby that, according to research, is extremely likely to survive if born prematurely, with survival rates upwards of 90%.

The Fairview Heights Planned Parenthood facility, where the alleged illegal abortion occurred, reportedly commits chemical abortions through 12 weeks gestation, and surgical abortions up to 27 weeks. That would mean this 28-week abortion was a violation of the abortion giant's own policy.

However, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch quoted a University of Chicago maternal fetal medicine specialist, who agrees that, essentially, abortion in Illinois is legal at any time:

... Ashish Premkumar, a maternal fetal medicine doctor at the University of Chicago, said it’s not so clear that an abortion at 28 weeks would be illegal in Illinois.

“Based on the Reproductive Health Act, there is not a gestational duration at which abortion is not able to be provided,” Premkumar said in an interview on Monday, referring to the same Illinois statute cited by Colyer in her complaint. 

And yet, the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute claims that in Illinois, "Abortion is banned at fetal viability, generally 24–26 weeks of pregnancy."

Colleen McNicholas, the abortionist who allegedly committed the procedure, has a history of malpractice; she at one time oversaw a facility in St. Louis, Missouri, which had, as Live Action News previously reported:

... a reputation as one of the most dangerous abortion businesses in the U.S. It had been operating without a license in 2019 when it had to call an ambulance for the 75th (known) time in just 10 years to transfer an abortion patient to a hospital due to an abortion-related injury.

Though McNicholas claimed the facility didn’t have a license because “state officials abuse their power,” the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services had actually decided not to renew RHS’ license due to its significant number of health and safety violations.

A Statement of Deficiencies can be read here; it includes a record of at least 30 deficient practices, including failure to ensure an abortion was complete and failure to follow up with a patient. 911 records from the facility indicate that multiple women suffered hemorrhaging during their abortions at RHS, along with incidences of fainting, seizures, and a stroke.

A Missouri Senate report of the facility was also critical:

[P]lanned Parenthood’s own internal files reveal a shocking callousness toward vulnerable young women who seek their services. In fact, the procedures outlined in the materials reviewed may very well constitute outright medical malpractice… All of this indicates that Planned Parenthood is far more worried about the reputation, business model and public relations efforts than they are about the women in their care. It is difficult to conceive of any other organization, let alone an organization that holds itself out as providing women’s health services, being so recklessly indifferent to the health of their patients as to put such directives as those listed above in print for the use of their employees.

Examples of the injuries women suffered include hemorrhaging, fainting, seizures, and a stroke; the Senate investigation also found instances of women having to return as many as five times for a single abortion procedure to be properly completed. 

The Bottom Line:

Planned Parenthood has become known for its corrupt, illegal, and disturbing practices. In this instance, the alleged behavior was so egregious that even one of its own employees spoke out about it — and was punished for doing so.

Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed and Gilkar, the baby's intended, biological parents, were also in the courtroom, where the Dallas judge extended the temporary restraining order barring West from making decisions about the baby's care for another 14 days. However, no final ruling has been issued.

Key Takeaways:

• A court ruled yesterday that the restraining order preventing surrogate McKenna West from making decisions about the baby she carried will remain in place for at least two more weeks.

• West described the horrific abortion procedure she refused to undergo, despite pressure from the baby's parents to do so.

• West said she would drop her bid for custody if the couple agrees to ensuring the baby will receive a chance at life by getting the care he needs.

The Details:

20-week abortion is "terrifying"

McKenna West told the court that an abortion at 20 weeks gestation is "terrifying."

"It would have been a two-day procedure…" she explained. "They would have injected his heart with a solution that would stop it."

After that, in a D&E abortion, the baby is "removed" from the uterus, as The New York Post described it, but what wasn't said is that the abortionist uses forceps to pull the baby out in pieces. He dismembers the baby, tearing off and pulling out arms and legs before crushing the baby's skull.

The procedure also carries signifiant risks for the mother, including uterine perforation, hemorrhage, and infection.

West could not go through with it. In an op-ed for The Post, she wrote:

No woman should be forced to kill the baby inside her. Most importantly, every child deserves a chance to live.

As a cardiac nurse, I knew this little one had a great shot at survival if given the opportunity to receive the necessary treatment.

Ahmed and Gilkar threatened to sue her, but West stood firm. She said:

But no threat or amount of money could sway my conviction that this baby had a real chance at a full life, and I could not participate in killing him and depriving him of that opportunity.

All I wanted was for the contracting couple to commit to giving this baby lifesaving treatment. But they refused.

So, I made my own plans to save him. My home state didn’t have a hospital equipped with the surgery he’d need at birth.

After extensive research, I found a hospital in Texas with excellent surgical outcomes, including a 100% survival rate for the Norwood procedure. I also had friends in the area who could support my kids and me through this difficult time.

West decided to fight for custody but told the couple that if they would agree to providing Rumi/Gabriel with the necessary medical care he needed, she would give up that fight.

According to West's attorneys, the couple would not agree to the surgery. They ultimately sued West for $100,000.

A California court order established Gilkar and Ahmed as the baby's legal parents, however, a Texas court and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton stepped in and ordered that the baby receive surgery. After birth, he received the first of three life-saving surgeries.

Possible complications and questions of trust

Now, Ahmed and Gilkar say that the baby suffered possible complications and is in critical condition.

“He’s struggling to breathe… We have to watch him gasp for air and choke on tubes,” Gilkar said in court.

There are risks with every medical procedure, but the baby would have died without the surgery — and he would most certainly have died had West aborted him as she was instructed to do.

Gilkar said she endured eight rounds of IVF and a hysterectomy before turning to surrogacy. But when the baby was diagnosed with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, she and her husband told West to abort him.

However, Gilkar also stated, "We've never wanted anything more than this baby."

Kera News reported:

... despite Gilkar’s testimony, West said she doesn’t trust the couple will continue seeking medical care — because Gilkar said she doesn’t regret wanting West to get an abortion.

Gilkar accused West of "trying to take him from us," calling the baby "the love of our lives."

But West explained that she doesn't trust that the couple will continue to provide the baby with medical care. “I’m not fighting to try to take someone else’s baby. I’m fighting because this baby boy needs someone willing to advocate for and fight alongside him as he gets the ongoing treatment his fragile heart requires,” West wrote.

West's attorney, Jeff Domen, told the court, "(West) didn’t want to raise a child. She entered into a contract to have a child and then give it away. But when she heard that the choice was to murder the child, she made a decision — not one that any of us would have wanted to make.”

West testified that if the couple commits to ensuring the baby receives the next two surgeries, she would drop her claims to custody.

“I have asked for only one thing from the very beginning: A commitment that this baby will be provided the life-saving treatment he needs. That is all it would take to end this," she said.

Gilkar testified that she and her husband have arranged medical care for him.

Why It Matters:

There can be an expectation among couples spending tens and even hundreds of thousands of dollars to have a child.

Claire, a woman who was conceived using IVF, explained that she knew she was wanted and loved by her parents, but the circumstances of her conception led to certain expectations that she couldn't meet. She said:

Somehow, somewhere, my parents developed the idea that they deserved to have a baby, and it didn’t matter how much it cost, how many times it took, or how many died in the process. They deserved a child. And with an attitude like that, by the time I was born they thought they deserved to have the perfect child… as Dad defined a perfect child.

And since they deserved a child, I was their property to be controlled, not a person or a gift to be treasured. 

Every single baby created via IVF was once deeply 'wanted,' yet they are subjected to rounds of testing as embryos, and scrutiny while in the womb to ensure that they best fit what their parents envision. And once a baby is born, those once "wanted" embryos are left frozen or destroyed.

No child should be treated as a commodity and killed because he or she has a health condition or a disability or because his or her parents are concerned about suffering.

Go Deeper:

Read Live Action News' coverage of this story in the articles below:

• Surrogate fights for life of baby boy with heart condition after refusing abortion

• Baby Gabriel is born and 'on the path to receive life-saving care'

• HHS tells Texas hospital it must provide life-saving care to baby in surrogacy case

• ATTORNEY: Baby boy at center of surrogacy case has had his first heart surgery

• Surrogate McKenna West saved their son's life. Now they're suing her for $100k

• Busting 4 media myths about surrogate McKenna West

Key Takeaways:

• The 2025 California assisted suicide report shows an 11% increase in physician-assisted deaths; however, the increase is likely much higher due to reporting inconsistencies.

• California assisted suicide deaths have been underreported for years, showing serious flaws in the tracking of the deadly drugs.

• Hundreds of written prescriptions went unaccounted for after they were dispensed to patients.

The Details:

The report, analyzed by Alex Schadenberg, executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, was released in July, and showed an 11% jump in doctor-assisted deaths. However, Schadenberg believes the increase is higher.

"Based on the reporting problems in the 2024 report, I predicted, last year, that there were likely 1100 assisted suicide deaths in 2024, but the real number is worse (1113) and in fact there were likely many more," wrote Schadenberg.

The reporting "problems" have been consistent.

In 2023, California reported 884 assisted suicide deaths, but the 2024 report with updated 2023 data showed 969 assisted deaths in 2023 — 85 more than initially reported. That's a nine percent (9%) difference. But then, the 2025 report showed even more deaths — a total of 983 in 2023 — 99 more than originally reported.

"That means two years after publishing the 2023 report the California Department of Health found 14 more 2023 assisted suicide deaths or 99 more deaths since 2023," wrote Schadenberg.

The data from 2022 was equally skewed. If that trend continued into 2025 reporting, then the rise in assisted suicide deaths is higher than California is letting on.

What's more is that the 2025 report shows there were 1,839 assisted suicide prescriptions written but that there were 1,159 persons who died from the prescriptions, 76 who died from prescriptions written prior to 2025, 300 who died naturally, and 380 who were given the prescriptions but their status is unknown.

"The California Department of Health has no idea if these 380 people died, and if they died did they die by assisted suicide but no assisted suicide report was submitted," said Schadenberg.

Why It Matters:

The fact that California continuously reports incorrect data on assisted suicide, he explained, means that the state can report an 11% increase in assisted suicide deaths when there was likely a 21% increase.

"The media will suggest that there was only an 11% increase in assisted suicide deaths in California with 1113 in 2024 and 1235 in 2025.  But based on the reporting problems there were likely at least 1350 assisted suicide deaths in 2025 which is greater than a 21% increase," he explained.

Key Takeaways:

• Guttmacher's new strategic plan claims it has 25 international and domestic partners in furthering its agenda — and fails to name even one of those partners.

• Its alleged plan is to "combat misinformation and disinformation" — even as the organization spreads its own propaganda about the abortion pill.

• The organization — which is financially backed by the Ford Foundation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Society of Family Planning, the Tara Health Foundation, the United Nations Foundation, and more — unrealistically portrays the pro-life movement as "well-funded" while neglecting to mention Warren Buffett's billions supporting Big Abortion.

• Guttmacher also claims that since Dobbs, Big Abortion has been under "extreme stress," and a psychological, emotional ,and spiritual "dominance of toxicity."

The Details:

The new strategic plan

Guttmacher's 2026-2029 strategy begins:

We write at a moment of extraordinary peril for reproductive freedom and bodily autonomy—when decades of progress are being undone and communities in the United States and abroad are seeing their rights infringed upon and access to health care diminished. It is a moment that demands urgent action.

The document is not significantly different from past strategies; it is full of self-congratulation and flowery language, and Guttmacher's focus remains unchanged: promoting abortion and contraception.

The pro-abortion organization vowed to:

• Take direct aim at the pernicious threat posed by misinformation and disinformation.

• Advance sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) globally through equitable partnership.

• Drive progress in the United States by strengthening our capacity to support work at the state level.

• Increase our reach and multiply our impact through digital innovation.

They plan to achieve these goals through the use of...

• Peer-reviewed papers 

• Policy analyses 

• Op-eds 

• Open data tools 

• Partner capacity strengthening 

Unnamed 'partners'

The 2026-2029 strategy was "affirmed through consultation with a wide array of partners and supporters," Guttmacher claimed, stating (emphasis added):

To develop the strategies in this plan, we engaged 25 domestic and international partners across those disciplines, as well as our staff and Board, to help us identify the greatest threats to our work in the next few years—and the best opportunities for Guttmacher to address them by leveraging its expertise and resources.

Guttmacher mentioned its "partners" multiple times without specifically naming one, claiming these partners are "global, regional and within individual countries; as well as US federal, state and local advocates, providers, donors, policymakers and researchers."

A short list of those who fund (2019, 2020) Guttmacher is revealing:

• Ford Foundation

• Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

• The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation

• The David and Lucile Packard Foundation

• Society of Family Planning

• Tara Health Foundation

• United Nations Foundation

Since 2023, the Susan Thomas Buffett Foundation (Warren Buffett) has granted nearly $20M to Guttmacher.

Strategic "Priority": Disrupt Misinformation and Disinformation

Guttmacher has called abortion "essential" and now plans to "Disrupt Misinformation and Disinformation (MDI)" by (emphases added):

• Improv[ing] understanding of MDI’s impact on SRHR through original research.

• Launch[ing] a digital clearinghouse as a one-stop shop for trusted facts.

• Train[ing] policymakers to identify and counter MDI.

• Engag[ing] new audiences, including influencers.

The organization — directly funded by foundations (like the Packard and Buffett Foundations) which are investors in the abortion pill's manufacturers — has long been promoting propaganda of its own to help expand access to the deadly drug.

Guttmacher vowed to "provide leadership in pre-bunking, debunking and challenging false narratives about abortion and contraception before they are enshrined in policies," despite never showing an actual abortion, opposing laws that educate on fetal development, and failing to inform women about the risks of abortion.

Combat "strong, well-funded opposition"

Laughably, the Guttmacher Institute portrays the pro-life movement as a "well-funded opposition." This, coming from the side funded by billionaires Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, and others, is bordering on absurd (emphasis added):

Since 2022, when the US Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturned Roe v. Wade and eliminated the federal constitutional protection for abortion, those advocating for sexual and reproductive health and rights have been facing an extraordinary challenge: How to advance a progressive agenda within a rapidly changing landscape where a strong, well-funded opposition is radically restricting fundamental rights.

In the United States, Dobbs served as a crowning moment—though not the endgame—for the anti-abortion movement and has ushered in an era of legal and personal chaos and confusion, for providers, policymakers, and, most critically, for people seeking abortions. Since the ruling, the opposition’s assault has shown no signs of slowing...

Guttmacher claimed that the "unrelenting assault on reproductive freedom after the Dobbs decision" has created "extreme stress" on those "working within SRHR on every level" (emphasis added):

Equally pressing for those working in the United States is fending off the unrelenting assault on reproductive freedom after the Dobbs decision, especially in the states where abortion opponents are doubling down on extremism.

The assault takes many forms: criminalization, prosecution and harassment of patients and providers; operational costs and constraints for clinic administrators; logistical and financial obstacles for patients needing to travel to other states; and increasing attacks on contraception.

These efforts are contributing to extreme levels of stress in the entire sexual and reproductive health ecosystem. As one partner put it, there is a “dominance of toxicity” affecting all who are working within SRHR on every level— psychological, emotional and spiritual.

Still, Guttmacher claimed its "complex ecosystem" encompasses a "wide range of actors" which they plan to activate against pro-life efforts.

Focus on State Policy

Guttmacher vows to "[s]hape both national- and state-level discourse that supports state advocates in achieving proactive goals or fighting restrictive efforts."

Its strategy states in part:

Guttmacher will ensure we meaningfully influence federal and state policy outcomes through our own research, communications and policy work and by deliberately focusing on how we can buttress partners and state coalitions with the evidence they need to advance their priorities.

... Guttmacher will be the trusted source advocates and policymakers turn to for state-level data on reproductive health care delivery, access and utilization, and for analyzing how state and federal legal and policy developments impact delivery of care and the people who need it.

But should an organization so clearly ideological in its stridently pro-abortion aims really serve as a "trusted source?

Guttmacher's goal is to "Drive Progress in the United States Through Responsive, State-Specific Resources":

• Build a stakeholder-informed US research agenda

• Generate new data responsive to state and federal partners’ needs

• Provide timely resources and technical support to state advocates

• Refine online platforms to share state-level data

Innovate Digital Outreach

Guttmacher is looking to innovate using Artificial Intelligence:

To remain relevant, discoverable, credible and influential in the digital knowledge ecosystem, Guttmacher will innovate our digital outreach and make strategic investments in our infrastructure, AI access, data governance and visibility.

Without such investment, Guttmacher’s research and knowledge risks being underutilized in key conversations about SRHR worldwide.

But AI is not always accurate. Even actors inside Big Abortion have referred to an alleged Al "Abortion Misinformation Problem."

The Backstory:

Who is the Guttmacher Institute?

The Guttmacher Institute, founded in 1968 as as the Center for Family Planning Program Development, claims online to be "a leading research and policy organization committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) worldwide."

The organization was renamed in 1977 after Alan F. Guttmacher, a former Planned Parenthood president and past Vice President of the American Eugenics Society (AES). He was a population control zealot who was instrumental in leading Planned Parenthood to begin committing abortions.

Guttmacher's first president (Frederick S. Jaffe, listed on an archived website now removed), was once described as “very abusive” by a longtime colleague. He also authored a controversial memo advocating eugenics through compulsory sterilization and abortion.

Guttmacher is a former “special affiliate” of Planned Parenthood which has funneled millions into Planned Parenthood's coffers, and is funded by the Buffett and Packard Foundations, which were early investors in the abortion pill. It is also funded by the William & Flora Hewlett Foundation, which joined the others in funding abortion pill studies and the discredited Turnaway Study.

Today, the Guttmacher Board of Directors still boasts former Planned Parenthood leaders.

Previous Strategy

• 2025: Guttmacher's November 2025 policy report called upon state and federal lawmakers to target parental rights for the purpose of expanding abortion access for minors as well as expanding abortion funding.

• 2021: Guttmacher's demands to politicians referred to “abortion access” as the “starting point,” urging Congress to roll out “swift and robust federal action” on abortion to create “a bolder, brighter future — one in which everyone can obtain affordable abortion care with dignity and on the timeline that is right for them.”

• 2019: Guttmacher's 2019 strategy was not to decrease the number of abortions but to "protect or expand access to abortion care,” by pushing statutory and constitutional measures to codify abortion, increasing taxpayer-funded abortion including forcing insurance companies to cover abortion, eliminate informed consent, increase abortion customers, pushing “self-managed abortions”

Consider This:

Guttmacher alleges that "decades of progress... being undone" is creating "extreme stress" on promoters of abortion, even as the abortion count increases. This strains credulity.

But the real stress is an increased death count of preborn human beings, due in large part to the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) enablement of "mail-order" abortion pills.

In addition, increased abortion funding, expansive abortion laws which now champion abortion to birth, and the misinformation that abortion is "essential" reveal that it is the sacredness of life that is truly under attack.

Key Takeaways:

• Tracy Kardys creates content on TikTok and Instagram under the name "Tracy Tells It All."

• She donated some of her eggs at the age of 21, which were used to create three children.

• Now in her 30s, Kardys is struggling with endometriosis and infertility, and has had at least one miscarriage.

• Many women choose to become egg 'donors' to 'help' infertile individuals, but they also may be drawn by the large amounts of money they can be paid for their eggs.

• Egg donation carries multiple risks and women are not always told of these risks.

• Donation can create issues for donors and the biological children conceived in this manner, who may be deprived of their history, heritage, and medical background.

The Backstory:

TikTok and Instagram creator Tracy Kardys has spoken openly about her history with egg donation, in which she participated at age 21. She went through four egg donation cycles, and as far as she is aware, this resulted in the successful births of three baby girls.

In one video, she explained:

"My kids have no idea that I exist.

Now, let me rephrase that. My biological children that aren't actually my children and are just my genetics have no idea that I exist. At least I'm pretty sure that they have no idea that I exist. 

That's because when I was 21, I was an egg donor. Yep. I have three baby girls, that I know about, that exist in this world that have my genetics. I'd like to say lucky them, but I also have stage 3 endometriosis, so... 

Anyway, at the time I wasn't sure if I wanted to have children, so I thought, why not? Great way to make sure that my genetics make it in this world, and who knows, maybe when they turn 18, they might want to contact me or have something to do with me, and at least I have my life and my genetics out in this world. I will totally toot my own horn. I'm pretty awesome. 

So anyways, probably about eight years went by where, like, I didn't think about them at all, and all of a sudden, I was like, 'I think I want to have my own kids.' Now it's been five years of trying to do that, and, well, now I can't stop thinking about them. Mainly because I wonder if they look like me, and I wonder if there's more than just three of them. And also, how did I make all girls? All right, all right, I know. I don't actually determine that, but the male genetics do.

Anyway, it's just wild to think about the fact that at 21, I could make the decision to put my genetics out into this world and not think about the ramifications. 

I will never, ever, ever regret that decision, because I helped three incredible families, four incredible families, have their own children and life and achieve dreams that they probably couldn't have achieved on their own. But still, so wild to think about."

In another video, she said it was "kind of weird," but that she hoped she would have the opportunity to meet her biological children one day:

"When I chose to donate my eggs in my contract, for all of my contracts, I put that when the child turns 18, they have the right to contact me through the agency should they want to, that then at the time have the right to say yes or no, which, that was all before like 23andMe existed or Ancestry.com and those genetic testing.

So realistically now, if I were to do one of those databases and they were to do one of the databases, I could pretty easily find them, but that wasn't the case at the time.

I do hope that one day they contact me, because it would just be really cool to know them, and if I do get to have children of my own, it would be really cool for them to know that they do have half-siblings out there, or at least half genetics, and let them have a relationship if they want to. And if they don't want to, that's fine too."

Kardys has also gone viral for her frank discussion about experiencing a miscarriage at 10 weeks. She reportedly kept her daughter's tiny body and buried it in a potted plant.

“No one tells you what to do, especially if you miscarry at home. For the next few days all I wanted to do was dig her up to hold her again,” she told PEOPLE, but added that she eventually was able to find peace. “I get to keep her close and honor her memory.” 

The Details:

In another interview with PEOPLE, Kardys spoke about her decision to become an egg donor, and about struggling to have children now. She said the idea originally came about because at 21, she wasn't sure if she would ever want to have children.

“My thought process was that your body makes eggs every month, and you lose those eggs if you don’t end up getting pregnant, so why waste them when there are other families out there that could use them?” she said.

In 2021, Kardys married, and she and her husband began trying for children. After unexplained infertility, she found out she had endometriosis, and underwent two surgeries.

“It’s pretty difficult that I can get someone else pregnant, but I can’t get myself pregnant," she said. “I never thought that would be the case when I made those donations."

She reiterated that she doesn't regret her decision to donate her eggs, even though she continues to struggle with infertility.

“It does fill me with comfort that I do have biological children out there," she said. "I feel like miscarriage and fertility are not really talked about. It almost feels like the woman is a failure because it’s so put on us. [But] being able to share my story and let them know that they’re not alone has been amazing. If I’m meant to be a mom, I will be. And if I’m not, I’m here to tell my story.”

The Bottom Line:

Many women choose to become egg donors for the same reason Kardys did: to help other couples have children. They also are often attracted to the large amounts of money they can get paid, which is likely why young college students are targeted by the fertility industry.

Yet egg donation carries multiple risks and can be dangerous, and women may not be told what they risk by donating — let alone the reality of having biological children who are deprived of their history, heritage, and medical background.

Key Takeaways:

• A viral but fake Instagram post unintentionally exposed that abortion on demand is accepted by many Americans.

• The fake announcement, noting that the plan was to intentionally kill the preborn child because the mother changed her mind, received comments of support.

• Planned Parenthood has long claimed that 'any reason is the right reason' for a woman to have an abortion, dismissing and ignoring the fact that abortion kills a living human being.

The Details:

The Instagram post, labeled as "AI content," stated, "A Baby Don't Keep Me" and included an image featuring typical baby announcement objects curated by AI. But instead of announcing a baby, it announced an abortion.

"Baby Cancelled," it said. "Due date was April 14th 2027." A onesie in the image read, "Mommy changed her mind Daddy wasn't sh*t."

Even for a fake post, the flippancy is jarring. But it's the comments that disturbingly reveal how much the post represents the real life attitudes of countless people. In a pro-abortion world, any reason is a good reason to have an abortion. While some comments showed disgust, others on the post included:

• "They way my mouth hit the floor lol I ain't even mad it was just unexpected."

• "Lowkey wish more women were like this. It's call intelligence. But I ain't finna argue nobody in the comments."

• "It ain't never been smart to bring kids into a world of chaos. Good for you lol"

• "I approve this message!! ( joke or not )..... Times are too hard to be locking yourself into a lifetime contract of sole responsibility & full time provider... I agree ya'll should be using protection, but we know that doesn't always work.....Kudos to you for thinking ahead, and not being another statistic."

• "Let's actually normalize this."

• "Good for you susta..God forgive me"

• "Off to Sky Daddy I know that's right"

• "You ain't wrong Queen"

• "As a L&D nurse, we need more women like you, good for you babe"

• "Pregnancy is too deadly and dangerous to be carrying the child of man who doesn’t love and cover you. Period. I wouldn’t put myself through that sh*t either."

The attitude was even seen in one of Live Action's Man on the Street interviews, where a young woman and a young man, upon separately hearing that abortion has ended the lives of approximately one-third of Gen Z, responded by saying, "F*** them kids" (13:50):

Why It Matters:

In 2023, Planned Parenthood tweeted, "[A]ny reason is the right reason" to have an abortion. It's a marketing tactic aimed at getting Planned Parenthood what it wants — more abortions, which equals more money.

But it also opens the door to a society in which anything goes in terms of killing human beings prior to birth, and some of us are already there.

That means America as a society and a Western culture would have to accept the historic and horrific sex-selective abortion of China and India, abortion based on something as treatable as a cleft lip, abortion based on the baby's due date and projected astrological sign, abortion because you'd rather get a dog — and abortion because the baby's father "ain't sh*t," or because he coerced the woman into it.

Under the 'all reasons are the right reason' mentality, each of these is considered a valid reason to kill a living, innocent human being.

The truth is that there is never a valid reason to intentionally kill an innocent human being.

Induced abortion — the direct and intentional killing of a preborn child — isn't necessary, even for medical reasons. In fact, abortionist Don Sloan previously admitted, “The idea of abortion to save the mothers’ life is something that people cling to because it sounds noble and pure – but medically speaking, it probably doesn’t exist. It’s a real stretch of our thinking.”

Former abortionist, Dr. Anthony Levatino, who is now pro-life, has stated that in the nine years he served as faculty at the Albany Medical Center:

"I saw hundreds of cases of really severe pregnancy complications. Cancers, heart disease, intractable diabetes out of control, toxemia of pregnancy out of control, and... in those nine years, I saved hundreds of women from life-threatening pregnancies.

And I did that by delivering them, by ending their pregnancy by delivery, either induction of labor or caesarean section... Delivering the baby.

And I always tell people: in all of those years, the... number of babies that I... was obligated to deliberately kill in the process was zero. None."

According to 2026 Gallup polling, 33% of those surveyed think abortion should be legal under (undefined) "any circumstances." That's an increase of seven percent since 2005. When asked whether or not abortion is "morally acceptable," 49% said it was and 41% said it wasn't.

The Bottom Line:

Countless comments on the viral Instagram post show how normalized abortion on demand has become in just two generations. Forty-nine years of Roe v. Wade, pro-abortion media coverage, and the loss of morals surrounding sex have led to this.

Our own children have become expendable.

Key Takeaways:

• The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court ruling that overturned an Indiana law prohibiting abortion businesses from telling minors how to get an abortion out of state without parental consent.

• The court ruled that the law violated the First Amendment right to free speech.

• The ruling leaves minor girls susceptible to abortion coercion and undermines parental rights.

The Backstory:

In 2017, Indiana passed its “aid-or-assist law," which required health care providers to receive parental permission before discussing abortion with minors.

Following its passage, the legislation was challenged by Planned Parenthood Great Northwest, Hawaii, Alaska, Indiana, Kentucky Inc. (PPGNHAIK). It was temporarily halted in 2017 and then permanently struck down in 2024 by U.S. District Court Judge Sarah Barker.

Following Barker's ruling, the state appealed the decision to the Seventh Circuit Court.

The Details:

On August 18, the three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Barker's 2024 decision, ruling that offering abortion information to minors is protected by the First Amendment right to free speech.

Though Indiana law prohibits most abortions, the court said that telling minors how to get an abortion out of state — even without parental knowledge — is legal.

“Indiana officials may disagree with the purposes behind plaintiff’s speech and with the laws and policies of other states. They cannot, however, make it illegal to provide information about lawful conduct in other states,” Judge David Hamilton wrote. “Nor can they apply Indiana’s own parental consent laws to out-of-state abortions.”

Zoom In:

Abortion advocates are hailing the court's decision, but without the law in place, minors are at real risk for abortion coercion without their parents' knowledge.

In arguing for the law during court hearings, Indiana Deputy Solicitor General Jenna Lorence previously pointed out that it is common for parents to give consent for a child's medical procedure.

"There's certainly a strong interest of the state in ensuring that the parent-child bond isn't broken by a child getting medical procedures without their parents' permission, knowledge or consent," Lorence said.

Indiana Right to Life's president and CEO, Mark Fichter, has also noted that the court's ruling endangers girls and undercuts parental rights.

"This ruling places young girls at risk of predatory abortion providers, coerced abortions, and abortions without informed consent,” Fichter said following Judge Barker's ruling in 2024. “It also opens the door for Indiana abortion providers to sell abortions to young girls across state borders – all without parents knowing.”

The Bottom Line:

The state has a duty to ensure young girls are safe from abortion businesses who will likely convince them that abortion is their only option. This ruling now leaves minors susceptible to a predatory industry, without protection from their parents.

Key Takeaways:

• A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order against an Illinois law that will force healthcare groups and doctors to promote assisted suicide to patients when it takes effect in September.

• The law was signed by Governor JB Pritzker in December of 2025 and two lawsuits followedk in an attempt to block the law.

• A coalition of plaintiffs, including Springfield Bishop Thomas Paprocki, the Lutheran Care Center, and four physicians filed a lawsuit on April 11. Under the order, the Plaintiffs will not face penalties for failing to follow the law as the lawsuit moves forward.

The Backstory:

On December 12, 2025, Illinois Governor JB Pritzker signed Senate Bill 1950, the "Sanitary Food Preparation Bill." Hidden within the bill's text was an amendment that created the "End-of-Life Options for Terminally Ill Patients Act," allowing adults considered "terminally ill" to end their lives via assisted suicide.

The law is scheduled to take effect on September 12. In the meantime, two lawsuits have been filed against it. The first was filed in June by the group End Assisted Suicide and the second on August 11 by a coalition of plaintiffs including Springfield Bishop Thomas Paprocki, the Lutheran Care Center, and four physicians. It is the second lawsuit which the recent federal court order is addressing.

The Details:

Last week, U.S. District Judge Franklin U. Valderrama placed a temporary restraining order against the enforcement of provisions within the "End-of-Life Options for Terminally Ill Patients.... pending the issuance of the mandate in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals' decision in NIFLA v. Treto and Schroeder v. Treto, and this Court's subsequent ruling on Plaintiffs' expected motion for preliminary injunction."

In a press release, the Thomas More Society shared, "The State of Illinois has agreed to a federal court order issued on Friday temporarily enjoining it from enforcing its new assisted suicide law against Catholic hospitals under the authority of the Most Reverend Thomas John Paprocki, Bishop of the Diocese of Springfield in Illinois, the Lutheran Care Center, and four Illinois physicians while their federal lawsuit moves forward."

Illinois will not apply the pro-assisted suicide law to Mary Keen Kirchoff, M.D.; Michael Porubcin, M.D.; Michael Hawking, M.D.; Brian Couri, M.D.; the Catholic health care ministries of the Most Reverend Thomas J. Paprocki's diocese of Springfield; and the Lutheran Care Center — at least not for now, "while a separate case raising similar issues is resolved on appeal," said the Thomas More Society.

“Illinois’s new law forces faithful health care providers to cooperate in the state’s suicide promotion scheme, and this agreement protects our clients from this grave assault on their religious beliefs,” said Peter Breen, Executive Vice President and Head of Litigation at the Thomas More Society. “No government has the power to tell a bishop what is or isn’t moral or to require doctors to violate their oath to respect and protect human life. This is a critical first victory for these faithful doctors, for Bishop Paprocki’s Catholic hospitals, and for the Lutheran Care Center.”

What's Happening Now:

When the law takes effect on September 12, the plaintiffs will be protected from the penalties for not following it, including fines of up to $10,000 per violation, the loss of licensure, and criminal prosecution.

According to the Thomas More Society, "The order will stay in place until the district court rules on Thomas More Society’s forthcoming motion for a preliminary injunction. That motion will follow a decision in Schroeder v. Treto, a separate Thomas More Society challenge to Illinois’s Health Care Right of Conscience Act now awaiting a ruling in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which raises some of the same questions at issue in this case."

Key Takeaways:

• Lactation counselors will no longer be able to bill for caring for both mothers and babies — a reduced reimbursement.

• Reimbursement requests for the care of both mother and baby reflects that lactation counselors are serving two patients, not just one.

The Details:

According to a June 2026 Reimbursement Policy Update Bulletin from UnitedHealthcare, starting September 1, lactation counselors will no longer be able to bill for their care of both mothers and babies. Instead, only care for the mother will be considered billable. 

Per the bulletin, “In alignment with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, (CMS) code S9443 will be considered for reimbursement when a claim is submitted listing the mother as the patient. Claims submitted for the code S9443 for an infant will not be considered for reimbursement.” 

While UnitedHealthcare is the first insurance company to announce the reduced reimbursement, parents and lactation counselors alike recognize that other insurers may quickly follow suit. 

Zoom In:

On the surface, it might look like lactation consultants are double-billing insurance.

The tension between interconnectedness and independence is at the heart of former abortion practitioner Dr. John Bruchalski’s insistence that OB/GYN medicine must care for both patients, the mother and the child. The child, both in the womb and out, depends on his mother for survival, but there remain two distinct persons, not one. 

This is why lactation care, whether given by a certified lactation counselor (CLC) or an international board-certified lactation consultant (IBCLC), is right to bill for two patients, both members of the mother-infant dyad. 

Historically, UnitedHealthcare and other insurers have reimbursed lactation care services billed for both mothers and babies, although they technically don’t have to, for one simple reason: women’s preventive services — which have to be covered under the Affordable Care Act at 100% without a deductible or co-pay — apply, by definition, to the woman only. 

This means that while UnitedHealthcare and other insurance companies have reimbursed charges for mothers and babies, they are not legally required to do so. 

The Big Picture:

There’s value in meeting with a lactation consultant before the baby is born. But for most moms and babies, lactation care enters the picture because there’s an issue with feeding.

An initial in-home visit (or in-office, if the mother and baby travel to the lactation consultant) includes:

• taking a medical history of both the mother and the infant

• weighing the baby before and after a feeding

• observing baby’s latch and suckling during a feeding

• assessing for tongue tie or anatomical issues with baby’s palate

• addressing maternal pain with nursing or cracked or bleeding nipples

• advising what to do for inverted nipples

• educating and observing different nursing positions for optimal support and comfort and feeding

• identifying and troubleshooting milk supply issues

• answering questions about pumping and assisting with obtaining a pump and supplies

• demonstrating active listening and concern for maternal stress related to her baby’s weight gain, supply issues, or pain

Over the course of multiple visits, the mother and counselor’s rapport strengthens and the counselor evaluates whether previous education and interventions made a difference. Has mom’s pain resolved or at least greatly diminished? How is the baby's weight gain? Are further referrals (such as for severe tongue tie or lip tie) necessary? 

Why It Matters:

In the short-term, reimbursing lactation services at half the cost saves insurance companies money. But what happens when women and infants don’t receive the care they need to successfully breastfeed at least some of the time, let alone exclusively? 

We already know that six months of exclusive breastfeeding reduces risk of “[a]sthma, severe lower respiratory disease, obesity, Type 1 diabetes, acute otitis media (ear infections), sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), gastrointestinal infections, which can cause diarrhea and vomiting, [and] necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) (death of intestinal tissue) for preterm infants.”

Live Action News previously covered why more, not less, breastfeeding support could be especially helpful for black mothers and babies, who are disproportionately more likely to die in the year after birth compared to their counterparts of other ethnicities. 

We know, too, that breastfeeding mothers have lower rates of ovarian cancer, breast cancer, Type 2 diabetes, and high blood pressure — and, according to some research, lower rates of postpartum depression. 

And yet fewer than 1 in 3 babies are exclusively breastfed at six months, let alone breastfed at all until two years of age “or beyond,” as recommended by the World Health Organization and the American Academy of Pediatrics. 

A press release representing the International Board of Lactation Consultant Examiners (IBLCE), the American College of Nurse-Midwives (ACNM), and the Association of Women’s Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses (AWHONN) reflected the long-term net loss if insurance companies fail to prioritize and adequately compensate lactation care:

Suboptimal breastfeeding has been estimated to cost the United States more than $3 billion a year in excess medical costs (in 2014 dollars), and global analyses put economic losses in the hundreds of billions. When combining the US medical, non-medical, and premature death-related cost of not breastfeeding, this number exceeds $25 billion in 2026 dollars. 

The Bottom Line:

The joint IBLCE, ACNM, and AWHONN statement called the solution to the reimbursement change “straightforward,” urging insurance companies to “either support a companion code that reimburses the child’s care, or properly reflect the rate on the available code so it reflects that one visit treats two interdependent patients.” 

The signers acknowledged, “Fair reimbursement and evidence-based care does not have to mean unlimited cost,” but pointed out that “a roughly 50 percent cut, with no offsetting increase, goes further than sustainability requires, and it risks higher spending on the poorer outcomes that follow when families lose access to this care.” 

Key Takeaways:

• On July 9, Planned Parenthood in Fort Collins, Colorado, called 911 for a patient who was "hemorrhaging."

• Coding from the 911 calls indicate it was a serious event that required a second ambulance stocked with blood for a potential transfusion.

• There are at least five other incidences of this same Planned Parenthood calling 911 this year alone.

• In 2025, an 18-year-old died after undergoing a 22-week abortion at the same facility.

The Details:

According to the pro-life watchdog group, Operation Rescue, on July 9, an ambulance was called to the Planned Parenthood in Fort Collins, Colorado, for a 29-year-old woman suffering an emergency. The 911 records obtained by Operation Rescue reveal that the woman was "hemorrhaging."

Though the records were heavily redacted, Operation Rescue reported that it showed a code of "21B01M," which it says is an indication of a "possibly dangerous hemorrhage."

Emergency service personnel coded the call as "Bravo Medical" and requested adding "blood," which Operation Rescue reports to mean "sending a second ambulance stocked with adequate amounts of blood, likely for a possible transfusion."

Why It Matters:

The abortion industry claims that abortion is safe, but the 911 records prove otherwise, and this particular Planned Parenthood has botched countless abortions, putting women in danger. It has called 911 several times just this year, including on:

• January 29: 30-year-old woman with "heavy complications."

• March 4: Woman suffering a potentially life-threatening emergency

• March 11: 40-year-old woman experiencing "heavy" bleeding

• April 10: 19-year-old patient experiencing chest pain, "moderate" bleeding" the day after her abortion

• June 12: 23-year-old woman for "stomach pain and severe vaginal bleeding."

In March, the coroner released the autopsy of 18-year-old Lexi Arguello, who did after undergoing an abortion at the Fort Collins Planned Parenthood in 2025 when she was 22 weeks pregnant.

Colorado has no gestational limits on abortion. The autopsy confirmed she died of disseminated intravascular coagulation, a clotting disorder, following an amniotic fluid embolism, which is a known complication of abortion. It is alleged that Planned Parenthood staff failed to secure timely care for Arguello.

But she has her concerns about Jack's beliefs, including the fact that he is pro-life. In a recent podcast, Faris said she suggested to Jack that his pro-life convictions are a "luxury" for him.

Key Takeaways:

• Actress Anna Faris is the mother to 14-year-old Jack Pratt, the son she shares with ex-husband, actor Chris Pratt.

• Faris stated on a recent podcast that her son wants her to become a Christian, and claimed she challenges him on his beliefs, including the fact that he is pro-life, which she suggested is a "luxury" for him.

• Faris didn't elaborate as to why she suggested being pro-life might be a "luxury" for him — whether it is because he is male, or from a well-off family, etc.

• Jack Pratt was born two months premature and spent time in a NICU, cared for by doctors and nurses who valued his life. Jack "gets to be pro-life" today because Jack was saved. The same cannot be said for children who are aborted.

• Being pro-life isn't a 'privileged' position or a "luxury" — it is speaking up for the most vulnerable humans who cannot yet speak for themselves but who have an inherent human right to life.

The Details:

Anna Faris appeared on pro-abortion comedian Chelsea Handler's podcast Dear Chelsea last week, where Faris said she doesn't share the same Christian faith as Pratt or their son Jack, who is now 14.

"I didn't grow up with religion," she said. "[Jack] has asked me to accept Jesus Christ... I told him that I would do anything for him, including this, but it's still going to take a whole lot of long conversations."

Among those conversations is her effort to "challenge" Jack in his convictions, such as asking him his thoughts on "mega-pastors" and on abortion.

"And he's impressive. Actually he's impressive because I try to challenge him. I'm like, 'Do you think it's a luxury that you get to be pro-life? Do you think that's kind of a luxury?' He's like, 'Maybe,'" she said.

Zoom In:

It's unclear exactly what Faris means by claiming it is a "luxury" for a 14-year-old boy to espouse pro-life convictions.

Is it possible that she thinks...

• As the son of wealthy parents and as a male, Jack is unlikely to face the challenges that many people living with unexpected pregnancies or challenges during pregnancy face?

• These convictions make it easy for Jack to suggest that someone choose life even though he hasn't experienced the same hardships?

A large share of the pro-abortion marketing plan focuses on how 'poor women need abortion' and portray it as solely a women's issue.

But at the same time, abortion activists also spread the message that no one is immune to 'needing' an abortion — not even men, as various campaigns have claimed:

• Some have portrayed men as "abortion beneficiaries."

• Groups like Men4Choice see that men benefit from abortion. The group's co-executive director, Oren Jacobsen, once stated that the group's goal is “helping men understand they’re stakeholders in this fight with something to lose" — meaning that keeping abortion legal helps men to "win" at the expense of their preborn children's lives.

Young men like Jack could grow up and find themselves in relationships that experience unplanned pregnancies, or they may have children who are faced with difficult prenatal diagnoses. What happens to this alleged "luxury" or "privilege" of being pro-life then?

Choosing not to kill innocent human beings in the womb, and instead defending their lives, is showing support for the most basic human right for those who cannot yet speak for themselves.

The Backstory:

But perhaps Faris, in attempting to challenge Jack's pro-life views, is unintentionally overlooking something a bit more personal to him.

What if Jack is pro-life because he was born eight weeks premature and spent time in a NICU after his mother's water broke and she was put on bedrest, and he knows that he, too, was once vulnerable — and that others fought to save him? Jack "gets to be pro-life" today because medical professionals valued his life and did all they could to ensure that he survived.

Jack was well cared-for because his parents and his medical providers valued his life, even though he was born needing a great deal of extra help to survive.

“My water broke in the middle of the night at seven months,” Faris told Redbook magazine in 2015. “We rushed to the hospital and they were able to halt active labor with magnesium.”

Despite this, Faris wasn't given an induced abortion; doctors ordered her to go on bed rest for four weeks to try to hold off delivery.

“But on the seventh day, I went into labor again,” she said. “I was in denial. For hours I was like, ‘I’m just having indigestion.'

“Chris and I were so scared, but then Jack came out and, even though he was so tiny, he looked so good to us.”

Experiencing PPROM

Jack was born weighing three pounds, 10 ounces after Faris experienced premature preterm rupture of membranes (PPROM) and received proper treatment. Sadly, PPROM has been promoted by pro-abortion groups as a reason for a woman to have a later abortion, but induced abortion isn't the <a href="/news/abortion-not-cure-all-pregnancy-complications">standard of care</a> for treating <a href="/news/guest-opinion-pprom-pregnancy-made-me-prolife">PPROM</a>.

Jack was a person at birth even though he hadn't reached full term. And he was that very same person in the womb, from the moment of fertilization.

"The day came when I got to take Jack home, and the first years were filled with doctor's appointments, five surgeries, physical therapy, a lot of laughter — because Jack was and is the most adorable cutest thing I could ever have imagined," Faris said.

Every parent should be given the chance to bring their baby home despite any struggles or odds against them, like Faris did.

Since Jack's birth, Faris has made efforts to help premature babies; she began serving as a board member of the Global Alliance to Prevent Prematurity and Stillbirth (GAPPS), which seeks ways to prevent premature births like she experienced with Jack.

Perhaps Jack is also pro-life because he also believes that, regardless of the difficult circumstance in which a child is conceived, every human being is made in the image of the God in whom he trusts, and no innocent human being should be intentionally deprived of his or her life by the will of another.

In several states, babies the same age Jack was then (and babies <a href="/news/massachusetts-abortion-birth-bill-heads-governors-desk">even older</a>) can be legally aborted — killed by a lethal injection of feticide and delivered stillborn, or dismembered in the womb — and research proves that women who choose to abort late in pregnancy typically do so for reasons that aren't related to any sort of medical emergency.

Reality Check:

The real luxury and privilege sits with those in favor of abortion.

Men in favor of abortion frequently discuss abortion as a "woman's right," yet if that woman chooses to exercise her right to choose life and carry that child, a man may <a href="/news/face-women-coerced-abortion-speak-men">push or coerce</a> her into abortion.

When an inconvenience or a diagnosis arises, pro-abortion parents can 'make the difficult choice' to have an abortion. As a result, they are often celebrated as exercising 'compassion' towards their vulnerable, innocent child... by ending that child's life via abortion.

Amid the nearly 50 years of Roe v. Wade, an expectation arose that parents would and should abort after receiving a diagnosis for their baby. Those who choose life in that situation are often treated as selfish and cruel.

How is holding such a position a "luxury?"

The Bottom Line:

Being pro-life means having the understanding that every single human being's life matters regardless of their age, location, developmental stage, financial status, health, or the circumstances of conception.

Key Takeaways:

• The British Medical Association (BMA) has joined with the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine (AAHPM) in encouraging doctors to help patients die by starvation, but the BMA goes further.

• While the AAHPM guidance assumes patients would be considered 'terminally ill' to request death by starvation, the BMA's guidance says patients do not need to be considered "ill or at the end of life."

• The BMA guidance also states that doctors have a "duty" to help these patients in their quest to starve to death or refer them to a doctor who will.

The Details:

On August 17, the BMA issued a new guidance to provide "clarification about the law and ethics of VSED" — voluntarily stop eating and drinking — to hasten death.

The BMA guidance differs from that of the AAHPM, which was issued in 2023 and follows the understanding that VSED would be undertaken "by patients with a clearly-defined terminal illness associated with a prognosis of months to several years."

Instead, the BMA guidance states that patients don't need to be considered "ill or at the end of life" to request help as they end their own lives by starvation. The guidance from the BMA also states that "doctors have a professional duty" to assist these patients. It says (emphasis added):

We start from a position of understanding that: – patients with capacity are entitled to make decisions about treatment refusals and about their nutrition and hydration, including to voluntarily stop eating and drinking in order to hasten their death; – there is no requirement in the law that a patient needs to be ill or at the end of life to decide to voluntarily stop eating and drinking in order to hasten their death.

Refusing to eat food or drink water is not the same as refusing treatment.

Food and water, along with comfort care like cleaning and pain management, are means of ordinary care for a person while many treatments, such as chemotherapy, are considered extraordinary. Stopping chemotherapy would mean a person would die naturally from cancer. Stopping food would mean the person would die from starvation and dehydration, which is considered torture.

As Wesley J. Smith explained for National Review, the BMA guidance is clear that doctors are expected to help these patients, even when they aren't sick.

The guidance notes, "When an adult patient has made the decision to elect to VSED, the doctor’s initial responsibility is to assess the patient to check that: (1) the patient has the capacity to make the decision; (2) the patient’s decision is not a symptom of a mental disorder; and (3) the patient’s decision is being made free from coercion."

It then states (emphasis added):

If the three criteria above are fulfilled, doctors have a professional duty to provide palliative care and symptom relief to their patient. The doctor’s role is not to consider whether the patient’s decision is rational, reasonable, or sensible. It is not for doctors to decide whether the patient should be permitted to end their life in this way.

This guidance exerts pressure on doctors to participate in a patient's suicide, discouraging them from providing the patient with any means of support to encourage them to stay alive, even when they aren't considered sick. The doctor is required to turn a blind eye to the tragedy even if he or she conscientiously objects to the suicide, by finding a doctor who will assist the patient in their suicide.

"Suicide nihilism is exerting an ever-stronger gravitational pull in the West, with doctors increasingly expected to wield their expertise as so many death order-takers," wrote Smith. "The AAHPM’s and BMA’s blessing of physician participation in VSED deepens that darkness and strengthens the culture of death."

Why It Matters:

Suicide in a medical setting is marketed as a way to escape a life of pain and die with 'peace and dignity.'

Yet, with assisted suicide, patients are paralyzed and can <a href="/news/disturbing-revelations-assisted-suicide-drowning">drown</a>, their lungs filling with fluid, without anyone around them realizing it due to their paralysis. Starvation and dehydration through VSED is a horrible way to die; many have suggested that when it comes to 'healthy' people's deaths, it may even be considered a "war crime." But as long as the doctors assist, these medical associations have no problem letting people die this way.

A person's wish to die should not be met with cheers of "empowerment" and "dignity." Every human should be loved enough to receive compassionate palliative care and pain management until their natural death.

Helping them commit suicide sends the discriminatory, cruel, and immoral message that their lives are not worth saving and that they are a burden.

A provision in France’s new law announced earlier this week by the French President, Emmanuel Macron, requires that life insurance policies pay out in instances where an individual’s death is the result of assisted suicide or euthanasia, according to The Telegraph. 

This rule will also apply to life insurance policies that were taken out before the assisted suicide and euthanasia law came into force. 

Suicide exclusion clauses, which are common in many insurance policies for the first 12months, will not be able to be used to withhold payouts for individuals who end their lives by assisted suicide and euthanasia. 

The issue emerged during the Senate debate before assisted suicide and euthanasia became law, as critics of the issue pointed out that obliging insurance providers to pay out in the case of assisted suicide and euthanasia would provide an “economic incentive to resort to assisted dying”.

Under new French law, people who are not terminally ill could be allowed to end their lives

Despite the fact that the Senate, the upper house of the French Parliament, rejected the Bill three times, the National Assembly, the lower house of the French Parliament, ultimately adopted the new assisted suicide and euthanasia law on 15 July 2026.

The legislation was then referred to the Constitutional Council – the highest constitutional authority in France – five times by the French Prime Minister, the President of the Senate, more than 60 senators, and two separate groups of more than 60 members of the National Assembly. Despite the concerns raised, the Council ruled that the legislation was constitutional on 14 August.

The new law does not require someone seeking to end their life by assisted suicide or euthanasia to be expected to die within a 6 or 12-month period or any defined period of time.

Applicants must have a “serious and incurable condition” which is “life-threatening” and is in an “advanced” or “terminal phase”. These criteria have raised concern among some groups representing people with disabilities in France that people with disabilities could come within the scope of the law, especially through the refusal of treatment, which could make a person eligible for assisted suicide or euthanasia.

A debate in the National Assembly last year heard opponents of the Bill make precisely this charge, arguing that an incurable but treatable disease could be made “life-threatening” through the refusal of treatment.

Under the new law, a psychiatric diagnosis or intellectual disability would not automatically disqualify someone who otherwise met the eligibility criteria from ending their life by assisted suicide and euthanasia.

Spokesperson for Right To Life UK, Catherine Robinson, said “It is scandalous that under the new assisted dying law in France, people could be financially motivated to end their own lives by assisted suicide and euthanasia to avail of life insurance payouts”.

“This also creates clear concerns relating to coercion and who may benefit from a loved one’s death”.

“Assisted suicide and euthanasia have only just been made legal in France, and already there are scandals in the making that seem almost inevitable”.

Key Takeaways:

• On July 15, staff at the Planned Parenthood facility in Aurora called 911 to report "heavy bleeding."

• Two weeks later, on July 29, the Alamo Women's Clinic in Carbondale called about a 16-year-old girl who had experienced a "complication."

• Illinois is one of the most pro-abortion states in the country and has few regulations to protect women from the abortion industry.

The Details:

According to the pro-life watchdog group Operation Rescue, two women were reported injured at Illinois abortion facilities in July.

The first took place on July 15, at Planned Parenthood's facility in Aurora. The victim was a 26-year-old woman who reportedly was experiencing heavy bleeding. As is common in the abortion industry, the staff requested that the ambulance come to the side doors instead of the front entrance, and without lights and sirens, in an effort to keep the injury hidden from the public.

The staffer who called 911 refused to provide any meaningful information about what happened to the woman.

"We just need her to be transported where they have a little bit more equipment to be able to properly continue her care for today," the staffer said. It was only after the dispatcher pressed for more information that the staffer admitted the victim had been undergoing an abortion procedure and was experiencing heavy bleeding.

It was recently discovered that the same facility had to call 911 on July 24 for a woman who had no pulse. Planned Parenthood Aurora has a long history of injuring women, including multiple instances last year alone. It also asks ambulances to arrive without lights or sirens, which can delay timely care for the patient.

On July 29, another injury occurred, this time at Alamo Women's Clinic in Carbondale, and the victim was a 16-year-old girl. The full 911 call has not yet been released, but Operation Rescue was able to obtain a computer-aided dispatch (CAD) report, which revealed the girl had a complication after a "procedure," likely an abortion.

The Carbondale facility is owned by abortionist Alan Braid, who runs it with his daughter, clinic manager Andrea Gallegos. He has a second location in New Mexico, where he relocated from Texas after Roe v. Wade was overturned. He had already been breaking Texas law by committing illegal abortions even after the Texas Heartbeat Act was in place.

The Big Picture:

Illinois is one of the top abortion destinations in the country, attracting a large number of out-of-state women. It has some of the most pro-abortion policies in the country, largely thanks to JB Pritzker, the billionaire governor who founded his own 501(c)4 to promote pro-abortion state constitutional amendments across the country.

Illinois passed the Reproductive Health Act in 2019, which made abortion a "fundamental right," requiring it to be treated as a health care procedure, and forcing all insurance companies to cover elective abortions. Non-physicians are permitted to commit abortions in Illinois, and the state has been considering even more pro-abortion bills this year, some of which have already passed.

Key Takeaways:

• An Indonesian woman and her child are recovering after doctors performed an emergency c-section done at eight months gestation to save her life during a major earthquake.

• Doctors heroically continued performing the procedure by flashlight as the room crumbled around them.

• Both mother and baby survived and are recovering.

The Details:

Maria Florida Nogo Kelen was eight months pregnant with her fourth child when doctors determined they needed to deliver her baby by c-section, or Maria risked a fatal seizure.

As the procedure was underway, a massive earthquake shook the hospital in Nagao, Indonesia. As the room began to collapse around them, doctors didn't hesitate, continuing the procedure by flashlight.

"It was a great emergency, even if the quake didn't go on for long," Maria said from her recovery bed, now located in a tent. "The doctors who performed it were miraculous, and they fought so hard. Thank you, doctors and nurses."

Zoom In:

Maria also noted that during the surgery, she remained strong for her kids. "During the surgery, I was not afraid," she said. "I had to be healthy for my kids."

Maria's doctor, Yona Sara Pardede, admitted to being scared, but says she "didn't have much choice."

“As humans we were afraid. The surgery was difficult as she was a small baby," Pardede told Reuters. "I ask God, 'Please help us.' We don't even have a ventilator."

Maria named her daughter Gempita, which means "earthquake." The little girl weighed under three pounds at birth, and is currently being cared for in an incubator.

Though Maria experienced severe hemorrhaging after birth, she is also recovering.

The Bottom Line:

The doctors' dedication to caring for Maria and Gempita despite the obvious dangers around them is a true testament to the care and sacrifice of many medical professionals.

“I’m very thankful that while the staff left their families at home, they did not abandon us, and kept taking care of me,” Maria said.

Key Takeaways:

• The American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) released new treatment guidelines on handling recurrent miscarriage.

• The organization is recommending that sperm be tested for DNA damage in cases of repeated miscarriage.

• While the ASRM has done research into sperm damage and the effect it has on fertility, it is now placing a greater focus on it.

• Women are frequently treated as the main cause of infertility, yet the role men play in infertility is still largely overlooked in the national conversation.

The Details:

A new committee opinion from ASRM delved into recurrent miscarriage and what could potentially be causing it. This includes redefining recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) as two or more miscarriages before 22 weeks, even if it is a chemical miscarriage, meaning women no longer need an ultrasound with a visible gestational sac present for the miscarriage to count.

The miscarriages also do not need to be consecutive, meaning two miscarriages of any kind should be deemed as RPL and doctors can begin investigating potential causes.

The ASRM noted numerous possible factors in recurrent miscarriage, including:

• parental chromosomes

• pre-existing health conditions in the parents

• state of the uterus itself

• damaged sperm

In 2012, the ASRM acknowledged that sperm DNA fragmentation was a potential issue, but didn't yet recommend routine testing, as the research was still new and inconclusive. Now, however, the research is more clear.

The group cited two recent meta-analyses:

• The first found that men whose partners experienced RPL had 11–12 percentage points higher sperm DNA fragmentation scores than fertile controls.

• Another found that couples with high sperm DNA fragmentation had more than twice the risk of repeated miscarriage compared with those with low fragmentation.

For years, investigations into miscarriage have largely focused on women. The new guidance gives greater weight to evidence that DNA damage in sperm may also play a role, and says testing men for sperm DNA fragmentation can now be considered in otherwise unexplained cases.

Fertility doctor Carrie Bedient told Scientific American she experienced first-hand the effect damaged sperm can have, as well as how it can be corrected:

"In the man’s case, the test results revealed a moderate level of DNA damage. Bedient gave him some frank advice on how to rehabilitate his sperm. 'Hey, I need you to clean up everything you can,” she recalls telling him. He vowed to stop drinking alcohol, stop smoking, start exercising and take vitamin supplements—and it worked."

It also isn't an issue of just ordinary sperm testing; everything may look normal in typical test results, yet some of those sperm can still be carrying damaged DNA.

Why It Matters:

As the ASRM recently acknowledged, the national conversation still treats infertility primarily as a women’s issue, even though male factors are the sole cause in 20–30% of infertility cases and contribute to another 20–30%.

This means roughly half of infertile couples have some male-factor component, and yet, women still undergo the majority of fertility testing and treatment, regardless of the underlying cause.

This is especially relevant, as egg freezing and the use of donor eggs becomes more culturally acceptable and prominent. While these are not a guarantee of future fertility, they are often treated as such.

Women are routinely encouraged to freeze their eggs or use donor eggs if they didn't, all while men rarely receive a similar message. But the reality of paternal age, sperm health, and sperm DNA damage complicates the idea that reproductive planning is solely a woman's responsibility.

As Bedient pointed out, the DNA damage in sperm can often be addressed. While it isn't guaranteed to work, finding out that sperm has DNA damage and taking action to fix it can prevent couples from resorting to donor sperm, and the ethical problems and potential trauma it could cause for their children.

The Bottom Line:

Men who want children should understand that their age and health can affect reproductive outcomes too, and focus on things like <a href="/news/surveys-public-feelings-ivf-natural-fertility-care">restorative reproductive medicine</a>, in which doctors identify and treat an underlying condition when possible, rather than simply bypass it with donor materials and in vitro fertilization.

Gianna Care, established in 2011 by psychiatric and pediatric nurse Carolyn O’Meara, acts as a pro-life group in Ireland that provides complete support for women experiencing unplanned pregnancies — from pregnancy testing and counseling to baby equipment, financial assistance, and post-abortion healing.

Key Takeaways:

• Gianna Care is a pro-life group in Ireland providing unplanned pregnancy support.

• The group provides "compassion, accurate information, and support to anyone facing a pregnancy or in need after an abortion."

• These services are needed now more than ever before, as statistics show that one in six pregnancies in Ireland ends in abortion.

• The group is a non-for-profit company that operates without any government funding.

A Mission Born of Compassion:

Gianna Care’s mission is very straightforward: to cater to every woman encountering an unplanned pregnancy in Ireland and remove any obstacles she may face to choosing life.

Notably, support at Gianna Gare is customized, confidential, discreet, and non-judgmental for as long as each woman requires such help. Offerings range from free pregnancy tests and counseling with qualified psychotherapists to financial aid and a total array of baby essentials (prams, nappies, feeding chairs, formula, clothing, and hospital bags), as well as optional family support during the first year after birth. 

The group's website states:

Our goal is to provide compassion, accurate information, and support to anyone facing a pregnancy or in need after an abortion. We believe that there is a great need in Ireland for women and their families to be given every support necessary when faced with an unexpected pregnancy. What’s more, we believe that every client should be treated with the utmost respect and dignity. All of the information we receive is held in strict confidence.

Kate Lawlor, administrative staff of Gianna Care, told Live Action News: 

“As an organization, Gianna Care is unique in that no other organization does exactly what we do to address the very real needs, both practical and emotional, that arise during unplanned and crisis pregnancies.

We talk to, and more importantly, simply listen to, sometimes distraught young women while endeavoring to do our very best to address all needs, providing both practical and emotional support.

We are the only organization in Ireland that provides this kind of much-needed service.” 

The Reality Behind the Statistics:

The need for Gianna Care’s contributions in Ireland has never been greater.

In 2025, the country documented a staggering 10,600 abortions — a dreary statistic implying that one in six pregnancies resulted in abortion. From the legalization of abortion in 2019 to the year 2025, almost 60,000 abortions have been committed across Ireland. 

However, behind these figures are individual stories — narratives that Gianna Care frequently experiences via its webchat (www.giannacare.ie) and helpline services. Trained volunteers at Gianna Care evaluate each woman’s age, emotional state, acuteness of need, and urgency of her situation before deciding on what to do next.  

Lawlor told Live Action News:

“There is literally no ‘typical’ Gianna Care client. We see 18-year-old expectant mothers who are distressed to find themselves pregnant and are fearful of losing their place in college, to grandmothers in their 40s with grown-up offspring who are in shock to find themselves pregnant after raising a family."

The Economic Fringes:

Sadly, many clients of Gianna Care experience financial hardship, hailing from the economic margins of Irish society, where the cost of raising a child can feel unbearable without financial aid. 

Such a reality shows why Gianna Care’s material assistance is so crucial to the group’s mission to discourage abortions. Notably, the group offers essential baby equipment and materials to help women focus on their role as mothers instead of fretting over basic necessities, like how to obtain the next pack of diapers for their newborns.

Gianna Care offers aid for the whole of the first year after the baby is born, when necessary. The organization functions without any government funding. As a not-for-profit company limited by guarantee (CLG), it depends wholly on donations and the dedication of its staff and volunteers throughout Ireland. 

“In fact, we are regularly approached by Respond and Focus Ireland for assistance with the material needs of their service users,” Lawlor disclosed, as a testimony to the level of trust shown to Gianna Care in its work. 

Nationwide Reach, Personal Touch:

Gianna Care’s outreach extends far beyond Dublin, Ireland’s capital. Other Gianna Care offices operate in Limerick, Kerry, and Dublin, supported by a north Midlands storage hub where donated baby goods are kept and distributed to regional clients. A Southeast hub is presently in the pipeline, with Kilkenny, Wexford, or Carlow being assessed as possible sites. 

With volunteers spread from Donegal to County Cork, Gianna Care ensures that support is always within reach for every woman. Owing to this island-wide network, Gianna Care can act promptly on urgent requests, such as sending a pram to a young mother in rural Kerry or bringing formula to a family in Donegal. 

Healing After Abortion:

Gianna Care also provides postabortion care — a service hailing from the acknowledgement that abortion can cause deeply entrenched mental, physical, and emotional trauma for all parties involved, including mothers, fathers, extended families, and the rest of society.

“Few women walk away from the experience of abortion without some lingering emotional discomfort. Unresolved feelings of guilt, shame, and sadness can set in shortly after an abortion, or they may not surface until months or years later, ” the group pointed out.

To deal with post-abortion trauma,  Gianna Care offers individual counseling and a monthly support group, exhorting clients to participate in healing after undergoing an abortion.

Conceding the deeply personal nature of these experiences, the group respects each client’s decisions regarding their healing and recovery. 

A Model for the Future:

In a political climate where abortion has become increasingly normalized and even trivialized, Gianna Care stands as proof that practical support to women facing unexpected pregnancies can still make a difference and contribute positively to the culture of life.

The group’s approach — listening first, then giving tailor-made practical and emotional support — provides a tangible roadmap for authentic pro-life and pro-woman support. By tackling both the immediate material needs and the deeper emotional challenges that vulnerable pregnant woman may face, Gianna Care strives to mitigate the factors that may otherwise pressure women toward abortion.

The Bottom Line:

As Ireland struggles with the social and moral ramifications of its abortion revolution in the years following 2018, groups like Gianna Care are a welcome reminder that every pregnancy is unique, and every woman deserves support that respects both her dignity and that of the unborn child in her womb. 

My water broke when I was just shy of 22 weeks pregnant with my oldest son.

It wasn’t dramatic like movies had primed me to expect. I simply woke up in a wet bed. I called my OB’s nursing line and was told that I had likely just “had an accident” but to come in to get checked out just in case. I felt embarrassed and foolish, but somewhat reassured.

My OB delivered out of a small regional hospital 30 minutes across town, so we made our way there, trying not to be too anxious. I wasn’t actively leaking, as far as I could tell, so perhaps the nurse was right.

This pregnancy had already been one complication after another, with early bleeding suggesting a blighted ovum that turned out to be a disappearing twin. Unfortunately, the bleeding didn’t stop there, and we later discovered a blood clot behind my surviving twin’s placenta. 

I’d bled so heavily, in fact, that I’d had to take a leave of absence from school. I should mention now that my husband and I had gotten married as college students. We were trying to balance work, school, and running me to the ER every few weeks.

But, as of late, things had calmed down somewhat and we were hopeful that the worst of the complications were behind us. Then, I woke up in that wet bed. 

We made it to the hospital and I was immediately taken up the Labor and Delivery now that I was over the 20 week line. The first test was hopeful. They used a pH strip to measure whatever discharge was currently present, and that came back negative. We were prepping to be sent home when I had another huge gush as I was standing up to go the bathroom.

They tested again, and that time it was unmistakable. I was leaking amniotic fluid. 

The Options

At that point, everything happened very quickly. My doctor came into the room and explained that yes, my water had broken, but that they might be able to save my baby.

She told me that my options were to do nothing and deliver here, knowing that my son would not survive, or to transfer to a hospital with a higher level NICU where they would attempt to keep me pregnant as long as possible.

I remember thinking, “Why even offer the first option?” and told her that I’d like to be transferred. She told me she’d get it all set up and that my care would be coordinated with the Maternal Fetal Health doctor that I’d only seen once before.

My contractions started as they loaded me into the ambulance for the transfer.

I learned on that drive that ambulances do not have great rear suspensions as I bounced through every single contraction. By the time we made it to the larger hospital, I was in active labor. I learned that I was 4 cm dilated. The plan was to do what they could to stop the contractions long enough to get steroids onboard for my son. 

They loaded me up with magnesium sulfate and muscle relaxers and I passed out before they were able to complete the ultrasound to tell me if my son was even alive.

I woke up to the good news that they had successfully stopped labor, that my son looked stable, and that they were going to start treatment to keep me pregnant as long as possible.

They also told me that there were three things that would trigger immediate delivery: Infection, Cord Prolapse, or Placental Abruptia. To reduce the risk of any of those things, I would be receiving IV antibiotics, and remain on full bed rest.

The Moment I Became Pro-Life

I’d have agreed to anything to save my son.

I spent the first few days on complete bed rest at Baylor All Saints Hospital in Forth Worth, Texas, not even able to get up to go to the bathroom. Once they felt comfortable that steroids were fully in place and that my contractions were being held in check by the muscle relaxers, they allowed me to start taking showers and using the bathroom. After a few weeks, we even graduated to once a week wheelchair trips down to the chapel and coffee shop.

They also took me on a field trip to the NICU so that I could get an idea of what to expect with a micro-preemie. It was there that I saw a little girl who had been born at 25 weeks gestation. She was incredibly tiny, but also perfectly formed.

It was at that moment that I became actively pro-life. How in the world could we advocate killing children just like her? It also made me reassured that whenever my son was born, he would be well taken care of in this hospital.

In the end, I spent seven weeks in the perinatal unit. My incredible MFH doctors visited every single day and did everything in their power to save us both. As we got closer to delivery, they had to make some changes. I lost my wheelchair privileges and spent more and more time on the monitor. The week before I delivered they told me that we were probably within a few days of delivering based on how my son was looking on the monitor.

They thought that the placenta was failing. 

"The Worst They'd Ever Seen"

That failure finally happened late one night.

I had been feeling off all day, and by dinner time was running a low grade fever. My doctor came in to talk to me and said that even though one low fever might not trigger instant delivery in all cases, the fact that my son was also having heart decelerations made her think that we were dealing with the beginnings of infection, and that given that he was now 29 weeks gestation, we were going to do the c-section that night.

Once again, I’d been loaded up with drugs, so I have very little memory of that delivery. I fully believed that the nurse who held me steady during my epidural placement was my husband!  

I stayed barely conscious long enough to hear my son cry, and then passed out. When I came to, I learned that he had been born grey with an apgar of 1.

They’d resuscitated him easily, though, and his second was a healthy 9. Somehow, his lungs were more developed than they’d feared and he was nearly on room air! However, they said that the placenta was “the worst they’d ever seen with a live birth” and that he was very small. They also let me know that we both were experiencing an amniotic infection and so we’d both need iv antibiotics for several days.

(Watch Lauren's interview with Secular Pro-Life's Monica Snyder below.)

Beyond Their Expectations

But he was alive! Alive and, apparently, thriving far beyond their expectations!

He was small, yes. Would need lots of time to grow, yes. But he was not the sickest baby in the NICU as they feared he would be.

He also didn’t have Down syndrome which they had feared might be an issue because of some limb shortness that had been identified after my rupture.

Because of the care that I received, both at the small regional hospital, and later the main campus, my son and I were both expected to live.

And live, he did.

He is now a grown man, with almost no negative impact from his premature birth. We learned later on that he has a completely unrelated growth disorder (that was what caused those short limbs in the womb) but he doesn’t even have asthma! 

But I learned after his birth that our experience was far from universal. I joined many peer support groups for mothers who’ve experienced PPROM, and tragically some find us only after their doctors had told them that the had to immediately deliver.

Their babies died, and THEN they found out that a different doctor might have been able to save them.

Pro-Life Laws Aren't at Fault. Better Training is Needed.

But now, after Dobbs, we’re seeing another tragic outcome.

Doctors who previously would have just delivered immediately — who are untrained or uninformed about proper expectant management procedures — are sending women home without so much as antibiotics, falsely believing that the law prevents any other kinds of care.

This has resulted in cases where both the mother and child have died, which was completely avoidable!

While it is true that not every pregnancy can be extended following a PPROM, it is also true that no woman should ever be sent home without care following a rupture.

No pro-life law asks this, and no pro-life doctor would ever do this. 

I am calling for better training for all OBGYNs relating to PPROM. It is unacceptable that women and babies are turning septic because of improper care. My son and I are alive because our doctors were well trained and well informed. Women shouldn’t have to rely on the luck of the draw to receive that standard of care. 

Unfortunately, instead of demanding this training, people are politicizing these deaths and blaming pro-life laws for these outcomes. That couldn’t be further from the truth.

No pro-life law in the country prohibits doctors from inducing or allowing natural labor to continue after PPROM.

That said, not enough doctors know how to attempt to continue pregnancy if the woman so desires. Better training addresses both of those issues.

We must not allow ignorance and fear to kill women and babies.

With under 180 stories contributed thus far, perhaps the low turnout is because this narrative is past its expiration date. 

Key Takeaways:

• Among those who still believe that women require birth control and abortion to live their best lives or live life on their own terms, one difficult theme recurred in response after response to Ms. Magazine's campaign: sex and babies are connected, and the vast majority of abortions come from sex outside marriage.

• Even with the relative fragility of marriage and high rates of divorce, research notes that marriage "is the best protector of human life" in the womb.

• Ms. Magazine’s campaign responses make the case for saying the quiet part out loud: Sex can lead to babies. Sex outside the permanence of marriage precedes the majority of abortions.

The Details:

“What kind of life did access to reproductive choices let you build?” So reads the landing page for feminist publication Ms. Magazine’s ‘The Life I Built’ campaign.

The landing page asserts:

You — or someone you love — has benefited from contraception, sex education, maternal care, assisted reproduction, miscarriage care or abortion. This isn't a privilege we ask permission for. Our lives depend on this right. It's a right millions of us exercise every day — legal or not, restricted or not, named or not. We are the majority. We're going on the record.

But among those who still believe that women require birth control and abortion to live their best lives or live life on their own terms, one difficult theme recurred in response after response: sex and babies are connected, and the vast majority of abortions come from sex outside marriage.

If the pro-life movement truly wants to end abortion, it will have to face this uncomfortable reality head-on. 

What the Responses Tell Us:

Tale as old as time

Many of the responses, to date, come from women in their 60s, 70s and 80s: 

• A 79-year-old Missouri woman who had an abortion in her early 20s after her birth control failed

• An 81-year-old Texas woman who traveled out-of-state with her boyfriend in 1968 for an abortion she insisted she’s never regretted

• A 75-year-old Texas woman who sought to “escape the Kansas farm life my mother led”

• A 67-year-old Canadian woman who was able “[n]ot to be trapped in my small central Canadian town because he was stronger than me in 1977”

• A 64-year-old Texas woman whose birth control failed at age 22, lacking social, family, or financial support, and who “ditched [her] boyfriend” after her abortion

• A 61-year-old New York woman who was “the oldest daughter of a teenage mother," and claimed, "The cycle of unplanned pregnancies trapping women in abusive relationships goes back at least 3 generations.” 

These women were sold a bill of goods: the lie that they could not succeed, whether personally or professionally, without shutting down their natural fertility — and, when that failed, ending the lives of their children in the womb. 

(Some of) today’s women are telling the same story

That lie has persisted among the generations, cited by:

• A 34-year-old New York woman who credits “reproductive choices” for her ability to “leave an abusive partner and decide to create the family I want on my timeline without depending on someone else”

• A 27-year-old Colorado woman; she wrote, “Birth control meant that, when I realized my long-term partnership was no longer working, we could part ways without being tied together for life by a child (the cat was hard enough to sort out).”

• A 20-year-old Kansas woman who credited abortion for her “freedom to continue pursuing a bachelor’s degree and experiencing young adulthood in D.C.” 

The reality that many of these women’s “reproductive choices” led to the deaths of innocent, vulnerable, tiny persons is gut-wrenching. 

Here’s where the pro-life movement is confronted by an uncomfortable truth that resounded through many, many responses to the Ms. Magazine prompt. 

No life is a mistake

First, to be unequivocally clear, the pro-life movement is absolutely right to highlight the good that can come from an unplanned pregnancy, the reality that every life is an exquisite, unrepeatable gift, and the fundamental truth that no child deserves to die because of the circumstances of their conception. 

At the same time, it’s true that having a baby in the context of an abusive relationship, or during college, or in myriad other unstable life circumstances would not be ideal, not without great challenges. 

The main cause of abortion is…

Ethics and Public Policy Center president Ryan T. Anderson noted this starkly in his foreword to Nathanael Blake’s book, “Victims of the Revolution: How Sexual Liberation Hurts Us All.”

He wrote, "Nonmarital sex is the main cause of abortion” (xiii). The statistics are crystal clear, he observed, writing that “4 percent of babies conceived in marriage will be aborted, compared to 40 percent of children conceived outside marriage; and 13 percent of women who have abortions are married, while 87 percent are unmarried.” 

In no uncertain terms, he asserted that, even with the relative fragility of marriage and high rates of divorce: “Marriage is the best protector of unborn human life. As long as nonmarital sex is expected, large numbers of Americans will view abortion as necessary when contraception fails.” 

The truth no one wants to hear

He concluded that “Our primary task is not to persuade people of the humanity of the unborn–anyone who has ever seen an ultrasound knows all about that–but to change how people conduct their sexual lives” (xiii). 

The Bottom Line:

Is the pro-life movement prepared to “preach” the vital importance of keeping sex within the bonds of marriage? Is the movement prepared to withstand name-calling and insults hurled by those who feel judged, or fracturing within the movement by those who oppose the violence of abortion but resist advocacy of historically Judeo-Christian values? 

Ms. Magazine’s ‘Life I Built’ responses make an unwitting but strong case for saying the quiet part out loud: Sex can lead to babies. Sex outside the permanence of marriage precedes the majority of abortions. If we understand that abortion is the intentional killing of a preborn human, our blasé cultural acceptance of nonmarital sex has to change.  

Key Takeaways:

• A group of pro-life men set up pro-life signs during the San Francisco pride parade.

• While the men were screamed at, spit on, and cursed at, they were able to have meaningful conversations with some of the attendees.

• One woman shared her personal pro-life conversion story and a teenage girl inquired about the sign showing an aborted child.

The Details:

The men spent the day sharing signs, including those featuring images of abortion victims, which led people to curse at them, spit at them, try to steal their signs, and tell them, "The sooner you die, the better."

Women screamed in their faces, parents covered children's eyes, and people called them "disgusting," all while full grown men walked around the streets naked.

But there were a few bright spots.

One woman approached them to say that she is pro-life and that she was "100% pro-choice" at one point in her life. She even took a friend to have an abortion. But after becoming pregnant with her own son, she came to be pro-life. She had been in a car accident while pregnant, and while undergoing testing to ensure her baby was okay, she realized he was the same age as the baby her friend had aborted. "You guys are showing what's real," she told the pro-life men, adding that the people at the pride parade have "got to see it."

A while later, a 17-year-old girl approached them to ask questions about their signs, wondering if the images of the aborted babies were real. One of the men, Simeon, directed her to visit the website for Justice for the Five, which details the discovery of five late-term aborted babies found in a medical waste bin from a Washington, D.C., abortion business.

The teen girl asked Simeon, "What do you guys think doing this here [at the pride parade] will do?"

Simeon told her that they have had a lot of "amazing conversations" and that many people attending the parade were open to learning the truth about abortion.

Why it Matters:

Speaking the truth about abortion in a public way educates those who don't know the truth about life in the womb and the violence of abortion. It also helps other pro-lifers feel more comfortable in speaking the truth.

Key Takeaways:

• David Norton was an accomplice in helping his mother-in-law, Mildred Roller, kill herself in 2024.

• Norton helped purchase nitrogen gas and other items — including a plastic tub, gas flow regulator, and a clear bag — which Mildred used to kill herself.

• He pleaded guilty to one count of manslaughter by aiding suicide, and one count of tampering with physical evidence as part of a plea deal.

• He was sentenced to two years of probation only, no prison time, and was also ordered to donate to a "medical aid-in-dying charity," meaning he must donate to an organization that helps people commit suicide.

The Backstory:

As Live Action News reported in January, Kim Roller and her brother-in-law, David Norton, were arrested in Colorado for helping Roller's 91-year-old mother, Mildred "Milsy" Roller, kill herself in 2024. The two purchased nitrogen gas and other items — including a plastic tub, gas flow regulator, and a clear bag — which Mildred, who lived in an independent living facility, then used to end her life.

The duo learned how to use the items through the Final Exit Network, an organization that provides information and holds workshops to teach people how to commit suicide.

After their arrest, Kim Roller and Norton were each charged with manslaughter by aiding suicide. Roller was sentenced for her role in the crime in April.

The Details:

On August 14, Norton pleaded guilty to one count of manslaughter by aiding suicide and one count of tampering with physical evidence as part of a plea deal. He was sentenced to two years of probation and was ordered to donate to a "medical aid-in-dying charity" — meaning he must donate to an organization that helps people commit suicide.

Shockingly, though Norton's actions directly led to Mildred Roller's death, Boulder County District Court Judge Dea M. Lindsey insinuated that he perhaps shouldn't have been charged at all.

“I go back and forth on whether this should be a charge at all,” Lindsey said prior to sentencing. “I think it’s a philosophical issue.”

Notably, both Kim Roller and Norton stood to profit from Mildred's death, as her will bequeathed her children "equal shares of her estate, which included a savings account with approximately $655,540 in it." Meanwhile, the monthly bill of her living facility was approximately $6,980.

The Bottom Line:

There is never a situation in which it is appropriate to help a person end his or her own life, even if sick or disabled.

As more of these individuals come forward to tell their stories, gender ideology is exposed as harmful and predatory. Compassionate doctors aim to help survivors heal from the bodily harm caused by medicalized gender fraud.

Key Takeaways:

• The Health and Human Services report, "Wolves in White Coats," contains interviews with several individuals impacted by medicalized gender ideology.

• Luke Healy and Elizabeth Edens were two such individuals who shared how Planned Parenthood and others inflicted harm upon them by perpetuating the idea that they were born in the 'wrong' bodies.

• One of the doctors seeking to help detransitioners, Dr. Katy Hurd, once struggled with her own gender identity, and has now joined the Resilience Health Network. She hopes to open a brick and mortar and telehealth clinic for people seeking healing after undergoing sex-rejecting interventions. 

• Planned Parenthood, the self-proclaimed leader in ‘gender affirming care,’ continues to receive full access to federal Medicaid funding.   

In The Spotlight:      

Luke Healy 

A report recently released by Health and Human Services (HHS), “Wolves in White Coats,” detailed first-hand accounts and interview responses from those impacted by medicalized gender ideology.

One of those testimonies was that of Luke Healy. According to the report, Luke was just 10 years old when he was first subjected to gender ideology. What began as “ordinary childhood interests” such as anime fantasy and “internet fandoms,” quickly progressed into exposure to “online communities where adults and older peers discussed sex, pornography, homosexuality, and transgender identity with children.” 

By age 13, Healy claims he had been “groomed” into believing he was “in the wrong body.” When his concerned parents sought help for their son, institutional “experts” were quick to erroneously affirm his distorted identity — part of “social transitioning.”

Healy’s experience is not an isolated one. Live Action’s recent report explained how gender-ideologues like Planned Parenthood help to push individuals from one “intervention” to the next, through multiple stages: 

• Ideological ‘Grooming’: May include exposure to desensitizing and dehumanizing sexualized content and ideas — often contrary to reality — such as the intentional fracturing of gender from biological sex, erroneously suggesting that biological sex is a fluid concept. 

• Social Interventions: May include using pronouns contrary to a person’s biological reality. May also include physically restricting practices to appear more masculine or feminine – in contradiction to one’s biological sex – such as breast binding or genital tucking. 

• Medical Interventions: May include off-label use of sex hormones for the purpose of feminizing or masculinizing, contrary to the person’s biological sex; the medically unnecessary use of puberty blockers; and medically unnecessary body-harming surgeries for the purpose of appearing more masculine or feminine contrary to one's biological sex.  

Though Healy’s parents refused to allow him to take puberty blockers or feminizing hormones while he was a minor, at age 18, he began taking estrogen obtained from Planned Parenthood and other suppliers. This continued for several years.    

Healy says the hormones failed to relieve his distress and instead made him feel “like a stranger in his own skin.” He even considered body-altering surgeries but said he “was being sold procedures, not psychological help,” and reported that the consultations only "deepened his doubts.”

Live Action News has reported that Planned Parenthood boasts of referring for these types of body-harming surgeries, and along with other sex-rejecting services, does so often without professional psychological assessment through its “informed consent” model. 

After Healy began to combat his substance abuse to rebuild his life, he began to recognize “the same obsessive, destructive patter in gender ideology that he had seen in addiction.” He reported that he knew “he was not a woman before he knew how to stop living as one.”

Eventually, Healy said he began listening to “... a Catholic priest online and confronting the spiritual and psychological reality of what he was doing,” that led to him cutting his hair, bringing his identity in alignment with his biological reality, and he “never looked back.”     

The HHS report concluded Healy’s testimony, stating (emphasis added): 

Today, Luke argues that the institutions involved in his case did not investigate the causes of his distress, but instead pushed a false identity and directed him toward increasingly invasive interventions.

His account raises serious concerns about online grooming, sex-rejection-only counseling, informed-consent hormone access for vulnerable young adults, and the broader medical and political system that treats these interventions as routine while dismissing those who later regret them.

Elizabeth Edens

Elizabeth Edens is a mother and ‘post-detransitioner’ who began medicalized transition interventions at age 19, leading to body-harming surgery.

In a recent article, Edens revealed that Planned Parenthood was a provider of the masculinizing hormones she used. Edens claims that the Planned Parenthood doctor was “very dismissive and defensive” when she brought up side effects of taking testosterone.

“‘Well, that’s why they are controlled substances now, isn’t it?’ she hissed, unable to contain her contempt for me. As if her practice [Planned Parenthood] hadn’t been the one supplying me with it months earlier!”    

Edens explained:

“I was surprised, still operating under the assumption that the doctors had been genuine when they said they wanted to help me while offering me transition. It would take three or four more experiences of such poor treatment for me to fully understand that their intention had never really been to learn the truth about symptoms.”

She underwent a medically unnecessary mastectomy, which she stated was brought about by “gender medicine” and left her feeling “tricked by the medical field.” 

“Nobody told me that the possible side effects would be completely life-altering and changing,” Edens wrote. 

Edens refers to herself and other post-detransitioners as “survivors of gender affirmation medicine” or SGAM, further stating:     

Any survivor reading this will know that this requires psychological strength in a way that living as a trans person does not. Trans ideology says, “I feel vaguely uncomfortable with the way that God made me, the way that I came into this earth, the way I was born from my mother.” And then it says, “It’s okay to not face that feeling. It’s okay to run away from it using every maladaptive coping skill you can.

But, as you know, when we break out of that mentality and detransition, we not only face up to the original pain and grief surrounding the wish not to have been born the sex we were, but we also mourn things that were altered about our bodies in traumatic, destructive ways.

That is a real grief and a real feeling. Trans ideology told us that simply disliking things about the way you were born was reason enough to feel suicidal, but it held out the promise that we could change them. 

We have to be stronger than that. We have to accept the things that there are things we can’t change.

The Long Haul:

Live Action News has consistently exposed first-hand accounts from detransitioners, revealing how Planned Parenthood distributed sex-rejecting hormones or blockers even when young individuals explicitly detailed their battles with psychological distress, self-harm ideation, and the trauma of sexual exploitation.

Rather than investigating the underlying origins of a person’s suffering, sex-rejecting institutional providers like Planned Parenthood have utilized deceptive tactics on vulnerable populations in need of genuine and compassionate healthcare.

While Planned Parenthood and others continue to inflict harm, some doctors and professionals are committed to finding ways to help detransitioners on a path toward healing. 

Earlier this year during a Genspect “Detrans Awareness Day 2026” conference, Dr. Katy Hurd shared some of her experiences treating patients a few years ago in an emergency care walk-in clinic near Seattle, Washington, where she began to see the widespread impacts that medicalized “gender-affirming” ideology was having on vulnerable populations. 

During a panel discussion, Hurd recalled that one of the first patients she saw with negative impacts of sex-rejecting “care” was a mostly non-verbal, 17-year-old female with severe autism who was suffering from unexplained chest pain after being on testosterone for several years.

From that moment, several other patients came in the clinic seeking healing from damage done from sex-rejecting practices like life-altering hormones and body-harming surgeries. Hurd, who herself struggled with gender identity early on in life, joined the Resilience Health Network and aims to open a brick and mortar and telehealth clinic for people seeking healing after undergoing sex-rejecting interventions. 

“The good news is that there is health and healing available… but it’s a long haul,” Hurd continued, but it is doctors like Hurd that are helping to make patients like Elizabeth Edens find hope, healing, and the feeling of being heard. 

Edens wrote:

After years of disappointment, and having finally met some doctors who truly believe in “do no harm,” I find my defensive shield against all physicians has begun to soften…

It was shocking how new and different it felt to be listened to, first by Dr. Hurd, and then by the specialist she connected me with. There are still physicians who honor their Hippocratic Oath to first do no harm, and are horrified by the ways medicine has hurt vulnerable people.

Why It Matters: 

The sex-rejecting, medicalized “ideological beast” is rampant throughout most major institutions and is often perpetrated by taxpayer-subsidized groups and clinics like Planned Parenthood.

While these ideological practices continue to inflict life-altering physical, emotional, and psychological harms — in addition to multiple Planned Parenthood affiliates facing serious allegations of fraudulent activity by HHS — the self-proclaimed leader in ‘gender affirming care’ continues to receive full access to federal Medicaid funding.   

Key Takeaways:

• Numbers show that VAD deaths in Tasmania have risen 71% since 2022.

• 109 people ended their lives through VAD from 2024-2025.

• An independent review of the law is now occurring, though supporters are pushing for a further removal of "safeguards" surrounding VAD.

The Details:

Since it was first legalized in 2022, demand for VAD in Tasmania has increased 71%. According to reports from the state's Department of Health (which documents October to October), there were 27 deaths in 2022-2023, 62 deaths in 2023-2024, and 109 deaths in 2024-2025. In 2024-2025, VAD accounted for 2.1% of all deaths.

Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition pointed out these numbers may not even account for all assisted suicide deaths, noting, "The Tasmanian reports refer to reported assisted suicide deaths since not all of the participants are accounted for in the data."

According to ABC Australia, the state is now conducting an independent VAD review "to assess if it is still working as intended, and what improvements are needed."

Meg Creely, president of the Tasmania Branch of the Australian Medical Association — which is contributing to the review — indicated her organization's clear support of euthanasia. She said that most VAD practitioners consider it "a really rewarding part of their medical career," but noted that it can be a financial burden on doctors.

"What we hear from our members is that legal access and practical access are not necessarily the same thing," she said. "The way the system's currently set up relies a lot on unpaid overtime of unrecognised work done by the health professionals involved."

Zoom In:

Unsurprisingly, many of those who were supportive of legalizing VAD in the first place are now advocating for a loosening of the "safeguards" initially put in place.

Independent MLC Mike Gaffney, who sponsored the initial bill that led to VAD's legalization in Tasmania, told ABC that initial restrictions were placed on the bill "in order to get the legislation through parliament." Such 'restrictions' he cited include the fact that in order to qualify, a person must be an Australian resident or have lived in the country for at least three years, must have lived in Tasmania for at least one year, and must be at least 18 years of age.

"I think it's time for us to readdress some of those issues," he said.

Additionally, though VAD deaths have skyrocketed in Tasmania (and elsewhere throughout Australia), advocates like Creely are still pushing for a loosening of restrictions to allow approval via telehealth.

Were this to be approved, even more people would undoubtedly die by euthanasia.

"We very much don't want to see the region somebody lives in be a reason that there is a difference in their ability to access care," Creely said.

This is part of a larger national push to allow a person to be approved for euthanasia without ever stepping foot in a doctor's office.

The Bottom Line:

VAD in Tasmania is following an all-too-common trajectory: once legalized, suicide rates rapidly climb, while lawmakers seek to expand the rules to allow even more death.

Though advocates continuously refer to assisted suicide and euthanasia as "care," there is nothing caring about assisting someone in taking their own life.

Key Takeaways:

• Dr. Heidi Overton graduated from the University of New Mexico School of Medicine in 2015, underwent surgical residency at Johns Hopkins Hospital, and received her PhD in clinical investigation from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in 2022.

• She was named a White House Fellow in 2019, and has served as an aide in both Trump administrations.

• Trump has nominated Overton to be Dr. Martin Makary's successor to lead the FDA.

• Filling in since Makary's departure as acting commissioner has been Kyle Diamantas, who had previously served as a Senior Counselor and Acting Deputy Commissioner for Human Foods at the FDA by Kennedy in February 2026.

The Backstory:

Overton is a physician and White House aide, who graduated from the University of New Mexico School of Medicine in 2015 with a medical degree. She followed that with surgical residency at Johns Hopkins Hospital, worked on a study on opioid guidelines with Martin Makary, and finally, received her PhD in clinical investigation from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in 2022.

As she was finishing her education in medicine, Overton was also working as a political aide. She was named a White House Fellow in 2019 in the Office of American Innovation and the Domestic Policy Council, helping to guide the federal government in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic during the first Trump administration.

Following that, she worked at the America First Policy Institute, guiding health care policy as the director of the Center for a Healthy America.

Following Trump's second election, she was named deputy assistant to the president for domestic policy in 2025.

Dr. Martin Makary served as FDA commissioner for less than a year before resigning in May. Trump reportedly considered several candidates as his replacement, ultimately choosing to nominate Overton.

Filling in since Makary's departure as acting commissioner has been Kyle Diamantas, who had previously served as a Senior Counselor and Acting Deputy Commissioner for Human Foods at the FDA since February 2026.

The Details:

Overton is reportedly pro-life, and has praised the Supreme Court's Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade. In a statement, she said:

Today the Supreme Court delivered a huge victory for life and recognized the tremendous advances in medicine over the past 50 years.

New technology such as the three-dimensional ultrasound and fetal echocardiograms allow doctors and parents to see a baby’s early development in incredible detail. Breakthrough treatments and advancements in neonatal intensive care have led to nearly 80% of the extremely preterm infants, born 22-28 weeks gestational age, to survive and leave the hospital with their parents.

While doctors can now save the lives of babies with minimally invasive surgeries to treat conditions as early as 16 weeks gestation, six states plus Washington, D.C., allow abortion all the way up until the time of birth.

The Supreme Court’s decision today will allow Americans to reevaluate the value of the potential of every baby in the womb and choose life through a democratic process. Human life is not disposable, but a precious gift from God with inherent worth and dignity.

She also previously criticized the Biden administration's contradictory policies on pregnancy and abortion, and warned about the risks of chemical abortions.

She now faces Senate confirmation hearings before her nomination can be confirmed.

The Bottom Line:

"Live Action is encouraged by President Trump’s nomination of Dr. Heidi Overton to lead the Food and Drug Administration," Mark Wiltz, director of government affairs for Live Action, said in a statement. He added:

"During Dr. Overton’s time at the America First Policy Institute, she helped lead important work exposing the dangers of chemical abortion and the serious risks posed by the abortion pill.

We pray that if Dr. Overton is confirmed that she brings that same courage and leadership to the FDA, which has an enormous responsibility to protect the health and safety of America’s women and children. If confirmed, Live Action looks forward to seeing the end to the harm brought by chemical abortion drugs across our country."

Key Takeaways:

• In 2022, Texas attorney Mason Herring was arrested after he tried numerous times to force his wife, Catherine Pressly Herring, into an abortion.

• When Catherine found out she was pregnant with the couple's third child, Mason repeatedly poisoned her with abortion drugs, though ultimately, she and her preborn daughter survived.

• Catherine spoke with Live Action founder and president Lila Rose about the terrifying experience.

The Details:

Catherine began by pointing out that the most surprising thing about her story is the perpetrator: her husband of 11 years.

"I think a lot of stories come out about abortion pills with young girls who are in college or dating; maybe it's a casual dating experience," she said. "But my experience with an abortion pill poisoning was actually with my husband of 11 years. We had a six-year-old and a two-year-old at the time. We were not actively stopping a pregnancy, and we were actually having discussions about having another child. A pregnancy was not out of the blue, initially."

Then Mason asked Catherine for a separation, which she had said was completely unexpected; a week later, she found out she was pregnant:

"It was terrifying. Everything felt really upside down. I felt like he was acting strange enough that I needed to say this in front of our marriage counselor, and have a witness to his reaction. His reaction did not go over well.

That was the launching point to all of this. 

Already, your maternal instincts are pretty heightened in pregnancy, and everything felt a little off. The marriage counselor suggested that we go on a trip together, go on spring break, which happened to be that same week. We did.

The day after we returned home from spring break, he brought me breakfast in bed. That's the first domino that fell." 

The breakfast in bed was strange because Mason was not living at their home, but was staying in a hotel. He also told her she had not been drinking enough water on their trip, and he suspected she was dehydrated.

Catherine said the entire experience was unusual, and had her on guard:

"We started talking about the plans for the day with the kids and what was going to happen. He slowly started shifting from being sweet into being impatient, and urging me to drink faster. 'I need to go. I need to get to the office. You're taking too long.'

Like, this is so strange. I'm eating my biscuit. All of a sudden, he jumped off the bed, stood up, and he was hovering over me. He said, 'You need to drink faster. I need to go.' He was angry. He was like, 'Chug the water.' That's not normally something that a husband says to a wife, chug something. 

It was at that moment that I pulled the cup away from my lips and looked down for the first time. And the water was not clear. It was creamy, kind of milky. But at that point, I had consumed about three-fourths of the water. I immediately asked him, 'What is this? What is in this cup?'

And he grabbed the cup out of my hands, and he looked down into it himself. And he said, 'Oh, weird. I must have grabbed a dirty cup.' And he immediately left the house with the cup."

What Happened Next:

Catherine said that within 30 minutes, she started experiencing violent cramps, and wasn't even able to make it to the bathroom before being sick. Yet she still remained in denial that Mason could have done this to her.

"I think the most dangerous part about domestic violence is your head and your heart play against each other," she explained. "This is a person I love. There's no way that he caused this. And so my first thought was, I must be having food poisoning."

Once it happened again, however, she realized it wasn't just food poisoning, but that he was drugging her with something. "It was so confusing," she said. "I was really trying to think, okay, what could be in the cup? Was he trying to hurt me, or was he trying to hurt the baby?"

She eventually googled abortion pill reversal, called the hotline, and spoke to a nurse. After explaining what had been happening, the nurse recommended she begin taking progesterone:

"So for those out there listening that don't know how chemical abortion pills work, they work by cutting off your hormone production. And so adding progesterone back in replenishes your natural hormones for your pregnancy. 

And she said, even if this turns out not to be an abortion pill poisoning, it won't harm you to take the progesterone. It was just a preventative action." 

Eventually, Catherine began bleeding, so she went to the hospital, where her symptoms continued to get worse, leading doctors to fear she was going into kidney failure. She was given antibiotics, and on an ultrasound, she saw that her daughter was miraculously still alive.

And yet, Mason arrived at the emergency room with another drink for her:

"I didn't know what to do. And the emergency room did not know what to do. These are not cases that they see every day, thankfully.

But I wasn't given a lot of guidance. Everybody was questioning, should I call the police? I'm like, 'I can't call the police, I don't have any evidence.' My now ex-husband was a very successful trial attorney, and I knew there was no way I could prove that this had happened to me.

So I spoke with social workers. They came in, kind of guided me on what I should do. We talked through whether I should contact the police.

And interestingly, my medical records did not indicate any of this information was going on. My medical records did not say I had been poisoned at that time. We did not have confirmation that it was abortion pills in my system." 

After leaving the hospital, Mason continued to try to give her drinks. This time, however, he did not watch her drink them, so Catherine was able to collect them for testing.

"I actually contacted a private investigator after those next drinks," she said. "Once I obtained some evidence, I took it to a private investigator and he helped me work to try to test the liquids. That proved to be very, very difficult. So you can test urine samples and blood samples for pharmaceutical drugs much easier than just a glass of water. So it took a lot of time, and thankfully we kind of had this lull in the middle where we could kind of get a plan together with my team."

The sixth drink involved their daughter.

"He left them in my two-year-old's room unattended," she said. "And very casually, as he left the house, he said, 'The red one is for our daughter. The blue one is for you.' And... you can handle a lot when it's on you; when it's about your children and your pregnancy, it's just a whole 'nother experience."

After seven attempts, Mason was caught on camera throwing abortion pill packets into the trash.

"He had brought in a baggie of crushed up powder and he pulled it out of his pocket, put it into a cup, and then topped it with cranberry juice from my fridge," she recalled.

At that point, she had enough evidence to go to the Houston Police Department, who ran tests to confirm he was drugging her with abortion pills. He was arrested, and she was able to obtain a restraining order against him, but the experience was traumatizing for Catherine.

"I've been diagnosed with complex PTSD from just having to relive this over and over for so many years to try to prove what happened," she said.

The Bottom Line:

Today, Catherine's daughter is alive, and though it took time, she is developmentally on track and thriving at four years old.

"She is a miracle girl," she said. "It's been a long road. My water broke 12 weeks early. She was born at 30 weeks and she has spent over 160 days in ICU in her life. At 14 months she was non-verbal, non-mobile, did not eat or drink by mouth. So she has come a very long way. I'm so grateful for her therapist, and we've just poured everything we could into her. So she's our little miracle."

Key Takeaways:

• Former University of Kentucky cheerleader Laken Snelling, who was arrested last year when authorities found the deceased body of a baby in her bedroom closet, has finally pleaded guilty to manslaughter, abuse of a corpse, tampering with physical evidence, and concealing the birth of an infant.

• Snelling originally misled authorities into believing the baby boy's death was entirely accidental; however, she later admitted to health personnel that she believed she heard him "whimper." She originally pleaded not guilty to first-degree manslaughter and then admitted to ending his baby's life by "depriv[ing] him of oxygen."

• Prosecutors are seeking a 10-year sentence for manslaughter and one year each for the remaining three charges. Snelling is set to be sentenced October 16.

The Details:

The New York Post reports:

After initially pleading not guilty to first-degree manslaughter in April, an emotional Snelling finally admitted to “ending” her baby’s life in a Kentucky courtroom Friday morning.

Snelling, now 22, also pleaded guilty to abuse of a corpse, tampering with physical evidence and concealing the birth of an infant.

Snelling reportedly told the court that she "was under a lot of emotional stress and my baby came unexpectedly," and that "instead of helping him I ended his life and afterwards I cleaned up and didn’t tell anyone." She told Judge Diane Minnifield that she killed him by “depriv[ing] him of oxygen.”

As Live Action News previously reported, the child's autopsy revealed that he was born alive and that the cause of death was "asphyxia by undetermined means."

The Post noted:

In an interview with police, Snelling, who has been free on $100,000 bond since her arrest last year, initially claimed the baby had fallen on the floor after she gave birth, but she didn’t think he was “breathing or alive.”

However, her story soon changed, claiming instead she had passed out “on top of the baby” and woke up to find him “turning blue and purple.”

She later told medical staff that the newborn had shown “a little bit of fetal movement” and made a “whimper” after being born, court documents state.

At first, it was speculated that this was a case of "self-managed abortion." However, it is now clear that the infant was born alive and then deliberately killed.

The Post added that "Prosecutors have recommended a 10-year prison term for manslaughter, and one year each for abuse of a corpse, tampering with physical evidence and concealing the birth of an infant," and Snelling is set to be sentenced on October 16.

The Backstory:

On August 27, 2025, "concerned roommates" contacted authorities "after they found blood in her room after hearing her make odd noises earlier that day," as Live Action News previously noted. Snelling was not home when authorities arrived and found a black trash bag in her bedroom closet, which contained a "blood soaked" towel with the baby boy's body wrapped inside.

According to the post-arrest complaint, Snelling "admitted to concealing the birth by cleaning any evidence, placing all cleaning items used inside of a black trash bag including the infant who was wrapped in a towel...." The complaint added that "the listed suspect treated the corpse in a way that would outrage ordinary family sensibilities."

In March of this year, a grand jury indicted Snelling on charges of manslaughter in the first degree, abuse of a corpse, tampering with physical evidence, and concealing the birth of an infant.

Live Action News reported at the time:

The jury wrote, "She intentionally abused the infant and thereby caused death to a person twelve (12) years of age or less, or who is physically helpless or mentally helpless."

She is not charged with murder, the grand jury explained, because she acted under "extreme emotional disturbance" — meaning they didn't feel that Snelling had reasonable self-control.

The Bottom Line:

Though pro-abortion pundits attempted to make this crime about abortion, it may be -- just not in the way they originally thought. Though Snelling didn't attempt a "self-managed abortion" as some suggested, she killed her newborn just after his birth.

Laken Snelling's baby boy was the exact same human after his birth as he was prior to it. There is no justification for killing him either before birth or after. He had the same inherent right to life, from the moment of his existence at fertilization, simply by virtue of being a human.

Had Snelling chosen abortion earlier in pregnancy, this very same child would be dead, yet much of society would claim it was her protected "right" to end his life.

This is nonsensical. All human beings, in or out of the womb, deserve to be treated as irreplaceable, valuable human beings and protected by law.

Key Takeaways:

• Expecting.Ai recently launched; it is a website catering to Chinese "intended parents seeking U.S. surrogacy options."

• The database allows Chinese citizens to filter American surrogates by a number of factors, including age, BMI, race, ethnicity, religion, marital status, and price.

• Surrogacy is outlawed in China, yet an unregulated international industry allows Chinese parents to utilize surrogates in other countries.

• There have been a number of surrogacy scandals over the past few years involving Chinese parents.

• Surrogacy disregards the children who are created in the process, focusing only on the adults' wants and desires.

The Details:

In a July press release, Expecting.Ai, which is based in Israel, announced the launch of "the largest Chinese-language surrogate database designed for intended parents seeking U.S. surrogacy options. At launch, the database includes hundreds of ready-to-match surrogate profiles from vetted U.S. surrogacy agencies across the country." It continues:

The new Chinese-language database allows intended parents from China and Chinese-speaking families worldwide to review U.S. surrogate profiles, understand key profile details, and inquire about specific surrogates directly through the Expecting.Ai platform.

One of the site's features is Aimee, described as "an AI-powered fertility assistant designed specifically for third-party reproduction."

On the platform, visitors can browse egg donors, sperm donors, and surrogate parents, viewing pictures and profile information much the same way one would shop for a new pet.

Though there is an English version for American users, the site's primary focus is a Chinese language portal meant to cater to Chinese citizens seeking an American surrogate. The company's press release cited a 2024 study published in Fertility and Sterility, which found that Chinese parents accounted for 41.7% of all international surrogate contracts with American women from 2014 to 2020.

"Surrogacy is already a complex and emotional journey, and language should not be an additional barrier," said Nadav Raanan, CEO of Expecting.Ai. "With hundreds of ready-to-match surrogate profiles now available in Chinese, intended parents from China and Chinese-speaking families can review their options clearly and take the next step with greater confidence."

Why It Matters:

Surrogacy is illegal in China, yet because it is a widely unregulated practice internationally, Chinese citizens can search abroad for wombs to rent and babies to purchase.

Josh Wood, executive director at Them Before Us, highlighted many of the website's problems in an X thread. Wood points to the "Chinese storefront," which allows users to filter available American women by a number of factors, including age, BMI, race, ethnicity, religion, marital status, and price.

"The site also recruits the supply," he noted. "A quiz on their landing page tells women how much they can make by renting their womb: four questions, instant quote."

Over the past several years, there have been several high-profile cases in which Chinese residents have exploited American surrogates, and the children they create. These stories include:

• A Florida woman fighting for custody after the Chinese man who hired her as a surrogate failed to pick up his triplets after they were born. Now, after almost two years, he is fighting to retrieve the children. In the meantime, they have been taken from the only home they've ever known and placed in foster care.

• A Chinese billionaire who has fathered at least 100 children using American surrogates.

• A surrogacy agency in California labeled a national security threat after seeking out women to be surrogates without any intended parents. Many of the babies were allegedly being taken to China.

The situation has grown so serious that last year, Florida Senator Rick Scott introduced the SAFE KIDS Act, to limit international surrogacy exploitation. The act would prevent surrogacy contracts with individuals from a "foreign adversarial nation," including China.

Wood pointed out:

Add it up and the market becomes clear:

- Banned in China.
- Affirmed by the Supreme Court in June: born here, citizen at birth, beyond Congress's reach.
- Green cards for the parents at 21.

Every adult in this market gets something. The child pays for all of it.

The Bottom Line:

At the center of every one of these stories — though rarely highlighted by the mainstream media — are the children who are created.

Surrogacy treats these children as products without a second thought, and often, they get caught in the crosshairs of tricky custody battles and international wrangling.

Unregulated surrogacy means these children could be one of dozens or even hundreds born to a single parent, deprived of the love, care, and nurturing of a mother, father, and traditional family.

No one is owed a child, but all children deserve to be born into loving families.

Key Takeaways:

• The American Medical Student Association is funding four abortion training retreats this summer.

• Students must agree that abortion is "essential to comprehensive health care."

• They will receive pro-abortion advocacy training in addition to training in manual vacuum aspiration abortion, the abortion pill, and 'self-managed abortion.'

The Details:

The AMSA Abortion Care & Reproductive Justice Institutes held four of the abortion training retreats in Asheville, North Carolina, this summer. The final retreat will be held August 20-23. In order to participate, medical students must align with the AMSA's view on abortion.

On its website, AMSA states that it "believes reproductive health services are essential to comprehensive health care, and we support full access to the entire range of reproductive services. We believe legal, safe, voluntary abortions should be available to all who need them, regardless of how much they earn, who they work for, or what state they live in." It gives medical students pro-abortion "advocacy training, and hands-on skill building" while asking students to "think critically about abortion-related education." It further states:

AMSA also believes both Undergraduate Medical Education (UME) and Graduate Medical Education (GME) programs should offer abortion education and training — especially Family Medicine & OB/GYN residency programs.

The "highly-skilled, culturally sensitive" students will attend the training retreat for free to build a "diverse physician workforce." In addition, they are offering scholarships to cover travel, meals, training supplies, and transportation to the airport.

The training involves:

• a workshop during which the students use a manual vacuum aspiration kit on a papaya

• "values-clarification training"

• the impact of the Dobbs Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade

• teaching on the abortion pill

• teaching on 'self-managed' abortion

• pro-abortion advocacy rhetoric

• networking

• identifying "reproductive freedom champions"

The Bottom Line:

Doctors need not intentionally and directly kill a baby to save a mother. Induced abortions utilize drugs and procedures to intentionally end the preborn child's life.

Treatment for miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, premature rupture of membranes, preeclampsia, and medical emergencies are not induced abortions. Preterm delivery and emergency C-section procedures can end pregnancies in emergencies without intentionally ending children's lives.

Campus Reform, the original source for this story, reached out to AMSA for comment but did not receive a response.

Key Takeaways:

• New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill signed SS260 on Thursday, which prohibits "interference" with abortion and 'transgender' services.

• The legislation makes it a criminal offense to harass or block individuals from accessing abortions, while strengthening the protected status of abortionists and abortion businesses.

• The bill also allows a person to sue anyone who “causes a reasonable person to suffer damage to the person’s business or personal reputation, financial harm, or pain and suffering, mental anguish, or emotional harm” due to committing or receiving an abortion.

• Pro-lifers warn the bill will limit the free speech and prayer of pro-life sidewalk counselor outside abortion businesses.

The Details:

In a signing ceremony Thursday described by one news outlet as a "giant street party," Sherrill signed S2260. The bill has a number of measures meant to intimidate those attempting to reach women outside abortion businesses; one of these measures makes it a fourth-degree criminal offense to "injure, threaten, intimidate, or physically block patients or providers, or to damage property in an effort to interfere with reproductive healthcare services."

'Reproductive healthcare' will now be defined to include 'transgender' services as well as abortion.

The legislation also strengthens the state's pro-abortion shield laws, protecting abortionists, or anyone connected with abortion, from out-of-state investigations or extradition. If an abortionist breaks another state's abortion laws, they will be safe from any legal action in New Jersey.

Further, it allows a person to sue anyone who “causes a reasonable person to suffer damage to the person’s business or personal reputation, financial harm, or pain and suffering, mental anguish, or emotional harm” because the person facilitates, performs, or receives "reproductive health services."

Pro-life groups stress that this opens to the door for an abortion-minded woman to sue any sidewalk counselors for "mental anguish" if she encounters them outside an abortion facility.

The measure went into effect immediately upon signing.

What We're Hearing:

The new law has been roundly condemned by pro-life groups, as they particularly warn that the legislation will hinder sidewalk counselors and those who peacefully pray outside abortion facilities.

New Jersey Right to Life said in a statement:

Peaceful sidewalk counseling, prayer, holding signs, or simply offering help and alternatives outside a facility can easily be labeled 'intimidation' by someone who claims to feel threatened, leaving pro-life advocates open to criminal charges that are difficult to disprove and chilling constitutionally protected expression.

The group's executive director, Marie Tasy, added:

“Governor Sherrill just signed a blank check for the abortion industry and a death warrant for countless unborn children with beating hearts. S2260 does not protect women. It protects the people who end the lives of living human children already growing in the womb.

New Jersey should be a sanctuary for mothers and babies, not a legal fortress for those who profit from abortion.”

Key Takeaways:

• Several new pro-abortion groups with less familiar names are making their way into the public eye... and they're well-funded.

• Some of these groups are partnered with well-established, well-known pro-abortion organizations.

• Others are comprised of pro-abortion politicians, and still others are recruiting pro-abortion Democratic women to run for office.

• All of these groups are making attempts to expand the killing of preborn human beings.

The Details:

Lawyers for Good Government (L4GG)

Lawyers for Good Government (L4GG) has a name that sounds positive, and its description claims it is:

[...]a community of 125,000 lawyers, law students, and activists fighting to protect equal rights, ensure equal justice, and create equal opportunities for every person.

We identify where lawyers can make the greatest impact and mobilize them to defend democracy and the rule of law, protect civil and human rights, and advance environmental justice for all Americans. 

LFGG's mission is to "mobilize lawyers to ensure that all levels of government — federal, state, and local— promote equal justice under the law and uphold civil and human rights, including the right to health and the right to live in a healthy environment."

It sounds noble until you dig further to discover that it is mobilizing to protect the prenatal killing of human beings. According to L4GG's state initiative webpage:

As federal protections continue to erode, state governments are making the decisions that define what rights look like in practice — on abortion access, transgender healthcare, voting, immigration enforcement, climate resilience, and more.

L4GG, which operates a "Policy Resource Hub" to promote "Reproductive Rights Law and Policy," is openly partnering with pro-abortion groups like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) to "amplify" its message that abortion (the intentional and direct killing of a preborn human being) is paramount to "human dignity."

Its website states:

At L4GG, we fervently believe in reproductive rights and health equity, understanding it as a cornerstone of individual freedom and human dignity. Our commitment to fighting for bodily autonomy is grounded in the knowledge that all aspects of the fight, from reproductive freedom to gender-affirming healthcare, are inextricably intertwined with one another.

L4GG created a State Legislative Advocacy Academy which "teaches lawyers how to use their unique skills to influence state policy..."

It claims to have "mobilized 125,000 lawyers and law students to fight" and that they have "contributed over $150 million in pro bono legal services" for, among other things, "reproductive healthcare" — abortion.

L4GG receives funding from several groups, including the 128 Collective Foundation, which, according to Influence Watch, has granted dollars to pro-abortion groups, including:

• $50,000 to Abortion Freedom Partnership.

• $50,000 to FemHealth USA, the US affiliate of DKT International, a worldwide seller of the abortion pill.

• $100,000 to If When How

• $50,000 to International Youth Alliance for Family Planning

• $25,000 to the National Women’s Health Network abortion hotline

Reproductive Freedom Alliance

The Reproductive Freedom Alliance (RFA) claims to be "a nonpartisan coalition of 24 Governors committed to protecting and expanding reproductive freedom."

But while claiming to be "nonpartisan," the organization is working to "[p]rotect abortion access by enshrining reproductive freedom in state constitutions, developing contingency plans to protect medication abortion access, and reducing barriers to care."

"Alliance Members" include governors and politicians from some of the most pro-abortion states:

• Gavin Newsom (California)

• Gretchen Whitmore (Michigan)

• Michelle Lujan Grisham (New Mexico)

• Kathy Hochul (New York)

The "Alliance" works to expand "access to abortion" and promote <a href="/news/pro-abortion-shield-laws-prosecution-states">shield laws</a> to protect abortionists.

Collaborative for Gender and Reproductive Equity

The Collaborative for Gender and Reproductive Equity [CGRE] describes itself as "[a] dynamic learning community of donors and foundations united in the advancement of gender, reproductive, and racial equity."

CGRE "supports efforts that use state courts to advance gender, reproductive, and racial equity."

It is funded by billionaire pro-abortion foundations, including:

• The Packard Foundation

• The Ford Foundation

• Michael <a href="/news/michael-bloomberg-donates-1m-missouri-abortion-pac">Bloomberg</a>

• <a href="/news/christianity-today-funded-major-planned-parenthood-donor">Hewlett</a>

CGRE’s Executive Director, Margaret Hempel, described the impetus behind starting CGRE to Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors:

At the end of 2018, the Packard family and the board of the David & Lucile Packard Foundation wanted to bring new money and new donors into work around gender and reproductive equity. A semi-formal cohort already existed around these issues, but funders were seeking community and ready to coalesce around new ideas and leaders. The Foundation made an initial five year, $50 million commitment and reached out to other donors to join. The JPB and Ford Foundations joined almost immediately, and were later joined by philanthropists newer to this funding space, like Schusterman Family Philanthropies.

Emerge America

Emerge America claims to be "the nation's premier organization that recruits, trains, and provides a powerful network to Democratic women who want to run for office."

Co-founded in 2002 by Andrea Dew Steele, Emerge is not just looking for women who want to serve in public office; the "ecosystem" of state affiliates whose goal is to "reach 100,000 women" by 2035 is openly recruiting pro-abortion candidates to run for office at the state and local level, including as judges and on the school board.

Emerge, a 527 political organization, claims that "[s]ince 2002, Emerge has trained more than 7,000 women to run for office, and over 1,200 Emerge alums serve in elected office today..."

Emerge has multiple training programs:

• Meeting the Moment helps women identify how they can take action and lead in their communities...

• Seated Together is our advanced leadership program for Black women elected officials...

• Gavel In prepares women interested in running for judge and navigating the judicial pathway, while our

• School Board Training equips women with the tools and knowledge to run for and serve on local school boards.

Emerge advocates for abortion at both the state and local level. Its website includes a "how to protect choice" and a "protect abortion rights by running for office" webpage. It offers "Signature Training" and "Boot Camp" programs that utilize pro-abortion activists and tools found on EMILY's List.

In fact, Emerge states that it partners with radical abortion groups like EMILY's List. According to its own website:

Emerge maximizes its impact through strong and strategic relationships with other political groups, including the Democratic Party political committees, EMILY’s List and state women’s training organizations, Planned Parenthood, America Votes, NARAL, national labor unions, Higher Heights for America, Victory Fund, Run for Something, Latino Victory, Moms in Office, Onward Together and many others.

...Emerge recruits program members through political contacts, board members, alums, and relationships with other political organizations, labor unions, and community organizations. We also hold information sessions during the recruitment season for women who are interested in applying. 

...Emerge does not train on any issues, but we do require all program participants to be registered members of the Democratic Party and read and sign the Democratic Party platform, which covers many important issues. Emerge relies on our strong network of partners to provide support to alums on particular issues. Alums are able to go to these partner organizations that are experts in a wide range of issues for additional guidance and information.

...Emerge is funded by donations from individual donors, labor unions, and Political Action Committees.

Emerge is led by current President A’shanti F. Gholar, who has referred to abortion — the direct and intentional killing of preborn children — as a "life-saving procedure."

Gretchen Sisson, a Research Sociologist at the pro-abortion Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH) located at the University of California, San Francisco, sits on the Emerge Board. The Board formerly held abortion activist Wendy Davis as well as Gloria Steinem and former Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards.

ANSIRH publishes the TEACH Early Abortion Training Curriculum.

Zoom Out:

These groups pose significant threats to preborn babies. Mike Seibel, a pro-life medical malpractice attorney who operates the website abortioninjury.com, has come face to face with trained Emerge activists, and warns:

"The pro-life movement needs to recognize organizations like Emerge pose significant threats to our legislation, activities, and initiatives.

We need to counter these efforts with organizations that train candidates with a conservative pro-life message. And get them elected to office."

Seibel told Live Action News that pro-life organizations needed to step up to "fund" and support the pro-life organizations that "protect" the movement from "political and legal harm."

Key Takeaways:

• Comedian John Oliver said multiple states currently have personhood laws (which treat preborn human beings as actual human beings) in place, and complained that even legislation like fetal homicide laws are dangerous.

• He additionally pointed to cases of medical neglect as "proof" that personhood laws harm women.

• Oliver argued that personhood laws turn their mothers into nothing more than "hosts" and "incubators."

The Details:

On Sunday night's episode of "Last Week Tonight," Oliver included a segment on fetal personhood, and the so-called dangers personhood laws pose to women. Oliver stated:

"The fetal personhood idea can be embedded in laws in a bunch of different ways, and some can initially sound appealing, like ones that make it a crime to cause the death of an unborn child during an act of domestic violence.

But, once the law recognizes a fetus as a separate victim, if you get pregnant, that same logic can quickly be weaponized against you, and in all sorts of ways. Hundreds of women across the country have been arrested or lost custody of their children for reasons related to their pregnancies."

He then pointed to examples of women who were reportedly denied miscarriage treatment, or who were allegedly being forced into c-sections, as proof that personhood laws put women's lives at risk. He also claimed it turns women into nothing more than "hosts" and "incubators."

"The obvious consequence of these laws is they treat the individual carrying the fetus as something less than a full human," he claimed. "And the very moment you're pregnant, you become merely a means to an end."

He continued:

[T]here are only a handful of situations where it's acceptable to call a woman a host: if she works front of house at a restaurant, if she invites you over for dinner, if she has her own talk show, or, if you're talking about Annabelle, host to the demonic spirit permanently trapped inside her.

... [W]hatever the rhetoric used to justify fetal personhood, in practice, it effectively treats women as incubators.

... [W]omen would effectively be second-class citizens.

Reality Check:

Many of Oliver's points are not based in reality.

It has become a frequent pro-abortion talking point to claim that pro-life laws put women's lives at risk, denying them needed treatment after experiencing pregnancy complications. In most cases, these women were victims of medical neglect or malpractice, not an inability to have their children directly and intentionally killed by abortion.

Induced abortion, the intentional and targeted killing of a preborn child, is not the medical standard of care, nor the same thing as providing treatment with the intention to save a woman's life, even if that treatment may result in the death of the child. The intent is what makes the difference.

Some doctors have wrongly blamed their own neglect on pro-life laws; their motivation for this is unclear.

Oliver also noted several cases which made nationwide news, in which women claimed they were forced into c-sections against their will. In reality, while the hospitals' manner of holding emergency hearings and court orders was wrong, the ultimate goal was not: to save the lives of both mother and baby.

In these cases, which Oliver did not acknowledge, doctors said these decisions saved two lives. One case specifically was prompted by the mother's alleged statement that she would not have a c-section, even if it meant her baby died.

"I heard her say, 'I'm not gonna have a C-section. If the baby dies, the baby just dies,'" Jenny Van Ravestein, the then-division director of women's services at UF Health Jacksonville, said in a hearing. "That, to me, was what was extremely upsetting to my team."

Dr. Erin Burnett, an attending physician at UF Health, added, "We were concerned that she would not want to act in the best interest of her infant, even if it came to that."

Obstetricians are well aware that they have two patients — mother and preborn child — something that is typically acknowledged by the medical industry.

The Big Picture:

As Live Action founder and president Lila Rose has explained, there is a simple reason as to why personhood laws are needed: because preborn children are human beings, and therefore, have an intrinsic right to life.

"[T]here is no doubt, from the first moments of its existence, an embryo from human sperm and egg is in fact, a human being," she said, adding, "The disagreement is about whether these and all humans deserve legal protection and to have their basic human rights protected."

Acknowledging the humanity of the preborn also does not infringe upon the bodily autonomy of pregnant women; after all, laws generally do limit people to what they can or cannot do with their bodies, and usually, the line is drawn at harming other human beings.

Pregnancy is the only circumstance in which a woman is told it is both legally and culturally acceptable to intentionally take the life of another human being. It's especially grievous that this human being is her own offspring.

Ultimately, as Rose pointed out, denying preborn children personhood is just another tool of oppression waged against the vulnerable by a more powerful class:

The reality is abortion has always been a tool of the powerful to oppress the powerless and has always been a tool of those who are irresponsible to reject the sacredness of human life and the responsibilities that come with sex.

The Bottom Line:

Acknowledging the humanity of one person does not deprive another person of their humanity.

Key Takeaways:

• In June, over 50 organizations, including Planned Parenthood, were informed that they would no longer receive TPP grants due to the inclusion of "sexually explicit" content in their program materials.

• Planned Parenthood and other groups have been criticized for including age-inappropriate, graphic sexual content in their sexual education programs.

• A federal judge ruled that HHS cannot implement the changes to the program while a lawsuit makes its way through the courts, but the organizations will also not yet see their funding reinstated.

The Backstory:

On June 26, the organizations received a letter informing them of a change to the TPP grant program, with Planned Parenthood and the other organizations accused of using materials that are “medically inaccurate,” “age-inappropriate,” and “sexually explicit." Because of this, they were no longer eligible to receive grants; this equaled a loss of $67 million across the 50+ organizations.

Planned Parenthood, in particular, is known for promoting sexual activity among children, despite claiming to want to prevent teen pregnancy.

Former Planned Parenthood sex educator Monica Cline wrote in a piece for the Washington Examiner that, after being hired, she was told to assume that “everyone was doing it," and that Planned Parenthood intentionally tried to remove parents from the equation.

“That is why they say, ‘Parents are a barrier to service,’" she said. "Organizations like Planned Parenthood do not aspire for more in our children’s lives. Their answer to happiness and empowerment is to have sex, use a condom, get tested, treated, and have an abortion.”

In Live Action's investigative series on Planned Parenthood’s sex education, disturbing information was revealed about what the abortion organization actually teaches children, including that the motto at Planned Parenthood seems to be sex with no strings attached. Teens are told that they can have sex wherever, whenever, and with whomever — and anything goes, as long as it’s consensual and contracepted.”

The Details:

A lawsuit was filed by the organizations in July, and Judge Christopher Cooper sided partly in favor of the coalition challenging the changes to the program, which include the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States, or SIECUS (a group which stridently opposes prenatal education for students and which was founded by a former Planned Parenthood medical director and funded by porn magazine "Playboy" founder Hugh Hefner), a Planned Parenthood chapter serving Iowa and Nebraska, and the governments of Hennepin and King Counties in Minnesota and Washington, respectively.

The judge wrote in his ruling:

"HHS is perfectly entitled to formulate its own views about how to stem teen pregnancy — or even whether it is worth preventing at all — and to pursue policy initiatives consistent with its viewpoint.

But it is not at liberty, under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), to impose conditions on grant recipients that Congress did not intend or that are unreasonable or unexplained. The preliminary record suggests that HHS has done just that."

However, funding is not yet restored. The ruling merely prevents HHS from using the new criteria to give out grants while the lawsuit is being considered, and the judge ordered both the Trump administration and the plaintiffs to arrange a schedule for the next steps in the court process before the month is over.

But for now, he appears set to side with the coalition challenging HHS.

“An educational initiative that counsels teens on how to avoid pregnancy without discussing the realities of unprotected intercourse and its alternatives would seem to defy social reality, common sense, and scientific evidence alike,” he wrote. “Yet HHS seeks to impose these and other unexplained criteria on all TPP grantees moving forward."

If this were indeed all that was being taught, it wouldn't be an issue; however, as Live Action News has shown, the sex education offered by SIECUS, Planned Parenthood, and others isn't simply discussing the "realities of unprotected intercourse and its alternatives."

Read More:

• <a href="/news/where-todays-sex-ed-came-from-matters">Where today’s sex ed came from… and why it matters</a>

• <a href="/news/unholy-alliances-abuse-lies-rampant-child-mutilation">Unholy Alliances: The abuse and lies that lead to the destruction of children's bodies</a>

• <a href="/news/unholy-alliances-sex-ed-gatekeepers-crowned-themselves">Unholy Alliances: How sex ed gatekeepers crowned themselves king</a>

• <a href="/news/sex-ed-leader-prenatal-development-stigmatize-abortion">Sex ed ‘leader’ slams prenatal development education because it might ‘stigmatize’ abortion</a>

• <a href="/news/nation-deceived-new-religion-comprehensive-sex-ed">A NATION DECEIVED: Behind the 'new religion' of comprehensive sex ed</a>

• <a href="/news/nation-deceived-grooming-core-comprehensive-sex-ed">A NATION DECEIVED: How 'grooming' is at the core of comprehensive sex ed</a>

The Bottom Line:

HHS has the option to appeal the decision before the deadline of September 1.

Just weeks before Second Reading of the new assisted suicide Bill on 11 September, Adam Jogee, the Labour MP for Newcastle-under-Lyme, has argued that poor access to high-quality end-of-life care, which many people experience, could lead to individuals ending their lives by assisted suicide due to a lack of care.

“If even one person feels driven to choose an assisted death because suitable care is unavailable, or because they worry that their family cannot cope because support is inadequate, then we will have failed to be the compassionate society that we think we are”, Jogee said. 

The Member of Parliament asked whether individuals could have a real and meaningful choice at the end of their lives if proper care is “too often inaccessible, inconsistent and overstretched”. 

Jogee pointed to numerous examples of the care crisis to explain why legalising assisted suicide in this context would be disastrous, including referring to a report from Hospice UK that revealed that approximately two-thirds of people who live in rural areas are unable to access palliative and end-of-life care close to home, which could make them feel pressure to end their lives by assisted suicide if the practice were to be legalised. 

He added that many people only realise that accessing such vital end-of-life care is difficult only when they need it, and stated that data has shown that almost 60% of hospices in England have made or are considering making cuts to frontline services, meaning that unless drastic changes are made the situation will likely get worse rather than better.

Jogee reiterated that this “broken system” also leaves those who work in care services feeling “undervalued and underpaid”.

“That cannot be the foundation upon which we ask Parliament to make one of the most profound life-and-death decisions of our time”, he said. 

Jogee also outlined how having mental health services that are in need of improvement could also have a detrimental impact on individuals if assisted suicide were to be legalised. 

“It would be reckless to introduce assisted suicide at a time when thousands are left without the treatment and support they need to deal with serious mental ill health”, the Member of Parliament expressed.

“A society should be judged not simply by how it responds when life is ending, but by how determined it is to ensure every person receives dignity, comfort and support until that moment comes”, he concluded. 

Jogee is not the only Labour MP to make such arguments recently

Jogee is not the only Labour MP to make such arguments in recent days. Earlier this month, Douglas McAllister, MP for West Dunbartonshire, expressed serious reservations about making assisted suicide legal when end-of-life care is in such a poor state.

McAllister, who voted against the last, almost identical, assisted suicide Bill, said his “concerns have not gone away”.

He explained that the assisted suicide Bill brought forward in the last session of Parliament by Kim Leadbeater underwent many months of scrutiny in the House of Lords. The recent Bill brought forward by Lauren Edwards is an almost identical copy of the Leadbeater Bill, meaning that, if MPs vote it through at Second Reading on 11 September, “we once again face months debating the same issue that dominated headlines and divided colleagues and communities last year”, McAllister observed.

He reminded readers that the Labour Party manifesto for the 2024 General Election promised to fix the country’s broken public services, including improving health and social care.

“It is difficult to talk about genuine ‘choice’ and ‘autonomy’ over death if people weighing up a potential suicide cannot access specialist palliative care; or if disabled people must still fight for the support that allows them to live independently”, he said.

MPs’ comments come as the PM states that end-of-life care must be fixed before assisted suicide debate occurs

Both of these MPs are echoing concerns raised by the Prime Minister last month. He said that the debate around introducing assisted suicide should not take place in a context where palliative and social care remains poorly funded, confirming “that’s the position I will stick to”. 

Responding to a question from Sam Coates, deputy political editor of Sky News, Burnham said, 

“I take the view that that debate – and I don’t say that there shouldn’t be a debate at some point about those issues – personally, I think there’s something that needs to happen first”.

“That is the fixing of the funding of palliative care and social care”.

“I think it is very challenging to introduce that wider debate in the context of people not receiving that care and having the peace of mind about that care. And that’s the way I kind of see this, and that’s the position I will stick to”.

Spokesperson for Right To Life UK, Catherine Robinson, said “We are grateful to Adam Jogee for speaking out so passionately on this important issue”.

“It is clear that assisted suicide would be a disaster if it were introduced at any time, but especially so in the midst of a crisis in end-of-life care”.

“MPs should ensure they listen to what Adam Jogee, Douglas McAllister, the Prime Minister, and many others have said, and vote against the assisted suicide Bill at Second Reading next month”.

This case blew the surrogacy debate wide open, putting pro-abortion advocates in a predicament because West was the woman who was pregnant and, under their arguments, has bodily autonomy and the right to not have an abortion carried out on the baby she is carrying.

Abortion, especially late in pregnancy, carries significant risks to the mother. But there's also the idea that the biological parents didn't "want" this baby. And the pro-abortion argument says a child should not be born unless he is deemed "wanted."

Is it "my baby, my choice" or "my body, my choice?"

The confusion is clear. So, to reframe West as a zero instead of a hero while ignoring the obvious talking-point dilemma, the lies have begun to fly. Let's put them to rest.

Key Takeaways:

• McKenna West acted as a surrogate for a California couple, and though she signed a surrogacy contract, she was led to believe that the chances of being ordered to abort the child were slim.

• At 20 weeks, the baby received a diagnosis of hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS), and the biological parents told West to abort. After deep consideration, she refused.

• She researched treatments for HLHS and learned about a high surgical success rate for the condition at Dallas Children's Hospital in Texas, where she then traveled in the hopes that he would survive and get the treatment he needed.

• Now, some pro-abortion sources claim that West fled to Texas to live out a "fantasy," that she "kidnapped" the child, and that she kept the baby from receiving care. None of these claims are true.

The Backstory:

McKenna West had agreed to be a surrogate for a California couple, now revealed as Nasheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed. Everything was going well until the 20-week appointment, at which point it was discovered that the baby had HLHS. It is a serious condition that is fatal if not treated.

Thankfully, there is a protocol for HLHS, which includes a series of three surgeries. Gilkar and Ahmed, however, asked West to abort. She knew that her surrogacy contract stipulated that she would abort if asked; however, after initially speaking to the couple and the surrogacy agency, West was led to believe that being asked to have an abortion would be very unlikely.

She began researching HLHS, and found that doctors in Texas had a 100% success rate in carrying out the first of the three surgeries.

Though — out of fear — she initially agreed to abort, she ultimately changed her mind. She asked the couple to commit to surgery, but they would not.

So she relocated to Texas with her children, aiming to give birth in Texas so the baby could get the care he needed. She also sued for custody, telling Gilkar and Ahmed that if they committed to allowing the surgeries, she would not sue. But they would not commit.

Baby Gabriel/Rumi was born in Texas earlier this month and was immediately taken from West, the only mother he has ever known. He has since had <a href="/news/baby-boy-surrogacy-case-first-heart-surgery">the first surgery</a> and is expected to have the second surgery within a matter of months. Gilkar and Ahmed are in Texas now with him.

The False Claims:

#1: West kept the baby from a 'specialized cardiac team'

The Texas Tribune cited legal documents which claimed that, by going to Texas, West was denying the baby access to "the specialized cardiac team in Los Angeles that will provide the lifelong care" that he needs.

• In reality, West was willing to go to California to give birth as long as the couple committed to the surgery. They would not do so.

• West believed that the best chance at saving the baby's life was to go to Texas, where doctors at Dallas Children's Hospital have achieved a 100% success rate in recent years with the Norwood procedure, the first of the three surgeries necessary to treat HLHS. In fact, Texas Children's is a national leader for treating babies, and was the first center in the Southwest to treat HLHS in utero.

• West also had a friend in Texas with whom she could stay, free of charge.

• She was in no way preventing the baby from receiving care. She was committed to helping him.

#2: West 'kidnapped' an 'embryo'

NowThis Impact shared a clip on Instagram titled, "Surrogate kidnaps couple's embryo for pro-life fantasy," featuring Senior Producer Chelsea Frisbie accusing West of "kidnapping" the "embryo."

"Instead of respecting [the biological parents'] wishes to abort, she kidnapped it," said Frisbie.

• How does one kidnap a "clump of cells" or an "it," as Frisbie so horrifically referred to Gabriel/Rumi? And, in fact, the baby was past 20 weeks — no longer a human embryo, but a human fetus in the second trimester of pregnancy.

Frisbie also said the biological parents talked with their doctors; this is misleading.

• They spoke with the obstetrician on a Friday, ghosted West, and asked for an abortion by Monday. Frisbie said that West went "AWOL with their embryo, and fled from Alaska to Texas... to try to claim parentage since she was the one who gave birth to him."

• This was not West's goal for uprooting her entire life and moving to Texas. She risked financial ruin and her job to move to Texas and protect the baby from the parents who were trying to kill him.

#3: A 'fatal fetal anomaly'

Frisbie also called HLHS a "fatal fetal anomaly."

• This is only true if it is left untreated. Even diabetes is fatal if left untreated.

• To back up her claim, Frisbie stated that the oldest person with HLHS is in their 30s. This is true, but only because the pioneering surgeries that Rumi/Gabriel is receiving did not exist before the 1980s. The babies prior to that, therefore, died.

• These surgeries allowed them to live, and now many of these children are still alive as adults, and have not needed a heart transplant.

• There are still other survivors who have undergone a heart transplant and are still alive. Imagine what will be accomplished to help children with HLHS even more in the next 30 years.

The baby deserved the opportunity to live.

#4: West is not the 'mother'

Frisbie also said West claimed to be the baby's mother, but what she actually said was that "to him, I am his mother."

• This is true because she is the only person that Gabriel/Rumi had bonded with and known for his entire existence until he was taken from her after birth.

• This separation causes an acute stress response that can negatively alter the developing architecture of the infant’s brain and disrupt the mother's neurobiological adaptation.

• Yet the video asks, "How is this fair to Rumi's actual parents?"

• The question shouldn't be about what's "fair" to the adults who wanted a baby, and then rejected the baby for having a health condition. It should be about what is best for Rumi/Gabriel.

Surrogacy treats the natural bonds between humans as interchangeable and transactional.

The Bottom Line:

"For now, the parents are with Rumi enjoying the time they have with him," Frisbie concluded.

This tone seems to imply that this baby is guaranteed to die — as if his continued existence and survival threaten to destroy the entire pro-abortion narrative surrounding children diagnosed in the womb with a complex, or even minor, health condition. Ultimately, it's because they do. It's the same mindset that pro-abortion groups had for baby Chance.

They are disappointed when these babies survive, because their lives are proof that they have been human beings from the moment they were conceived.

Such a trend is not a byproduct of “unbiased” or “neutral” search engines, but the outcome of premeditated pro-abortion funding and planning, as well as advertising businesses that regard chemical abortion as little more than a business transaction. 

Key Takeaways:

• Artificial intelligence (AI) has become increasingly popular, and social media uses algorithms to determine which content to show users in their feeds.

• Advertisers target users based on information about their reproductive status, mental health, and purchasing behavior.

• A woman can be targeted for abortion based only on algorithmic classifications without ever searching for abortion herself.

The Details:

At the moment, many digital advertising platforms permit advertisers to target women according to their most intimate online searches regarding their reproductive status, mental health, and purchasing behavior.

A 2023 investigative piece by The Markup unraveled a spreadsheet from Microsoft-owned ad platform Xandr including hundreds of thousands of “audience segments,” listing categories such as “Heavy Purchaser – Pregnancy Test Kits,” “Infertility / IVF,” “Pregnancy and Ovulation Apps," and “Depression (Audience Interest)."

Advertisers can bid in real time to display ads primarily to users who align with these segments, implying that a user browsing a health article while regarded as “prone to depression” and a “heavy purchaser” of pregnancy tests can be fed with customized ads without ever typing the word “abortion.”

Ad platforms depend on wide audience segments and contextual signals — such as the page being viewed, time of day, device type, and location — to determine which ads get shown. A woman does not need to have searched for abortion herself; she can be targeted simply because she gets classified under a section such as “Family planning,” “Pregnancy/maternity,” or “Depression medications,” or because she is reading content about pregnancy loss.

For instance, in the United Kingdom (UK), women who encountered miscarriages have reported continuing to see pregnancy and baby-product ads even after their losses, sparking legal action against Meta over invasive targeted advertising.

This shows that algorithmic systems are not solely mirroring individual intent to search for a particular product or service; they are actively exploiting reproductive vulnerability on a wider basis. 

Zoom In:

Alongside targeted ads, AI-driven telehealth and chatbot tools are making the abortion pill a self-service product that circumvents in-person care and comprehensive risk counseling.

Abortion businesses and advocacy groups have launched AI chatbots meant to widen access to the abortion pill.

In 2023, for example, Live Action News reported on “Charley,” an AI chatbot masterminded by former Planned Parenthood executives and abortion activists as a platform that directs women and minors to access illegal abortion drugs, lie to doctors about complications, obtain funding to travel out of state, and bypass parental notification laws.

Yet Charley does not provide counseling, does not ask the user’s age, offers no alternatives to abortion, and blatantly steers users away from pro-life pregnancy centers, which it lambasts as “fake clinics.”

Moreover, abortion-service websites are incorporating other AI tools to further the abortion cause.

In the UK, the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) has experimented using an AI chatbot, following North American cases where AI is already used to “support abortion care and improve access to information.” Effectively, the unfortunate consequence is the regularization of the notion that a chatbot should be the first point of contact for an abortion.

As chemical abortion contains genuine medical risks — such as heavy bleeding, infection, incomplete abortion necessitating surgical assistance, and in some instances, death — such a trend is troubling. 

Nonetheless, AI chatbots and telehealth “guidance” direct women through ordering and consuming abortion pills without ever ensuring any health safeguards are in place.

As one article pointed out, AI systems can give rise to “seemingly correct but erroneous responses,” meriting caution in medical contexts. When unsupervised chemical abortions happen, the ramifications can be life-and-death situations for both mother and unborn child.

Why It Matters:

Evidence has proven that major AI models are not ideologically neutral; they are being conditioned and funded in ways that trivialize abortion access and sideline pro-life alternatives.

An openDemocracy investigation in 2026 discovered that leading chatbots — including tools from OpenAI, Google, Anthropic, and xAI — regularly fed users information from at least one pro-life group when asked about pregnancy options, but did so in a way that framed these groups as biased, while depicting pro-abortion resources as “legitimate” sources of information. Put simply, the AI does not simply reflect “both sides;” it prioritizes abortion-access narratives while sidelining pro-life groups. 

Meanwhile, pro-abortion actors are outwardly investing in AI to expand access. Academic literature now discusses “AI and abortion” as a field, with papers suggesting “equity-centered research agendas” that assume AI should be harnessed to “advance abortion access and reproductive autonomy.” 

Amnesty International UK released an article titled, “AI & Abortion Care: Why are people using AI to find abortion care?" regarding AI as a means to get around legal and geographic obstacles to abortion.

Similarly, Nature Medicine mentioned “safe medication abortion in shifting health and legal contexts,” implicitly promoting the use of digital tools to widen abortion access even where laws curb it.

Such articles are not neutral descriptions but are research agendas and editorial decisions that portray abortion access as a moral and public-health imperative that AI ought to boost. 

Meanwhile, pro-abortion actors have portrayed pro-life voices as misinformation risks.

Some academic and advocacy analyses have erroneously described pregnancy resource centers (PRCs) as groups that “delay access to medically legitimate prenatal and abortion care” and “negatively impact maternal health.” Tech-policy outlets have urged for platforms to “take action against dangerous crisis pregnancy centers," echoing abortion-rights framing that treats pro-life counseling as inherently deceptive.

When AI models are trained on such a one-sided view without including robust pro-life sources counterbalancing pro-life medical and ethical literature, the resulting systems will reflect those biases in their recommendations, summaries, and risk disclosures. 

The Big Picture:

Telehealth abortion providers and AI chatbots are optimized to appear in response to queries like “abortion pill,” “how to get an abortion,” and “pregnancy options.”

Investigative reporting by The Markup revealed that ad-tech companies can target women across the wider web — not only on search engines — using various audience segments. A woman reading an article about miscarriage or pregnancy loss may be shown ads for abortion businesses based on the page’s content and the profile advertisers have inferred about her, even if she has never searched for terms like “abortion” or “pregnancy center." 

Pro‑life groups themselves have admitted that the struggle for women contemplating abortion is being waged online.

Life Advancement Group stated that “96% of centers using Google Ads and SEO say it’s their #1 source of abortion‑minded patients,” highlighting just how indispensable paid search campaigns and search‑engine optimization are for connecting with women weighing an abortion.

Christianity Report stated that pro‑life pregnancy centers are now deploying AI chatbots such as “Olive” and “Ava” to “keep pace with the pro‑abortion movement, which has already implemented AI with bots like Roo and Charley to promote abortion access.”

These revelations leave no doubt that the digital front is genuine: the side that commits the greatest resources to AI‑powered outreach, sophisticated ad targeting, and top search rankings will be the first to address women in crisis.

At the heart of this system lies the reduction of women’s bodies to a tradable commodity.

The Bottom Line:

The takeaway is stark: AI is not a neutral tool, but a competitive arena influenced by who funds it, what data it is trained on, and where strategic investment is steered. 

Pro‑abortion actors have grasped this reality and are already deploying AI chatbots, streamlined telehealth pathways, and targeted ad campaigns that characterize unsupervised chemical abortion as a routine consumer purchase.

Unless pro‑life advocates deliberately enter the same digital space — with ethically designed AI, strong Google Ads and SEO strategies, and round‑the‑clock chat and telehealth services that provide accurate medical information, clear risk disclosure, and concrete material support — susceptible women will keep encountering pro‑abortion information at their most fragile moments. 

Fortunately, a number of pro‑life groups are already shifting in this direction. Choose Life Marketing’s “Olive” chatbot permits women to book appointments at pregnancy centers around the clock, while Life Advancement Group is promoting “AI for Pregnancy Centers” alongside “Answer Engine Optimization" (AEO) so that pro‑life content appears in AI‑generated summaries and voice‑assistant replies. 

All in all,  AI will not become pro-life by chance; it must be made so by intentional, well-funded, technologically competent engagement. Otherwise, the default will remain what it increasingly is today: a hyper-targeted, frictionless pipeline from crisis search to chemical abortion, with real women and children paying the price — with their vulnerable lives. 

Key Takeaways:

• Details of a couple's lawsuit against a surrogate mother have emerged.

• They are suing her for $100,000 in damages plus an additional, undisclosed amount.

• The surrogate, McKenna West, refused to have an abortion at the demand of the baby's intended parents after he was diagnosed with hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Facing a lawsuit, West went to Texas, where medical experts could treat the baby upon his birth.

• She gave birth last week on August 12, and the baby was immediately removed from her.

• He has now undergone the first of three necessary surgeries to treat his condition.

The Details:

Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed are suing McKenna West for $100,000 in damages, along with an unspecified additional amount for "malicious, outrageous conduct," according to TMZ.

The media outlet said it obtained the lawsuit filed against McKenna in the weeks before she gave birth to Baby Gabriel/Rumi. Gilkar and Ahmed agreed to pay the single mother of two $60,000 to carry their baby, but then wanted her to abort him after he was diagnosed with HLHS during the pregnancy.

The contract allegedly stated that West would abort based on a fetal diagnosis and a request by the intended parents for an abortion. But she was led to believe such a scenario would be very rare.

Once she was actually faced with the demand to abort him, she felt she must protect his life, even at risk to her own financial well-being. She refused to undergo a late-term abortion.

Gilkar and Ahmed deny threatening West to go through with the scheduled abortion; however, a lawsuit is a threat. As <a href="/news/surrogate-fights-baby-heart-condition-refusing-abortion">previously reported</a> by Live Action News:

[Gilkar and Ahmed] have filed a lawsuit and are instructing West to go to their home state to give birth, but they have not stated whether they will allow doctors to perform the life-saving surgeries on baby Gabriel or if they will only provide him with 'comfort care' so that he dies shortly after his birth.

Through her attorneys, West agreed to go to California if [Gilkar and Ahmed] commit to providing Gabriel with the surgery. It appears they have not agreed to this condition, and they have sued West for not going through with the abortion.

As the couple would not commit to providing the surgeries the baby needed, West ignored the lawsuit and moved to protect his life. She said at the time:

"I want to fight for him because he deserves that chance. There's no guarantee; there's not a guarantee with anything. But he deserves a chance of living life outside of my womb. I just really pray he gets that opportunity."

What's Happening Now:

Amid the lawsuit against West because she would not kill their baby through abortion, Gilkar and Ahmed are in Texas with Baby Gabriel/Rumi, as he potentially undergoes two of the necessary surgeries. He has reportedly <a href="/news/baby-boy-surrogacy-case-first-heart-surgery">already undergone</a> the first of the three, known as the Norwood procedure.

Gilkar and Ahmed have also said in court documents that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's intervention to ensure Baby Gabriel/Rumi received care deprived them of their...

"fundamental constituational interest in the care, custody, control and medical decision-making for their child without constitutionally adequate notice, process, and opportunity to be heard... in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution."

They argue that Paxton did not have standing to intervene in their case. Paxton and his office had said that once born, "Texas will protect [Gabriel/Rumi's] life without regard to the circumstances of his conception or the terms of any private agreement.”

After the baby's birth on August 12, Gilkar and Ahmed were granted a temporary restraining order barring West from having contact with him, and giving the couple full decision-making power over the medical care of the baby they instructed West to abort.

Key Takeaways:

• O.J. Brigance was a football player who played in both the Canadian Football League (CFL) and the National Football League (NFL).

• He most notably played for the Baltimore Ravens, and was a vital part of the team's win in Super Bowl XXXV.

• Brigance was diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), also known as Lou Gehrig's disease, in 2007.

• He died from complications of ALS this month after fighting the disease for almost 20 years. He was 56.

The Backstory:

O.J. Brigance became a football star after transitioning from the CFL to the NFL, and became most well known for his time with the Baltimore Ravens. He recorded the first tackle of the game in the team's Super Bowl XXXV victory over the New York Giants, racking up 25 tackles altogether.

But his journey to football greatness was not easy; being small for a football player, he was largely snubbed by the NFL, and played for the CFL instead.

He took it upon himself to approach the league, and was rejected by 28 teams before two agreed to let him try out. The Miami Dolphins eventually signed him, where his determination and professionalism impressed everyone. He spent two years as a team captain, and was named the Ed Block Courage Award winner for his resilience after a back injury.

He was signed by the Baltimore Ravens in 2000, and again was named a team captain, this time on special teams.

“O.J. was never one of those guys who was overly talented, but he was so dedicated and professional about his job, offensive tackle Jonathan Ogden said in 2008. "If everybody approached the game like he did, we would have a lot of great players.”

After retiring as a player from the NFL, he joined the Ravens organization as director of player development — a position he held until his death. He did so well at his job that he was named best in the NFL twice.

But in 2007, after feeling some weakness in his shoulder, he was diagnosed with ALS.

While he and his wife, Chanda, were devastated, he was resolved to make the best of the situation.

He was eventually confined to a wheelchair and had to rely on a ventilator to breathe, but was still able to use his voice, thanks to a computer system which tracked his eye movements.

“[God] says, ‘My power is made perfect in weakness,'” Brigance said in a prior interview. “I have no physical voice, and have atrophied arms and legs, but God has given me a voice and platform to do my greatest work. This significance of moment is not about me. It’s about the thousands of people out there on this same journey I am.”

Zoom In:

Brigance kept working until his death, arriving at the office at 9:30am even though it took him four hours to get ready each day. And through it all, he kept his faith.

“The world says seeing is believing, but men of faith say believing is seeing,” he said. “I believe that despite my diagnosis, I will walk again. This team believes no adverse circumstances will stop them from achieving their goal of being world champions in football and in life. There are no great accomplishments without faith.”

He also kept a sense of humor and purpose.

"I am getting old, Vic. The Bible says gray hair is a crown of splendor... I have a whole lot of splendor going on right now," he joked in an interview on his 50th birthday.

He also noted the greatest lesson he's learned through his ALS journey: "The very thing that hinders you presents an opportunity to reciprocate kindness to those walking the same journey."

He also said he was able to stay positive due to his faith in God.

"I have been able to remain positive throughout the diagnosis because of my faith in Jesus Christ. God's grace is sufficient no matter my physical weaknesses," he said, adding, "I would describe my life as one of assignment. I would like to think that, for the most part, I touched people in an impactful way by being giving and kind to others."

The Details:

After battling ALS for nearly 20 years, Brigance passed away at the age of 56. The prognosis for most people with ALS is just two to five years, making Brigance's survival nothing short of miraculous.

"We are devastated by the awful news that we have lost O.J. Brigance," Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti said in a statement. "O.J. was a beloved legend, mentor and man to everyone who was fortunate enough to know him. His infectious smile and the inspirational way he lived and played endeared him to everyone he touched, both inside our building and across this city. This is a tremendously sad day for Baltimore."

Ravens general manager Eric DeCosta said that he remained an inspiration to the team through it all.

For 22 years, we’ve been blessed to have O.J. as a teammate, friend and brother. It’s a sad day, but also a celebration of all the gifts that O.J. bestowed upon our team and our city and the entire NFL community. O.J. inspired us with humility, faithfulness, determination, competitiveness and love for humankind.

We never once saw O.J. angry or frustrated by his disease. Instead, we all witnessed a hero who influenced so many people through his unwavering optimism and grit. O.J. Brigance is the definition of what it means to live like a Raven. I will miss his smile and the twinkle of joy in his eyes.

Before his death, he and his wife founded the Brigance Brigade Foundation and raised millions of dollars for research into ALS; a statement on the website said the organization would continue fighting ALS in his honor.

The Bottom Line:

In a tribute video shared by the Ravens, Brigance was asked what he wanted his legacy to be.

"I lived every day. I smiled every day," he said. "Regardless of the circumstances that came my way, you got the same O.J. That I'm constantly being honed and pruned and shaped and molded by life's circumstances to be a better man. And that's all I want people to do in their own lives. Never ask the question, why is this happening to me? But more so, what can I learn from this? How can I impact someone else's life from the situation that I'm going through?"

Key Takeaways:

• Makerita Miracle Tanuvasa, known as Miracle, was born at 21 weeks 3 days.

• At birth, she weighed as much as a can of Coke.

• She is Australia's youngest surviving premature baby.

The Details:

Annrose Tunavasa told The Age that from the beginning, her daughter's life was a miracle.

Annrose had gone to the doctor in March expecting to be told she was four or five weeks pregnant. Instead, an ultrasound revealed she was more than halfway through a pregnancy.

“I went to do an ultrasound and the sonographer told us that we were about 22 weeks pregnant,” she said. “I said, ‘that’s impossible’.”

Annrose told the doctor she had miscarried a baby in December. “She said, ‘Well, maybe you had a twin, and you miscarried the twin… you’ve got to go to the hospital and you’ll be staying there until you give birth.’”

On March 25, five days after Annrose learned she was pregnant, Makerita Miracle Tanuvasa was born. Known by her middle name, Miracle, she measured 30.5 centimeters long and just 351 grams, about the size of a can of Coke.

“We weren’t able to hold her, but she was very, very small,” Miracle's father, Misi Tunavesa, said.

“I took one look at her and I was like, ‘There’s no way she’s gonna make it,’” recounted Annrose.

Even doctors were shocked at Miracle's small size, given that ultrasound scans estimated her weight around 500 grams.

“A week later the doctor came in to see me, and she said, ‘She’s just not matching the scans that you came in with, she doesn’t match that baby.'”

Doctors analyzed Annrose's ultrasound pictures from her previous miscarriage, and determined that little Miracle was indeed from the same pregnancy.

Though Annrose's pregnancy was initially estimated to be 22 weeks, doctors later determined that Miracle was actually born at 21 weeks 3 days, making her the smallest preemie ever to survive Australia.

Because of her extremely small size, Miracle had to spend 14 weeks in the hospital before she was able to go home with her family.

“Even the doctors couldn’t explain how she was able to survive everything she's gone through," Misi said. “It was just like she was here to fight."

The Bottom Line:

At one time, it would have been unthinkable that a baby as small as Miracle could survive outside the womb. Yet modern medical advancements are making these extraordinary stories of survival more common.

"It's quite a miracle," nurse Renee Judd told Nine News. "Hence the name, Miracle."

One was another pregnant teenager who survived, but had to deliver her baby boy at 25 weeks as a result. He did not survive.

Key Takeaways:

• 16-year-old Rylee Montgomery was dating 18-year-old Michael Sanchez when she got pregnant.

• According to Montgomery's family, he demanded she have an abortion, but she refused, and was committed to raising her child.

• Sanchez made repeated threats against Montgomery, though police took no meaningful action.

• Montgomery was shot, along with a pregnant 17-year-old and a 22-year-old woman. Montgomery died of her injuries, while the other two survived, though the 17-year-old was forced to deliver her baby early at 25 weeks. The baby boy, Timothy, did not survive.

• Sanchez has been arrested and charged with murder.

The Details:

Montgomery and her preborn daughter were killed in May, with Sanchez arrested and charged with their murder. According to Montgomery's family, he had been making repeated threats toward her, which began when she got pregnant.

Amy Montgomery, her stepmother, told AZCentral that 18-year-old Sanchez at first appeared to be a nice guy when the couple began dating last year. "I thought, 'This is a good match for Rylee,'" she said. "She seemed really happy with him."

Then, in February, Montgomery found out she was pregnant, and initially, she was terrified of how her parents would react, thinking they would be angry.

"We're disappointed in your choices, but we don't hate you. We love you. We'll do everything we can to support you and the baby," Amy Montgomery said of her reaction. "She didn't want to have an abortion. She said, 'I'm going to keep my baby.' He had other plans for her."

Sanchez, however, was allegedly furious, and demanded that Montgomery have an abortion.

"He was just psychotic," Amy recalled. "First thing he told her was 'You're gonna (expletive) kill it and she says, 'No, I am not.'"

An abusive situation

From there, her family said he turned violent, even allegedly choking her at their house. According to a now-deleted GoFundMe, Montgomery broke up with him in March. After that, he allegedly decided to kill not only Montgomery, but several of her friends, including a 17-year-old who was also pregnant.

Montgomery's family said the 17-year-old, Abby Krebs, had tried to help Montgomery escape the abusive relationship with Sanchez.

Amy said Montgomery had vowed to escape from Sanchez and raise her child, but despite repeatedly asking for protection from police, she was left to fend for herself. "[W]e tried to get her out, and (police) told me to get a restraining order. That's a paper. Go get him," she said.

Police, meanwhile, admitted that there had been a complaint filed from Montgomery, alleging Sanchez pointed a gun at her. They did nothing because they claimed there was not enough evidence to arrest him.

The Montgomery family said they had pages of text messages which showed Sanchez repeatedly threatening Montgomery, yet all police would recommend is an order of protection.

Previous arrests

He had also previously been arrested for other crimes, including a DUI, and was wearing an ankle monitor. “He never had restrictions. He never had to call his parole officer," Amy explained. "We were bringing Rylee to a doctors appointment, and I said, 'don’t you have to tell them? He said no, I do what I want.'”

The day of the shooting, Montgomery received a text message from Sanchez which included a photo of him holding a gun, which the family reported to police.

"We'll look it up and add it to the report," Amy said of the police response.

What Happened Next:

Within hours, Sanchez allegedly found Montgomery at a friend's house, where he shot and killed her.

He also shot Krebs and a 22-year-old woman, Myah Hembree. Both survived, though Krebs was forced to deliver her baby at 25 weeks.

Tragically, her baby boy, who she named Timothy Rylee after her best friend, did not survive.

He was buried with Montgomery and her preborn daughter, who was named Erica.

“We were getting ready to plan the baby shower and instead now we have to plan a funeral,” Krebs said. “I miss him a lot. It’s honestly hard to talk about."

She added that they had been at Krebs' home, thinking Montgomery would be safe there. Krebs recalled:

“It happened because she told him that she wanted to leave him. And we thought that because she was at my house, she would be safe because we thought he didn’t know where I lived.

And he ended up showing up at my house because of Life 360. Even though her location had been off earlier in the day."

Immediately after the shooting, Krebs and Hembree identified Sanchez as the shooter:

"I heard the gunshot go off and I just saw my best friend fall to the floor immediately. And in that moment, I kind of knew she was gone, but I didn’t want to believe it. And then he shot at me and Myah while we were running away and he shot me from behind and I fell and then I tried to get up again and I fell again and I crawled into the rocks by my house.

I’m angry that he took my baby and my best friend from me. And I’m angry that he injured one of my other best friends."

Hembree is still in the hospital, and only recently was able to come off the ventilator.

The Bottom Line:

Sanchez has been charged with two counts of first-degree murder, endangerment and interference with a monitor device.

It's not clear if his charges will be adjusted after baby Timothy's death; police recommended an additional murder charge. For now, the family is focused on honoring Montgomery's memory and finding justice.

“Rylee’s in the clouds with the angels,” Amy said at a memorial service. “And I know baby Erica’s with her. She’s still in her little womb. Just as good a mom in heaven as she would have been on Earth. And she’ll watch Timothy until Abby gets to go home too. We have to have something good come out of this tragedy. We lost two babies and we lost our Rylee. We almost lost Abby. We cannot, cannot lose Myah."

Key Takeaways:

• Kelly and Falzone were in a relationship until she was murdered in 2023.

• Falzone was between 35 and 37 weeks pregnant at the time of her murder.

• Prosecutors charged Kelly with fetal homicide, so he was charged with two counts of second-degree murder. It was the first time New Hampshire's 2018 fetal homicide law had been used.

The Backstory:

William Kelly was found guilty of both counts of second-degree murder in July, after killing Falzone and her preborn child in 2023.

At the time of the murder, Falzone was nearly full term, and was between 35 and 37 weeks pregnant. She and her preborn baby had been beaten to death; authorities also found injuries at various stages on her body, indicating a history of abuse.

In addition to the murder conviction, Kelly had a long criminal history, which included a 2019 conviction for second-degree assault involving domestic violence.

In 2018, New Hampshire passed a fetal homicide bill, though it only applies to preborn children who are at least 20 weeks gestation. Legislative attempts this year to expand the law to include all preborn children failed.

Senator Regina Birdsell, who sponsored the fetal homicide bill, told NHJournal that this kind of case is exactly what the legislation is intended for:

“Unfortunately, situations like this happen, and this is precisely why I put the bill in.

I know there was a lot of consternation about the prosecutors misusing this law, but I obviously had confidence in our attorney general that he would use this law as it was intended, unlike the opponents.

That is exactly what the AG did by charging this man, and the jury did what they should in finding him guilty.”

The Details:

The New Hampshire Department of Justice announced that Kelly has been sentenced to 80 years to life in prison, with 40 years to life applied for each murder. The sentences will run consecutively rather than concurrently, which means it is unlikely Kelly will ever be released from prison.

Prosecutors pointed to the brutality and violence of the crime in calling for a severe sentence; Falzone had 100 bruises on her body, five rib fractures, and was bleeding internally.

Prosecutors also expressed gratefulness that neither victim was ignored in sentencing. "We're glad that the judge recognized there were two victims in this case," Assistant Attorney General Brian Grekleck-McKeon said.

Judge Mark D. Attorri denied requests from Kelly's legal team for leniency; they had asked that he be sentenced to 40 years in total. "The mercy the defense is asking for here is going to have to come from an authority infinitely greater than this court," Attorri said. He added:

You will still be able to wake up every morning. You will be able to breathe the air and you will at least at times be able to see the sunlight which Christine Falzone and her child and Mr. Kelly's child will never have the opportunity to do again.

Falzone's family members testified about the loss they suffered, and also said they were glad Falzone's case would help other victims receive justice in the future.

"Little did she know then that her life would be cut short, her dreams would fall to the floor as she did and that she and her baby are going to be the storms that clear the path in the state of New Hampshire for every victim's case coming forward," Tiffany Marcos, Falzone's aunt, said.

The Bottom Line:

While at least some preborn children can receive justice in New Hampshire, such legislation is not present across the country. Thirty-eight states have fetal homicide laws in place, though every preborn child deserves protection, as well as justice in cases of homicide.

Key Takeaways:

• The Department of Defense has announced it will reimburse eligible service members $500 for sperm freezing and $10,000 for egg freezing.

• The initiative is part of a three-year pilot program.

• Egg freezing and IVF come with considerable risks, as well as ethical problems.

The Details:

Per the notice issued on August 13, eligible service members will be reimbursed up to $500 per year for sperm freezing and $10,000 per year for eggs, with coverage including retrieval, freezing, storage, and shipping.

The initiative applies to active duty service members who have received orders for duty in a dangerous country, or who are ordered to be separated from a partner for at least 180 days.

The notice specifies:

... a covered member means a member of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, or Space Force serving on active duty who has either received orders (including deployment orders) for duty for which the member may receive hazardous duty pay; whom the Secretary determines is likely to receive such orders in the next 120 days; or who will, under orders, be geographically separated from a spouse, domestic partner, or dating partner for a period of not less than 180 days, including sea duty.

Services can be obtained at military medical treatment facilities that specialize in reproductive health, as well as civilian fertility clinics.

The initiative is slated to take effect September 14.

Why It Matters:

In the past, egg freezing was considered a last-resort measure, especially considering both freezing and IVF (which utilizes those eggs and/or frozen sperm to produce a child) come with a number of considerable risks.

As Live Action News has previously pointed out, egg retrieval carries risks for women, including:

• bleeding

• infection

• damage to the bowel, bladder, or blood vessels

• miscarriage

• ectopic pregnancy

The procedure can also result in a rare but life-threating condition known as ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, which can occur in women who take fertility medication to stimulate egg growth.

The effectiveness of egg freezing has also been shown to be low. According to The Federalist, “failure rates in the fertility industry are extremely high. […] In January, scientists in the United Kingdom presented data that suggests the live birth rate using a patient’s own frozen eggs is a mere 18 percent." Oddly, the data also suggested that "The success rate is 31 percent when donor eggs are used.”

Incentivizing egg and sperm freezing sends one message to active duty service members — now isn't the time to have a child, and you can always delay it. And the government is willing to pay these military personnel to put it off until later.

Unfortunately, this carries the underlying assumption that someone who freezes their gametes will actually be able to conceive later; this isn't always the case.

This isn't the only issue; female service members have previously spoken out receiving pressure to abort their preborn children.

Bethany Saros was stationed in Iraq when she became unexpectedly pregnant. She wrote about her experience in an essay for Salon:

“One of the stigmas attached to a female getting pregnant on a deployment is the assumption that she did it on purpose. It’s whispered about any time the word ‘pregnancy’ comes up right before or during a combat tour. 

The unspoken code is that a good soldier will have an abortion, continue the mission, and get some sympathy because she chose duty over motherhood. But for the woman who chooses motherhood over duty, well, she must have been trying to get out of deployment."

The Bottom Line:

Incentivizing egg and sperm freezing perpetuates the "unspoken code" that Saros speaks of. They, along with IVF, are ethically fraught, risky procedures.

​On Monday, August 17, an “Ordinance Outlawing Abortion, declaring Denver City a Sanctuary City for the Unborn" was adopted in a 6-0-1 vote by the city council of Denver City, Texas (pop. 4,911), making the city the 99th in the U.S. and the 82nd city in Texas to pass an ordinance outlawing abortion.

​The city of Denver City, Texas, is located mainly in Yoakum County between Seminole (pop. 7,952) and Plains (pop. 1,481), on Texas State Highway 214 and between Seagraves (pop. 2,994) and Lovington, New Mexico (pop. 11,668), on Texas State Highway 83. A small section of Denver City is located in Gaines County.

The Denver City Council’s consideration of the measure followed a successful citizen initiative petition process allowed by the Denver City Charter. While only 357 verified signatures of Denver City residents were required for a successful citizen initiative, a total of 742 signatures were submitted on Monday, July 27. 

​Public Testimony:

​After a presentation from Right To Life Across Texas, followed by several questions from the city council, several in attendance gave public testimony as to why they believed Denver City should become a Sanctuary City for the Unborn.

​First to speak was Yoakum County native and Hobbs, New Mexico, resident Kim Stephens Van Dyke, who shared:  

​"I was raised in Plains; I was born in this neighborhood in Yoakum County Hospital [in Denver City], and I have lived in Hobbs [New Mexico] for 44 years. So I have experienced firsthand the challenge – especially whenever Texas enacted the heartbeat law – of how we were targeted by the abortion industry. I believe in the value of life at conception. Not only was I born in the Yoakum County Hospital, as a neonatal nurse of 28 years, I've had the opportunity to teach neonatal resuscitation here at this hospital. So bringing forth life, saving life is very important to me.

As I'm looking at this wall here, it brings to mind Nehemiah in the Bible, and whenever Nehemiah, along with the other Israelites, left Babylon… Whenever Nehemiah went back, he built that wall with tools in one hand and a weapon in the other. And I definitely see my home of Yoakum County – I still pay taxes in Yoakum County – I see Yoakum County as that Nehemiah, that has that opportunity to build that wall and protect the unborn so that the blood of innocent babies and the future taxpayers of Texas are not on the hands of this county."

​Next, Pastor Gilberto Urias of Primera Iglesia Bautista gave an impassioned testimony before the Denver City Council. He shared:

​"I am a pastor here in Denver City. A Christian first, but a pastor, a full-Gospel pastor… I was really touched by the group of people that were out walking and asking for [signatures] and explaining this ordinance. I believe, as a Christian, we’re going to stand one day before Almighty God. Which we are, like it or not, and give an account for what we did and didn’t do. I believe that if we support this, Denver City being a Sanctuary City for the Unborn, to me that’d be a great blessing. I know it would be, instead of a curse. New Mexico, they’re under a curse… It’s not biblical. Baby butchering."

​Pastor Urias continued:

"​Proverbs 3:27 says, 'Withhold not good from them to whom it is due, when it is in the power of thine hand, or your hand to do it.' Once again, as a God-fearing Christian… I’ve got seven grandchildren of my own… I’m very thankful. I can’t imagine one of them being butchered the way they’re doing babies. They’re a great blessing… Like the lady said, we’ve got to stand our ground and do what is right."

​After Pastor Urias' testimony, Mayor Ronald Weir made a motion to adopt the measure. The motion was seconded by Clint Bowman. Mayor Weir, Mayor Pro-Tem Keith Mensch, and City Councilmembers Clint Bowman, Joan Breith, Rodney Hanneman, and Mark Sherman voted 6-0 in favor of adopting the measure, while City Councilman Brad Irons voted to abstain.

​Councilman Brad Irons – who abstained – called the presentation "powerful" and shared that the people who spoke touched his heart. He expressed gratitude to Right to Life Across Texas both for the opportunity to ask the "hard questions" and for how each question was handled. Councilman Irons shared:

​I still had questions before the vote, but you definitely changed my 'no' to an 'abstention' so I could get more information. Too many people are just saying no without asking questions and getting past the misinformation. If they don’t have enough information to say 'yes,' how do they have enough information to justify automatically voting 'no'? If they don’t know, then they need to get out of the way.

​Councilman Irons expressed that the discussions afterward were even better than the discussions that took place during the meeting and helped him understand even more.

The Ordinance:

​The Denver City SCFTU ordinance:

(1) prohibits performing elective abortions and aiding or abetting elective abortions within the city limits of Denver City, adding additional enforcement coverage beyond that provided in state law,

(2) prohibits elective abortions on Denver City residents – regardless of where the abortion took place,

(3) prohibits abortion trafficking pregnant mothers to abortion facilities across state lines,

(4) recognizes organizations in violation of the federal Comstock Act – which prohibits the mailing and receiving of abortion inducing drugs and abortion paraphernalia – to be criminal organizations and prohibits such organizations from operating within the city limits of Denver City, and

(5) prohibits the transportation and disposal of the bodies of aborted babies killed by out-of-state abortion providers anywhere within the city limits of Denver City.

​The ordinance is not enforced by the city or local law enforcement, but is enforced the same way as the Texas Heartbeat Act: through the creation of a private right of action allowing citizens to file civil lawsuits against anyone violating the law.​ The measure does not allow any lawsuit to be filed against the mother of the unborn child, but only against the abortionist and those who are assisting the abortionist in the killing of her unborn child — including abortion traffickers. The Denver City SCFTU ordinance also educates about the state-funded Thriving Texas Families Program and the services provided through pregnancy care providers partnered with the Texas Pregnancy Care Network and The Pregnancy Network.

Multiple Ordinances Passed:

​The City of Denver City is the eighth city and the sixteenth political subdivision in 2026 to pass a ‘Sanctuary for the Unborn’ ordinance, following the Texas cities of Matador (pop. 570), Lockney (pop.1,988), Wellman (pop. 205), O’Donnell (pop. 704), Brownfield (pop. 9,976), Muleshoe (pop. 5,158), Ranger (pop. 2,469), and the Texas counties of Borden (pop. 631), Hall (pop.2,825), Hood (pop. 61,598), King (pop. 265), Sterling (pop. 1,372), Lynn (pop. 5,596), Collingsworth (pop. 2,652), and Scurry (pop. 16,932).

​The only other city in Yoakum County that could pass a SCFTU ordinance is the City of Plains, while the only city yet to consider the measure in Gaines County is the city of Seagraves.

On August 10, the Seminole City Council voted unanimously to reject the Sanctuary City for the Unborn Ordinance, which came before them as a result of a similar citizen initiative petition process allowed for by their city charter, where 1,551 signatures were submitted to the City of Seminole. Because the Seminole City Council failed to adopt the ordinance, the Sanctuary City for the Unborn Ordinance will be on a citywide ballot for voters to accept or reject at the polls on November 3, 2026.

Both Yoakum County (pop. 7,694) and Gaines County (pop. 21,598) could also pass a ‘Sanctuary County for the Unborn’ ordinance covering the unincorporated area of Yoakum and Gaines County.

​Citizens who wish to see their city or county pass an ordinance to further protect pregnant mothers and their unborn children from the violence of abortion are encouraged to sign the online petition – regardless of what city, county, or state they are located in.

Key Takeaways:

• A month after France's National Assembly passed a bill legalizing 'assisted dying' in the country, the French Constitutional Council upheld most of the bill's provisions, only addressing a conscience clause for pharmacies and private, faith-based healthcare institutions.

• The concerns the Council was urged to address included the short withdrawal period for individuals requesting assisted suicide (set at 48 hours), weak safeguards for legally incapacitated adults, and the absence of a conscience clause for healthcare facilities.

• While the legal right to assisted death can be enacted immediately, access to palliative care, which was approved in May 2026, is scheduled to take effect in 2030. 

• French organizations are urging an appeal to European courts for reconsideration.

The Backstory:

After months of failed debate and no consensus, France’s National Assembly passed a bill on July 15, 2026, legalizing assisted suicide and euthanasia in the nation. 

But conservative lawmakers and the Prime Minister, Sébastien Lecornu, quickly appealed to the Constitutional Council for reconsideration of certain provisions, essentially halting enactment of the law for one month while the Council deliberated. 

The provisions brought before the Council included the short withdrawal period for individuals requesting assisted suicide (set at 48 hours), weak safeguards for legally incapacitated adults, and the absence of a conscience clause for healthcare facilities.

However, over the course of the month, the Council effectively only addressed one of the concerns — the conscience clause — and upheld the other concerning provisions. 

The Details:

On August 14, 2026, the Constitutional Council, whose role is sometimes likened to that of the U.S. Supreme Court, ratified the law and most of its provisions but provided for three stipulations. 

• The first stipulation allowed for a protective conscience clause for pharmacies seeking to opt out of providing a lethal drug meant to end the life of a patient seeking suicide or euthanasia. 

• The second condition also provided a conscience clause for private, faith-based healthcare institutions wishing to refuse participation in assisted dying by simply stating their life-affirming values in their statutes. However, it is only partial protection, because these private facilities would only be able to refuse participation if there were no other local institutions that offered assisted suicide. 

• The third condition allows for patients with legal guardians to have access to assisted suicide provided that the doctor assisting in the suicide consults the patient’s legal guardian. The consultation of the guardian is not binding, however, and the physician can override the guardian’s advice and proceed with the medical assisted suicide. 

While celebrating the two victories over the conscience clauses, many are simultaneously deeply worried about the short 48-hour withdrawal period that continues to be in effect.  

Dr. Ségolène Perruchio, president of the French Society for Palliative Care (SFAP), stated:

"Those who accompany people at the end of their lives every day know that the will to die is fluctuating, that suffering can be relieved, and that no decision regarding death should rest on a single practitioner: this experience of caregivers has still not been taken into account."

While the legal right to assisted death can be enacted immediately, access to palliative care, which was approved in May 2026, is scheduled to take effect in 2030. 

The Bottom Line:

The fight for a culture of life is not dead yet.

French organizations are urging an appeal to European courts for reconsideration. And many hope that the 2027 Presidential election can change the fatal trajectory of the nation.

“The United States will carry this work forward through a whole-of-government effort led jointly by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Department of State,” U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced in a joint press statement this week.

The Geneva Consensus Declaration was launched in 2020 by the Trump administration and a cross-regional group of nations from all continents. The declaration is focused on international cooperation to improve women’s health through a pro-life, pro-family and pro-sovereignty approach.

It expressly affirms that “there is no international right to abortion, nor any international obligation on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion” and that the family is “foundational to society and as a source of health, support, and care.” Signatories pledge to work together to ensure the UN system respects these basic principles.

The declaration was originally signed by 34 nations, and the Trump Administration officially presented the agreement to the entire General Assembly as an official United Nations document. The list of signatories has steadily expanded despite open opposition and hostility from the Biden administration and the European Union. It has now been signed by 43 nations. The latest to join was Argentina this week. More nations are expected to join in coming months after the Trump administration’s announcement this week, and an updated list is to be submitted to the General Assembly.

The announcement makes it clear that the U.S. is taking the reins, once again, to promote the declaration and expand its influence.

“The Trump Administration believes strong families are foundational to stronger, safer, and more prosperous nations...."

Read entire article at C-Fam. 

Key Takeaways:

• Dakota and Kelsey Ross traveled from Kansas to Las Vegas for a vacation and a planned wedding.

• Kelsey was 34 weeks pregnant.

• While on Fremont Street, Kelsey went into labor, and was rushed to the hospital.

• Their daughter Kelbey was born via C-section, and the couple married in the hospital.

The Details:

The Ross family were excitedly expecting a baby girl, but decided to take a trip to Las Vegas and get married. Kelsey was 34 weeks pregnant at the time, and after the couple flew to Nevada from Kansas, they took some time to do a little sightseeing before the wedding.

The couple was on Fremont Street the night before their planned wedding when Kelsey went into labor.

"I just went to the bathroom and felt like cramps, kind of like period cramps, and then all of a sudden it's trickling," Kelsey said. They immediately rushed to try to find help.

“We go as fast as we can to the front of Fremont, and there's three sheriffs to the left outside White Castle. So, we ask them, ‘How long for an ambulance?’” Dakota said. "It takes about 15 minutes, but as we go into White Castle, we had an OBGYN there off-call to go to her at the table."

They were taken by ambulance to University Medical Center of Southern Nevada (UMC), where Kelbey Willow Sapphire Ross was born via c-section. “She couldn't have chosen a better day," Kelsey said. "Today's my mom's birthday, today's our wedding day."

Zoom In:

After giving birth, hospital staff made sure the Rosses' wedding would still take place.

A neonatal doctor — who is also a pastor and officiant — held the ceremony for them, which was attended by nurses and doctors to celebrate with them. The hospital also arranged for a photographer and invited local media.

Dakota's parents were also able to attend; they had traveled with the couple to Las Vegas to serve as witnesses. "My son just celebrated his 21st birthday a week or so ago," his father, Marc Ross, said. "He was coming for vacation. They were going to get married later today, but Kelby, the baby, she decided she wanted to be part of it."

T most special guest, baby Kelbey, was the flower girl.

The wedding took place less than 24 hours after Kelsey went into labor, and she said she has been recovering beautifully. “I literally had a C-section, and it didn't even feel like I had one,” Kelsey said, adding, “It's been like a dream come true, honestly."

Kelsey wrote on Facebook:

Late announcement. She was originally due September 23rd. But we are proud to welcome Kelbey Willow Sapphire Ross into this world! On August 15th! 4 pounds and 6.9 ounces! She decided to come on our wedding day in Las Vegas!

We are currently still in the hospital. We are looking at being released on Wednesday! And yes we still got married at the hospital and the main director is the one who ran our wedding and married us! And doctors and nurses showed up to watch it. They were so excited to be part of it!

The hospital surprised us with the 3 different news stations to announce Kelbey and our wedding! And also a photographer! It was so beautiful! And Kelbey was also flower girl! We are so very very excited! Our wedding and Kelbey being born went world wide on the news! A moment I’ll definitely never ever forget! We are so proud to be your parents and cannot wait to get you back home!"

The Bottom Line:

The family plans to drive back to Kansas together once Kelbey is discharged from the NICU. In the meantime, Dakota's father had advice for his son: "Just love your wife and love your daughter, and you know, cherish every moment, because she's gonna grow up quick."

Key Takeaways:

• The Northeast Heights facility in Albuquerque is permanently closed, according to Abortion-Free New Mexico.

• Services will reportedly be moved to Planned Parenthood's Eubank Health Center instead.

• Abortion facilities are closing and consolidating as the abortion industry moves to promote telehealth abortion instead.

The Details:

Abortion-Free New Mexico reported that Planned Parenthood's Northeast Heights facility in Albuquerque, New Mexico, has permanently closed and is referring clients to its Eubank location instead. The Northeast Heights facility had just reopened and begun committing abortions again earlier this year.

“New Mexico’s political leaders have gone all-in on abortion — using taxpayer dollars and government policy to prop up the industry. Yet despite those efforts, abortion facilities are consolidating and closing around us. This closure is great news and proof that the abortion industry is not invincible," Abortion Free New Mexico's Tara Shaver said.

Executive Director Bud Shaver added:

"Despite New Mexico leaders pouring taxpayer money into abortion and using government policy to prop up the industry, abortion facilities are still consolidating and closing.

More Americans are identifying as pro-life, while the abortion industry faces mounting legal, financial and operational pressure nationwide. New Mexico’s leaders cannot prop up a failing industry forever. Taxpayer resources should support mothers, children and life-affirming alternatives — not abortion."

The Big Picture:

After the fall of Roe v. Wade, the Albuquerque City Council gave Planned Parenthood $250,000 in taxpayer funding; the governor, meanwhile, authorized $10 million for a state-funded abortion facility, albeit not in Albuquerque.

Abortion is heavily protected in New Mexico, and the state had the highest abortion rate of any in the country in 2025. In other words, Planned Parenthood's closure is likely not due to a lack of government support or funding, nor a lack of clientele.

This is more likely due to a larger, industry-wide strategy of closing physical abortion facilities to transition towards so-called virtual health centers instead. By now, this has been thoroughly  documented, with consolidation of facilities and merging of affiliates now typical for Planned Parenthood, having happened multiple times in recent years.

As Live Action Research Fellow Carole Novielli explained:

From 2024-25, before the BBB took effect, a record breaking $832 million was funneled to Planned Parenthood from taxpayers’ pockets while it killed more than 434,000 preborn children – a record number on both counts.

During that same "killer year," Planned Parenthood’s own reports showed plummeting health care services, like cancer screenings and well woman exams, among other actual health services, all while reporting net assets of more than $3.1 billion.

The majority of abortions are now committed by pill, and pivoting to telehealth allows Planned Parenthood to focus on its biggest source of revenue, while cutting down on the costs associated with brick-and-mortar facilities. Since federal Medicaid defunding in July 2025, the abortion corporation has closed no more than 30 of its brick-and-mortar centers, while opening other centers.

The Bottom Line:

The closure of an abortion facility is a victory, but pro-lifers must remain vigilant, as more often than not, these closures are part of an overall strategy from the abortion industry.

The ruling can be appealed.

Key Takeaways:

• District Court Judge B. Lynn Winmill ruled that the 14th Amendment's Due Process and Equal Protection clauses allow for the right to an abortion "when a pregnancy threatens the woman's life or health."

• The ruling would allow abortion when a woman's health is at risk, or when there is risk that she may self harm.

• The heart of the state's pro-life law still stands, even as the judge ruled that, while it may be "troubling" that the state can restrict abortion, the overall law does not violate the state constitution.

The Details:

On Thursday, U.S. District Court of Idaho Judge B. Lynn Winmill ruled that under the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the 14th Amendment, protections include the "narrow but fundamental right to abortion when a pregnancy threatens the woman's life or health."

His decision blocks Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador from enforcing a portion of the state's laws protecting the lives of preborn children.

Judge Winmill wrote:

“By banning health-preserving abortion, Idaho attempts to deny this fundamental right on the basis that the threat of harm comes from a fetus, which depends on the woman for survival.

But a pregnant woman’s health is not a state resource to be allocated at the legislature’s whim. The Fourteenth Amendment exists precisely to prevent subjugation like this.” 

Dr. Stacy Seyb, who is behind the challenge to the state's pro-life laws, claimed the law prevented him from treating women in high-risk pregnancies and added that the ruling allows him to offer women "the option" of an abortion "without leaving the state."

The problem with the ruling is that Winhill considers abortion — the direct and intentional killing of preborn children — to be "health-preserving."

It is not medically necessary to intentionally end the life of a preborn child to save his or her mother; inducing labor or performing an emergency C-section would serve the same purpose of ending the pregnancy but without intentionally killing the child.

If a child were to die as a result of the delivery intended to save the mother's life, that is not considered an abortion.

Winwill also wrote, “It is an affront to human dignity to bar pregnant women from receiving life-saving care on the basis that the threat comes from a mental health condition, rather than a physical health condition.”

If a pregnant woman is facing a mental health concern that is deemed serious enough to warrant abortion, all efforts should be made to get her appropriate mental health care. An abortion likely won't cure a woman's mental health crisis, and in fact, may add to it.

A report from the American Psychological Association’s (APA) Task Force on Mental Health and Abortion confirmed that post-abortion trauma does exist, stating, “It is clear that some women do experience sadness, grief, and feelings of loss following termination of a pregnancy, and some experience clinically significant disorders, including depression and anxiety.”

Research shows that having a history of mental health concerns is a predictor of psychological distress following an abortion.

Labrador said in a statement emailed to the Idaho Capital Sun:

“Judge Winmill did exactly what the Supreme Court rejected in Dobbs: he legislated from the bench and manufactured a new constitutional right to abortion.

The Supreme Court made clear that abortion policy belongs to the people and their elected representatives, not a single federal judge.

Not only did he ignore Dobbs, he compounded that mistake by ignoring clear precedent stating that district judges lack authority to issue universal injunctions. We will appeal immediately, and we are confident this decision will be overturned.”

Idaho defines abortion as "the use of any means to intentionally terminate the clinically diagnosable pregnancy of a woman with knowledge that the termination by those means will, with reasonable likelihood, cause the death of the unborn child...."

It excludes birth control devices and pills, the removal of a dead preborn child, the treatment of an ectopic or molar pregnancy, and the "treatment of a woman who is no longer pregnant."

In addition, the Idaho Defense of Life Act protects the life of the mother, but not against her own mental health. It states (emphasis added):

The following shall not be considered criminal abortions for purposes of subsection (1) of this section:

(a)  The abortion was performed or attempted by a physician as defined in this chapter and:

(i) The physician determined, in his good faith medical judgment and based on the facts known to the physician at the time, that the abortion was necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman. No abortion shall be deemed necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman because the physician believes that the woman may or will take action to harm herself; and

(ii)  The physician performed or attempted to perform the abortion in the manner that, in his good faith medical judgment and based on the facts known to the physician at the time, provided the best opportunity for the unborn child to survive, unless, in his good faith medical judgment, termination of the pregnancy in that manner would have posed a greater risk of the death of the pregnant woman. No such greater risk shall be deemed to exist because the physician believes that the woman may or will take action to harm herself...

It also states:

Medical treatment provided to a pregnant woman by a health care professional as defined in this chapter that results in the accidental death of, or unintentional injury to, the unborn child shall not be a violation of this section.

The Bottom Line:

Despite the ruling, the heart of the state's pro-life law still stands.

Notably, Winhill ruled that it may be "troubling" that the state can protect preborn lives from abortion, but that the overall law does not violate the state constitution.

“It’s important to recognize that the civil cause of action in the Heartbeat law still remains in effect — meaning that any physician who performs an abortion that is prohibited by the Heartbeat law can still be liable for breaking the law,” the Idaho Family Policy Center President Blaine Conzatti said in the press release. “And doctors should take note: The IFPC Legal Center stands ready to hold doctors accountable who illegally perform abortions.” 

The judge's ruling can be appealed.

Key Takeaways:

• House Bill 1168 criminalizes the trafficking and distribution of abortion-inducing drugs within the state of Oklahoma.

• The bill went into effect August 13.

• The bill is meant to protect preborn children, as well as women who have been "coerced or deceived" into taking abortion drugs.

• Supporters estimate it could save the lives of 4,000 preborn human beings each year.

The Details:

House Bill 1168 makes it a crime to provide abortion-inducing drugs, such as the abortion pill, to anyone intending to use the drugs to commit an unlawful abortion. 

Anyone convicted of trafficking or attempting to traffic abortion-inducing drugs now faces a fine of up to $100,000, up to 10 years in prison, or both.

The legislation was signed by Governor Kevin Stitt on May 5 and went into effect on August 13.

The new law was sponsored by Rep. Denise Crosswhite Hader, who said she "couldn't be prouder" the legislation was taking effect. She added:

"Four years ago, I set out to close the loophole that let traffickers ship dangerous chemical abortion pills into our state with no oversight and no accountability.

This law protects vulnerable women who have too often been coerced or deceived into taking these pills with no medical care or support. It's projected to save around four thousand preborn babies a year in Oklahoma, and every one of those lives matters.

I'm grateful to everyone who fought alongside us to get here." 

Why It Matters:

The legislation is designed to protect women and preborn babies from companies that unscrupulously mail abortion drugs to anyone who asks for them — even abusers and predatory men.

Live Action News has repeatedly reported on instances where men have ordered the abortion pill and then attempted to coerce or trick women into taking the pill. Some of those predators include:

• Jeffrey Smith — convicted of attempted first-degree intentional homicide of an unborn child after he spiked a pregnant woman's water bottle with abortion drugs.

• David Benjamin Coot — pleaded guilty to second-degree assault, tampering with a witness, and fourth-degree assault for forcing an abortion drug into his mistress without her knowledge or consent.

• Justin Banta —  charged with capital murder for allegedly slipping his pregnant girlfriend abortion drugs, causing the death of their six-week-old preborn child.

• Mason Herring - pleaded guilty to injury to a child and assault of a pregnant person for attempting to induce an abortion by drugging his wife Catherine’s drink several times using misoprostol. 

These stories have become so numerous that in May, Heartbeat International launched a national tracker documenting reported abortion pill poisonings and forced/coerced abortions.

These types of abuses are possible because in 2021, the FDA under the Biden administration temporarily removed requirements that the abortion pill be dispensed in person by a physician who has first conducted a physical examination. Those changes became permanent in 2023.

Numerous companies now ship the abortion pill to anyone who requests it online — even into states like Oklahoma, which protects most preborn children from abortion.

The Bottom Line:

The new Oklahoma law is meant to further deter anyone from shipping the abortion pill into the state. As the bill's Senate sponsor, Sen. David Bullard, stated, "We estimate this law will save roughly four thousand preborn babies a year in Oklahoma. That’s four thousand reasons this fight was worth it, and I’m proud of every person who helped carry it across the finish line.”

Key Takeaways:

• Baby Gabriel has reportedly had the first of the necessary surgical treatments for HLHS in Texas.

• His biological parents' attorney stated that this will be the couple's final update on the health condition of their child, as they are seeking "privacy in caring for their son" while he recovers.

• Children with HLHS often need multiple surgeries, but Dallas Children's Hospital in Texas reportedly has a 100% success rate with the first of the three necessary surgeries to treat HLHS.

• The baby's biological parents have portrayed the life-saving actions of McKenna West and Texas AG Ken Paxton as "political theater."

The Details:

The baby boy's biological parents, Omar Ahmed and Nausheen Gilkar, who have named the baby Rumi, stated through attorney Lee Budner that this will be "the last update on Rumi's health that his family intends to share."

Budner added, "His condition remains critical and complex, and his family seeks privacy in caring for their son on his long road to recovery."

CBS News reported, "The procedure was performed Monday morning, Budner said, and 'Rumi is now recuperating under the loving care of his parents and his heroic team of doctors, nurses, and medical staff.'"

The news outlet also noted that more surgeries are needed for children with HLHS:

The second surgery is usually performed at 4 to 6 months, and the third between 18 months and 5 years old, according to the Cleveland Clinic. The heart condition is rare and complex, the Cleveland Clinic says, and can cause lifelong complications.

Rather than expressing gratefulness for her refusal to kill their preborn child upon their request, Budner told CBS Monday that West "continues to assert baseless claims for custody of Rumi, in violation of multiple courts orders out of both Alaska and California. We look forward to quickly defeating those claims as Rumi's parents continue to focus on his health and safety above all else."

The Backstory:

Surrogate McKenna West delivered the baby boy last Wednesday in a Texas hospital after fighting for his life and refusing to kill him in an abortion.

During a routine 20-week ultrasound scan, West learned that baby Gabriel/Rumi had a serious heart condition. Hypoplastic left heart syndrome is a serious but often treatable condition, yet even after it was learned that in Gabriel/Rumi's case, a positive outcome was expected, Ahmed and Gilkar reportedly continued to pressure West to abort — reportedly concerned about the baby's quality of life.

Live Action News reported:

In court documents obtained by Live Action News, West's doctor, Dr. William Laird, ехplained that he thinks HLHS is "likely an isolated cardiac anomaly" for baby Gabriel. He said Gabriel seems to be a "standard risk" patient, meaning there is a low risk of "operative mortality" (death) following the Norwood procedure.

In addition, the court document points out, "Baby Gabriel's chances upon receiving the Norwood procedure are good - very good. Yet Defendants still refuse to commit to life-saving care."

West fled from her home state of Alaska to Texas, where she traveled because she learned that "[d]octors at Dallas Children's have achieved a 100% success rate in recent years with the first of three surgeries" for HLHS, as Live Action News reported. These surgeries are "the Norwood procedure shortly after birth, the Glenn procedure at four to six months old, and the Fontan procedure around age two or three. Some patients will ultimately require a heart transplant, although if and when depends on the patient."

Once in the state, "Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed — and a judge granted — a petition instructing doctors to provide Gabriel with care at his birth, including at least the first of the three surgeries he would require. The petition also said that Gabriel could not be taken out of Texas."

Last week, after the baby boy was born, his parents released a stunning statement through Budner that called AG Paxton's actions (and McKenna West's as well) "political theater" (emphasis added):

"Our clients' son was born yesterday morning and he is now in their physical custody while he receives expert medical care at a tertiary care center. Thankfully, McKenna West's baseless attempt to interfere with his medical care has been soundly rejected by the courts.

Right now, our clients are continuing to place their baby's health and well-being first, following the advice of the baby's medical team, as they always have and just as any loving parent would.

As if the heartbreak of his condition were not enough, they are devastated to see their family tragedy transformed into political theater by the Texas Attorney General's office and McKenna West.

Our clients' only focus at this time is ensuring that their baby receives the medical care that he vitally needs and that they, as his parents, are able to spend every precious moment they can with their beautiful newborn son."

The real "tragedy" would have occurred if baby Gabriel/Rumi would have been intentionally killed before birth, as his parents originally sought to ensure.

The Bottom Line:

This is a heartbreaking and difficult situation for several reasons — one, because surrogacy intentionally removed baby Gabriel/Rumi from the only person he had known from the moment he was conceived; two, because that same woman, who saved his life, has been forced to have zero contact with him; and three, because the biological parents who attempted to ensure the death of this child prior to his birth are now presented in the media as "loving parents" who only want to "place their baby's health and well-being first."

From the moment he was conceived, this precious baby has deserved to have everyone fighting to protect his life.

Key Takeaways: 

• Baby Meadow was born weighing just 350 grams, or 12 ounces, and is the smallest surviving micropreemie born at John Muir Health Walnut Creek Medical Center.

• Due to a condition preventing her from receiving needed nutrients in the womb, Meadow was delivered early and spent 167 days in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

• Meadow’s doctors said they had the “technology and expertise” to help her survive.

The Details:

When doctors told Noel Creamer that her preborn daughter had “no chance” of survival, the determined mother was not willing to give up on her child. “Even though she was so small, I felt her kick and move, and I just knew I knew she didn’t make it this far along for it just to be over,” Creamer said. Instead, she turned to doctors at John Muir Health Walnut Creek Medical Center, which has the only Level III NICU in the county. They delivered baby Meadow, who weighed less than one pound, and provided medical care during her five-month medical stay in the NICU.

At birth, the top layer of Meadow’s skin was not developed, and her eyes were sealed shut, prompting her mother to give her the endearing nickname “little kitten.” Despite these and other obstacles, Meadow amazed doctors, getting stronger until she was given the all-clear to be discharged from the hospital. According to Creamer, “She’s just a magic baby.” As a warm sendoff, the staff that cared for Meadow during her NICU stay lined the hall to celebrate her homecoming.

Zoom Out:

Meadow’s incredible story is another example of the continuing advancements in neonatal care. According to a 2025 JAMA study, positive outcomes for premature babies have increased across the board over the past decade, but most notably for micropreemies.

Since 2014, survival rates for babies born at 22 weeks who have received active medical treatment leaped from 25.7% to 41%. The study also noted a 28.8% to 78.6% increase in medical treatment for these youngest patients over the past 10 years, demonstrating that “viability” is directly dependent on the intentional care a patient receives, rather than an unmovable medical truth.

“It was a miracle, and shows what is now possible for us, redefining what we can do,” Dr. Brian Kellert, perinatologist at John Muir Health Walnut Creek Medical Center, told NBC Bay Area. 

The Bottom Line:

There are a growing number of success stories like baby Meadow’s thanks to increasing advancements in medical technology. Babies as young as 21 weeks are capable of surviving when given proper medical care, like <a href="/news/guinness-world-record-holder-premature-surviving-two">Nash Keen</a>, who was named the world's most premature surviving baby by Guinness World Records when he was born at 21 weeks in 2024. He just celebrated his second birthday.

According to Hospice UK, hospices in England ended the last financial year with a collective deficit of more than £70 million, a figure which they say is more than double that of the previous year.

The organisation revealed that at least 33 hospices have already made significant cuts to the services they provide in light of these budgetary constraints, with almost 60% of hospices either making changes or considering reductions in services due to this increased deficit. 

A new benchmarking report by Hospice UK, on which the figures for England are based, found that 87 hospices across the UK had a collective deficit of £38 million, which is more than double the deficit faced by the same group of hospices in the previous year. 

One such hospice, Queenscourt Hospice in Southport, has described the current financial situation as the most challenging time in its 35-year history. The hospice has warned that it could be forced to close if the situation is not ameliorated. 

Toby Porter, CEO of Hospice UK, said that “nearly one in three people who need palliative care miss out on the support they need” due to hospice care services being underfunded. 

“When hospice services are reduced, it is hospitals, patients and families who pay the price”, he added. 

Louise Charnock, Executive Director of Nursing Services at Queenscourt Hospice, said, “Hospices across the country are facing the same impossible choices, and without sustainable funding, more services will be forced to reduce the care they provide”.

PM Andy Burnham makes clear that care sector’s problems must be fixed before assisted suicide is debated

Hospice UK’s announcement came shortly after the new Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, said that the debate around introducing assisted suicide should not take place in a context where palliative and social care remain poorly funded, confirming “that’s the position I will stick to”. 

Responding to a question from Sam Coates, deputy political editor at Sky News, Burnham said, “I take the view that that debate – and I don’t say that there shouldn’t be a debate at some point about those issues – personally, I think there’s something that needs to happen first”.

“That is the fixing of the funding of palliative care and social care”.

“I think it is very challenging to introduce that wider debate in the context of people not receiving that care and having the peace of mind about that care”.

Hospice UK welcomes PMr’s comments, shares worries about assisted suicide

The Hospice UK CEO, Toby Porter, said that the organisation “welcome[s] the Prime Minister’s recognition that palliative care must be fixed as a priority so everyone can get the care they need”.

The organisation has consistently raised concerns about legalising assisted suicide amidst a crisis regarding fragmented and underfunded care.

In June this year, Katie Reade, Head of Policy & Public Affairs at Hospice UK, said, “It is unacceptable that anyone might feel they have to consider an assisted death because they fear they will not receive the care they need at the end of life”.

“Real choice at the end of life means people have equitable access to high-quality care, whoever they are and wherever they live”, she added.

As the revived assisted suicide Bill is set to have its Second Reading in the House of Commons on 11 September, Hospice UK reiterated that “[m]any significant unanswered questions for hospices remain, including workforce impacts and financial impacts on a sector already under pressure”. 

“Opponents and supporters of the assisted dying Bill alike must fight to ensure high-quality palliative and end of life care is available to everyone who needs it, and hospices are properly funded, to be there for everyone who needs them”, Reade said.

Spokesperson for Right To Life UK, Catherine Robinson, said:

“It is disheartening to hear the extent to which the hospice sector is facing extreme financial difficulties.

If assisted suicide were to be made legal in this context, where hospice and other end-of-life care services are unable to meet the demand of those who need them, it seems likely that people could decide to end their lives by assisted suicide because they feel that they do not have any other real choice.

The fact that hospice providers are actively cutting their services due to budgetary constraints is something that should worry us all.

To introduce assisted suicide in this context would be madness, likely leaving some people feeling as if they do not have any real choice at the end of their lives but to hasten their death by assisted suicide.

Andy Burnham is correct in highlighting this issue. MPs must vote against the new Bill at Second Reading in the House of Commons on 11 September. Lives depend on it”.

Key Takeaways:

• A coalition of plaintiffs has filed a lawsuit seeking to stop a law allowing assisted suicide in Illinois from taking effect.

• The plaintiffs argue that the law violates their rights of free speech, as well as religious protections.

• The lawsuit is the second against the legislation, which is scheduled to go into effect on September 12.

The Details:

On August 11, a coalition including Springfield Bishop Thomas Paprocki, the Lutheran Care Center, and four physicians filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Represented by the Thomas More Society (TMS), the group maintains that the state's 'End of Life Options' Act violates the constitutional right to free speech and religious protections.

As a TMS press release notes:

The law requires faithful medical professionals to help facilitate patient suicides in violation of the Hippocratic Oath, centuries of legal and medical tradition, and their deeply held religious convictions.

Peter Breen, Executive Vice President and Head of Litigation at TMS, further explained:

“Illinois is forcing faith-based hospitals, nuns, and doctors into supporting the state’s assisted suicide regime.

The law commands Catholic hospitals, religious nursing homes, and faithful doctors to promote suicide’s alleged ‘benefits,’ refer patients to suicide drug prescribers, and then lie on death certificates to cover it up.

This immoral scheme flagrantly violates religious liberty and free speech rights, and we intend to stop it.”

The lawsuit seeks an injunction on the law before it is slated to take effect on September 12.

This is now the second lawsuit seeking to stop the state's assisted suicide law.

In June, the group End Assisted Suicide, which is a coalition of disability and patient advocacy organization, also filed a suit challenging the law's constitutionality. That lawsuit argues that the law threatens the life and well-being of individuals with disabilities by singling them out for lethal drugs, rather than providing equitable care.

The Backstory:

In the late night hours of October 31, 2025, Illinois lawmakers passed Senate Bill 1950. Though the legislation was titled as a "Sanitary Food Preparation Bill," hidden within the text was an amendment that created the "End-of-Life Options for Terminally Ill Patients Act," allowing terminally ill adults with a prognosis of six months or less to live to choose to take their own lives via assisted suicide.

The legislation was met with immediate outcry from those opposed to assisted suicide, with even the Daily Mail noting that disguising the law in such a way was "sneaky" and an "absurd tactic."

Though many groups, including the Chicago Tribune Editorial Board, urged Illinois Governor JB Pritzker to veto the legislation, he signed it on December 12, 2025.

The Bottom Line:

Several of the plaintiffs offered statements explaining their opposition to the legislation.

“At the heart of the Catholic Church’s healthcare ministry is the healing work of Christ — to stand with the suffering, to comfort the dying, and to affirm the God-given dignity of every human life,” said Bishop Paprocki. “Illinois’s assisted suicide law undermines that mission by forcing Catholic hospitals and those who serve in them to push death onto their most vulnerable patients."

Dr. Mary Keen, another Plaintiff, added:

“The State’s demand that physicians begin helping patients accomplish assisted suicide violates everything I know as a health care professional, as well as my deeply held Catholic convictions on the dignity of every human life.

As a doctor, I have a responsibility to meet my patients’ existential pain with loving accompaniment, not with abandonment.”

Key Takeaways:

• New Mexico legalized assisted suicide in 2021 in what was considered one of the most extreme bills in the nation.

• Physicians were initially required to give patients information about assisted suicide, even if they opposed the practice.

• 170 people were given assisted suicide prescriptions in 2025 by just 26 providers, and 723 people have received fatal prescriptions since legalization.

The Details:

New Mexico's 2025 Annual Data Report has been released and shows that 170 lethal prescriptions were issued. Only three of those people did not take the fatal drugs.

This was a decrease from 2023, in which 213 people were given assisted suicide prescriptions; altogether, since being legalized, 723 people have received the prescriptions. Interestingly, only 26 health care providers across the entire state prescribed the assisted suicide medication in 2025.

The report does not confirm that the conditions required under law were met, or how many people traveled from out of state into New Mexico to die. The vast majority were elderly, had been diagnosed with cancer, and were receiving hospice care.

The Backstory:

Legislation to allow assisted suicide in New Mexico was introduced in 2019, and it was immediately controversial. It allowed non-physicians to prescribe assisted suicide drugs, did not require a specific prognosis, and required providers to lie on the death certificate. So if a woman with, say, lung cancer underwent assisted suicide, the death certificate would have to say lung cancer, rather than her actual cause of death: assisted suicide. There were very few safeguards put in place, and it still allowed for assisted suicide tourism, as well as for people with mental illness to qualify.

At the time, it was described as one of the worst pro-assisted suicide laws in the nation.

Assisted suicide was ultimately legalized in 2021 in New Mexico and has just five requirements. In addition to being a legal adult, the person must have:

• The capacity to make an informed health care decision

• A terminal illness with a life expectancy of six months or less

• Voluntarily requested medical aid-in-dying

• The ability to self-administer medical aid-in-dying medication

The law initially required health care providers to give information to patients about assisted suicide, a blatant violation of conscience protections. Christian health care providers sued, and in 2023, the law was amended to clarify that providers would “not be subject to criminal liability, licensing sanctions or other professional disciplinary action” for “refusing, for reasons of conscience, to participate in medical aid in dying in any way, which includes refusing to provide information on medical aid in dying to a patient and refusing to refer a patient to any entity or individual who is able and willing to assist the patient in obtaining medical aid in dying.”

Key Takeaways:

• Julia Holcomb sued Tyler in 2022, alleging that he groomed and sexually assaulted her while she was a minor in the 1970s.

• Holcomb claims she became pregnant, and Tyler coerced her into an abortion.

• Tyler is asking a judge to keep evidence of Holcomb's abortion excluded, and if not, to include a second abortion after the relationship with Tyler was over.

The Backstory:

In 2022, Julia Holcomb sued Tyler for allegedly grooming and sexually abusing her in the 1970s, when she was just 16, under California’s Child Victims Act.

Though Tyler claims the relationship was consensual, the details, even from his perspective, are disturbing.

He wrote about Holcomb in his book, "Does The Noise In My Head Bother You? A Rock 'n' Roll Memoir," though he did not name her. In the book, he wrote:

She was sixteen, she knew how to nasty, and there wasn’t a hair on it. With my bad self being twenty-six and she barely old enough to drive and sexy as hell, I just fell madly in love with her. She was a cute skinny little tomboy dressed up as Little Bo Peep. She was my heart’s desire, my partner in crimes of passion.

I was so in love I almost took a teen bride. I went and slept at her parents’ house for a couple of nights and her parents fell in love with me, signed papers over for me to have custody, so I wouldn’t get arrested if I took her out of state. I took her on tour with me.

Holcomb, however, claimed her mother was convinced by Tyler to give him guardianship so she could go on tour, despite being a minor, and this led to a sexual relationship.

Under the agreement, Tyler was supposed to give her better access to education and health care, but did not, and Holcomb described herself as "powerless" in the situation.

In 1975, she got pregnant, and said Tyler strongly pressured her into having an abortion. While she said she did not want to go through with it, Tyler was her legal guardian and she feared a loss of all support if she didn't do as he said. So she had the abortion, and it devastated her. Afterward, she moved back to her hometown of Portland, was baptized into the Methodist church, and eventually became a devout Catholic.

Holcomb went public with her story about the abortion and her time with Tyler more than 15 years ago. Read it in her own words. In one portion of her account, she recalled the abortion experience this way:

The doctor did not explain what the procedure would be like. Steven watched when the doctor punctured my uterus with a large needle. Then I was taken to a room to wait for the contractions.  Steven sat beside me in the hospital until it was over.  When the nurse would leave the room he was snorting cocaine on the table beside my bed.  He even offered some to me once, but I just turned away, sick inside. Steven, high on cocaine, was emotionally detached, witnessing the procedure but cut off from the normal reaction and feelings of horror you would expect.  At the time I was shocked and hurt by his behavior.

But I know now that on an unconscious level, he must have been traumatized witnessing the death of his first-born son in such a horrific and direct way.

Steven watched the baby come out and he told me later, when we were in New Hampshire, that it had been born alive and allowed to die.  (I was not allowed to see the baby when it was delivered.) Steven told me later that it had been a boy and that he now felt terrible guilt and a sense of dread over what he had done.

In "Walk This Way: The Autobiography of Aerosmith," the band's memoir, Tyler also recalled the effect the abortion had on him:

It was a big crisis. It’s a major thing when you’re growing something with a woman, but they convinced us that it would never work out and would ruin our lives. . . . You go to the doctor and they put the needle in her belly and they squeeze the stuff in and you watch. And it comes out dead. I was pretty devastated. In my mind, I’m going, Jesus, what have I done?

Ray Tabano, one of the founding members of Aerosmith, said he was the one who had convinced Tyler to press Holcomb for an abortion, and said:

So they had the abortion, and it really messed Steven up because it was a boy. He . . . saw the whole thing and it [messed] him up big time.

In a statement about her lawsuit, Holcomb said she wanted celebrities like Tyler to be held accountable for preying on young girls like her.

“I want this action to expose an industry that protects celebrity offenders, to cleanse and hold accountable an industry that both exploited and allowed me to be exploited for years, along with so many other naïve and vulnerable kids and adults,” she said. “Because I know that I am not the only one who suffered abuse in the music industry, I feel it is time for me to take this stand and bring this action, to speak up and stand in solidarity with the other survivors.”

The Details:

Tyler has denied that he abused Holcomb, claiming that the relationship was consensual, though he was unsuccessful in getting the lawsuit dismissed. The case will go to trial later this month, and Tyler is looking to have the evidence of Holcomb's abortion kept out of court.

He claimed the abortion took place in Massachusetts, which is relevant as that portion of Holcomb's case has been thrown out already due to that state's statute of limitations, though the suit continues with regard to the part of their relationship that did not take place in Massachusetts.

Tyler also argued that if the 1975 abortion is allowed to be admitted, his team should also be allowed to introduce information about a second abortion Holcomb later had. That abortion took place in 1979, when she was pregnant by another man; the defense claims this proves her trauma isn't due to Tyler's actions, arguing:

[T]he fact that [Julia] voluntarily underwent a second abortion is probative as to the emotional distress she alleges she suffered from the 1975 abortion, and because [Julia] admits both abortions were traumatic, provides a possible alternative cause of her alleged mental condition.

However, it is notable that Holcomb never saw the result of the abortion; Tyler did.

And while Holcomb — who stated in 2011 that she was at that time a mother to seven more children — now regrets both abortions, the difference between the first and the second is coercion.

Holcomb felt the fear of potential destitution and homelessness; at the time, she was living in Massachusetts, thousands of miles away from her parents, as a minor who was completely dependent on Tyler, who pushed her to abort.

“My baby had one defender in life: me, and I caved in to pressure because of fear of rejection and the unknown future," she said. "I wish I could go back and be given that chance again, to say no to the abortion one last time. I wish with all my heart I could have watched that baby live his life and grow to be a man.”

The judge has yet to rule on Tyler's request.

Key Takeaways:

• The woman in the UK has been cleared of murder in the suicide death of her mother.

• Emma Nightingale procured drugs for her mother Lorna, who was not terminally ill.

• After Lorna took the drugs and died, Nightingale was arrested and charged with murder.

• The murder charge was ultimately dropped, but she may face additional charges.

The Details:

Emma Nightingale, age 36, said her mother, Lorna, age 70, "begged" her to get pills so she could take her own life because she was in pain from chronic kidney disease, dental problems, and cataracts.

She explained, "I got in contact with a doctor in Switzerland, as they sell the pills legally there. Mum never would have made the journey, and it was her wish to pass away at home in her own country." She did not provide further details in order to protect the doctor who gave them to her.

In December, after Lorna took the drugs and died from an overdose, Nightingale called an ambulance service.

“She’d had enough and wanted to go with dignity," Nightingale told the Eastern Daily Press. She added, “She wanted for me to be there with her. She was happy and smiling right up to the end, watching all her TV shows in bed surrounded by the flowers I constantly bought her.”

However, Nightingale said she is a Christian and initially struggled with the ethical concerns of helping her non-terminally ill mother to die.

Nightingale was arrested and charged with murder. In April, she appeared in court and pleaded not guilty.

Assisted suicide is currently illegal in the UK and helping someone to commit suicide carries a penalty of up to 14 years in prison. Nightingale spent five months in prison, but the charges were ultimately dropped because there was "no longer a realistic prospect of conviction," according to court documents cited by the Eastern Daily Press. It is unclear if she will face any charges in her mother's death, but she said Crown Prosecution Service may charge her with encouraging or assisting suicide. 

“It was the hardest decision I’ve ever had to make. It was the humane thing to do,” she said. “There was no way I was going to let the person closest to me in the world, my mom, who was my best friend, go through that sort of pain and suffering.”

She described her mother's final days, saying:

In the time we had left together, I ensured she was as comfortable and happy as she could possibly be. She gave me the honour of waiting on her 24/7, making her tea and all her favourite foods - soft mashed potatoes, Yorkshire puddings with gravy, crumpets and soft desserts.

She still had a good appetite, and I brought her fish and chips whenever she wanted from the takeaway just across the road. Whatever she wanted, I made sure she had. Just seeing her smiles and contentment while watching her favourite TV shows and enjoying her food was a joy to me.

Nightingale is now advocating in favor of the UK legalizing assisted suicide. The UK has been considering such <a href="/news/140-medical-professionals-new-uk-assisted-suicide">legislation</a> but it has received a lot of pushback and delay, due to concerns from varied groups.

Why It Matters:

Lorna's final days appear to have been peaceful and without pain, and Nightingale seems to have enjoyed caring for her mother. It's unclear why this couldn't continue or why Lorna didn't receive appropriate care that could have helped to manage her pain and keep her comfortable long term so that she could live out the rest of her days in a similar way.

Ensuring proper care would have been an appropriate act of compassion.

Legalizing assisted suicide for people with terminal illnesses would not have allowed Lorna to legally access a deadly drug cocktail in the UK. What it would do is further the false idea that certain people are better off dead — the disabled, the chronically ill, and those considered terminally ill.

Legalized assisted suicide tells people that suicide is tragic unless you fit into one of these health categories, and as time goes on, restrictions are loosened that ultimately allow even more people to kill themselves until only lives deemed "healthy" are seen as valuable and the rest are deemed too difficult.

Mayday Health, a nonprofit that publishes information about abortion pill availability and directs women to third-party providers, challenged a South Dakota law making it a felony to advertise medication intended for an unlawful abortion. Mayday does not prescribe, sell, or ship abortion pills.

On July 17, a federal judge granted Mayday and its co-plaintiff, trial attorney and former Democrat state legislator Nancy Turbak Berry, a preliminary injunction, temporarily preventing South Dakota from enforcing the law against them while the case proceeds.

Mayday Health Executive Director Leo Raisner celebrated the decision.

“We share information and list legitimate providers,” Raisner said. “That’s not illegal. That’s protected by the First Amendment.”

Mayday shared on its Instagram account, calling it a “Big time First Amendment win in South Dakota.” 

The applause was immediate.

Cody McDevitt of Repro Rights NOW described the ruling as “an early First Amendment victory” with potential implications for “medication-abortion information, online speech, and interstate access.” 

Abortion, Every Day founder Jessica Valenti was more colorful, writing that South Dakota had been “absolutely ratioed by the Constitution.” 

In earlier coverage of Mayday’s lawsuit, Valenti emphasized that the organization does not “sell, handle, provide, offer for sale, or distribute any medications.” Instead, she wrote, “They only provide information,” leaving out the fact that the information Mayday provides specifically helps people circumvent the state’s abortion law.

The ACLU of South Dakota had already condemned the state’s attempt to restrict Mayday’s advertisements.

Samantha Chapman, ACLU of South Dakota advocacy manager, called the investigation “little more than political theater at the taxpayer’s expense” and warned that attempts to restrict abortion information would further isolate pregnant South Dakotans seeking to educate themselves about medical care.

Jezebel characterized South Dakota’s effort to uphold its abortion law as a “free-speech stomping crusade” and quoted the ACLU describing it as “a politically motivated attack on free speech.” 

The argument running through these responses is clear: The government should not be permitted to silence an organization merely because state officials disapprove of the information it shares. Mayday does not prescribe or distribute abortion pills. It provides information and connects people with third-party providers. Its supporters insist that this distinction places Mayday’s work squarely within the protection of the First Amendment.

“Information should not be banned,” Mayday’s attorney, Jim Leach, said after the ruling. “This ruling says the state cannot ban information about abortion, no matter what you think about abortion or anything else.” 

Double Standard

Interestingly enough, however, many of the same voices applauding the ruling and advocating for Mayday Health’s First Amendment rights are among those insisting that ours should be taken away.

Heartbeat International does not sell, ship, or manufacture progesterone. Through the Abortion Pill Rescue Network, we share information and connect women who regret beginning a chemical abortion with licensed medical professionals willing to evaluate them and, when appropriate, prescribe progesterone.

A woman reaches out. We listen. We provide information. We connect her with a medical professional. She makes her own decision.

Apparently, “we share information and list legitimate providers” is a winning First Amendment argument when the objective is to help a woman complete an abortion. When the objective is to help a woman stop an unwanted abortion, the same activity suddenly becomes “dangerous disinformation.” At least for some state attorneys general.

Mayday itself has accused pregnancy centers of spreading harmful disinformation. Raisner previously wrote that pregnancy center employees use “false and dangerous information” to dissuade women from abortion.

In an interview with an undercover investigation conducted by Mayday, Abortion Pill Reversal was described as “a dangerous, non-proven method” and a “bogus, medically dangerous claim.” 

Repro Rights NOW celebrated Mayday’s injunction as a First Amendment victory but called Abortion Pill Reversal “an unproven protocol promoted by anti-abortion groups.” In separate coverage, it declared, “There is no credible evidence that abortion pill reversal exists.” 

The ACLU of South Dakota defended Mayday from what it considered a politically motivated attack on speech. The national ACLU, meanwhile, has called the science supporting Abortion Pill Reversal “junk science” and described Dr. George Delgado’s work as an “unproven” theory that is “not based on science.” 

In earlier litigation, ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project Director Jennifer Dalven praised a court for preventing women from being “forced to receive false information from their doctors.” 

Jezebel condemned South Dakota’s actions against Mayday as an assault on free speech. Yet when New York Attorney General Letitia James sued Heartbeat International and pregnancy centers over Abortion Pill Reversal, the publication applauded James’ actions and accused us of “deceiving abortion seekers” and promoting “unsafe, untested ‘abortion pill reversal’ junk science.” 

Valenti praised Mayday because it “only provide[s] information.” Four days after Mayday secured its preliminary injunction, her publication, "Abortion, Every Day," described pregnancy centers as “fake clinics that exist to surveil, lie, and dissuade prospective abortion seekers.” It called Abortion Pill Reversal “an unsafe and unproven process” and accused pro-life organizations of spreading “dangerous disinformation.”

The double standard could not be more blatant.

When Mayday directs women to abortion pill providers, it is education. When Heartbeat directs women to licensed healthcare providers, it is deception.

When Mayday advertises an option that may end a pregnancy, information “should not be banned.” When Heartbeat tells a woman she may still have an opportunity to continue her desired pregnancy, government restriction is treated as consumer protection.

When Mayday challenges government interference, it is courageously “fighting back.” When Heartbeat defends itself against government interference, our appeal to the First Amendment is dismissed as an attempt to avoid accountability.

'Choice' vs. Control

Free speech cannot turn on the speaker’s viewpoint.

Nor should “choice” evaporate the moment a woman changes her mind. A woman who wants an abortion is told that she deserves information, autonomy, and immediate access to help. A woman who regrets taking mifepristone and wants to try to save her pregnancy is told that the information she seeks should be censored for her own good.

That is not choice. It is ideological control dressed up as concern.

The contradiction is particularly striking because Mayday relied in its own South Dakota court briefing on a Second Circuit decision protecting speech about Abortion Pill Reversal. Even as it leverages a case protecting the right to speak about abortion pill reversal, would Mayday agree that APR-related speech is indeed worthy of protection?

Heartbeat International is still waiting for our California trial to conclude. The state is seeking extraordinary penalties against us for communicating with women about Abortion Pill Reversal. After weeks in court, we now await the remaining briefs, closing arguments, and ultimately the judge’s decision.

We are not asking for a special exemption. We are asking for the same principle Mayday’s supporters so enthusiastically claim for themselves.

If Mayday has a First Amendment right to tell women where they can obtain illegal abortion pills, then surely Heartbeat has a First Amendment right to tell women where they can seek perfectly legal medical help after taking one.

Key Takeaways:

• The Oakland County Board of Commissioners in Michigan has voted to give Planned Parenthood $1.5 million in taxpayer dollars.

• The money will be used specifically for the Ferndale Planned Parenthood.

• Planned Parenthood, which recently closed three Michigan facilities, frequently cites funding cuts as a reason for closures. In reality, it has been planning for years to transition to a telehealth business model.

The Details:

Oakland County Board of Commissioners voted 11-6 to award Planned Parenthood $1.5 million of taxpayer dollars to help operate its Ferndale, Michigan, facility through August 2028.

The funding comes weeks after Planned Parenthood announced it was closing three other Michigan facilities, allegedly due to federal funding cuts.

Commissioner Charlie Cavell alluded to those federal cuts (which were restored in July) as one reason why he voted yes to the proposal.

"Planned Parenthood has been going through a transition where they've been losing a bunch of money from federal sources, so this is a great opportunity to step in," Cavell said.

In an opposing vote, Commissioner Christine Long said she received many phone calls urging her to vote 'no.'

"I am against it using taxpayers' funding. The $1.5 million, that's a hefty amount of tax dollars," she noted.

Amber Roseboom, President, Right to Life of Michigan, decried the decision to fund the abortion giant, noting that nationally, Planned Parenthood has enough funds to have spent tens of millions on upcoming elections:

“This is a flagrant abuse of the taxpayers’ trust and resources…

Peddling the idea that Planned Parenthood needs this infusion of cash under the guise of healthcare is an insult to every taxpayer in the county.

Begging the taxpayer for resources in the midst of a midterm election in which they have already sent more than $50,000 to Jocelyn’s Benson’s campaign for governor and their national organization has committed $47 million to defeat Republicans is an absolute disgrace.”

Reality Check:

For years, Planned Parenthood has been playing the victim in order to gather as much in taxpayer funding as possible, blaming federal funding cuts as a reason why its brick and mortar facilities are closing.

However, as Live Action News previously documented, the organization's closure announcements are routinely misleading. For years, it has planned to transition to a telehealth business model with virtual health centers.

Through these virtual centers, it can continue to offer the abortion pill — which now makes up the majority of abortions — without the overhead and expenses of brick and mortar facilities.

The Bottom Line:

Taxpayer dollars should never be used to fund an organization that profits in the killing of preborn children.

Key Takeaways:

• The Hope Clinic for Women in Granite City requested emergency transport for a 15-year-old girl with a high heart rate.

• Planned Parenthood in Aurora called 911 for a woman who had no pulse after staff began sedation.

• Both facilities have a long history of injuring women.

The Details:

Operation Rescue reported the facts as currently known for both emergencies.

Emergency #1: Rapid heartbeat

The first occurred on July 22 and involved a 15-year-old girl who visited the Hope Clinic for Women in Granite City, Illinois, just minutes away from St. Louis, Missouri.

While it's not known what caused the medical emergency, Hope Clinic's website makes it clear that the primary service available at the facility is abortion.

The EMS audio revealed the girl was conscious and breathing, but had a “high heart rate." This is known as tachycardia. If she was experiencing any other symptoms, they were not reported, though even on its own, tachycardia can be the first sign of the body going into shock.

There are numerous things following an abortion that could cause tachycardia: hemorrhage (both external or internal), sepsis, or an adverse drug reaction.

Unfortunately, the girl's condition and what caused the emergency are not known.

Emergency #2: No pulse

Two days later, on July 24, a second abortion-related emergency occurred. This time, it was at the Planned Parenthood facility in Aurora, Illinois, which is not far from Chicago. The EMS audio from this call included comments from the staffer.

"I just need an ambulance transfer to the hospital," the staffer said, and then asked another person in the background how old the patient was before reporting that she was 21. The dispatcher then had to ask multiple times what the reason was for calling 911 before the staffer answered.

"She's de-satting — I'm sorry. She's de-satting," the staffer said, to which the confused dispatcher asked, "What is that?"

"Her vitals are going down," the staffer responded. "She's being sedated and at some point, she stopped having a pulse."

READ: <a href="/news/illinois-abortion-facilities-injured-21-women-in-2025">Illinois abortion facilities injured 21 women in 2025</a>

This time, it was confirmed that the woman was undergoing a surgical abortion.

"De-satting" is shorthand for desaturating, meaning a person's blood oxygen levels are falling. While details beyond this are not known, it is clear that this was a critical emergency.

Worse, the staffer withheld the most vital piece of information — that the woman lost a pulse — until later in the call, downplaying the severity of the emergency, and delaying emergency response.

Once again, the status of this woman is not known.

The Big Picture:

Both facilities are known to have a history of injuring women.

Planned Parenthood Aurora had multiple abortion injuries last year alone, commits second-trimester D&E abortions, and has a long history of injuring women. Staffers frequently request ambulances to come without lights or sirens.

Hope Clinic similarly has injured women.

The facility is known to have sent multiple abortion patients to the hospital with injuries, including three women in the span of two months in late 2023. That year, Hope Clinic had 17 known injuries. In one particularly disturbing 911 call, a staffer was heard cavalierly laughing after a woman was injured.

Hope Clinic is known to send its patients to Barnes-Jewish Hospital in St. Louis, Missouri, which is 20 minutes away, even though there is a hospital directly across the street. The owner of the abortion facility, abortionist Erin King, is married to David Eisenberg, a gynecologist who works at Barnes-Jewish/Washington University. While it is designated as a Level 1 trauma center, meaning it is a "comprehensive regional resource that serves large cities and is equipped to provide the most complete and complex level of care for trauma patients," it may also be preferred due to Eisenberg's presence.

Eisenberg has been involved with multiple abortion-related studies and is the "Division Chief of Complex Family Planning" at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. Additionally, as Live Action News previously reported:

[A]bortionist David Eisenberg (also a Washington University physician) was the medical director at Planned Parenthood in St. Louis. Eisenberg was caught practicing questionable hand hygiene at the facility and downplayed the seriousness of the health code violations. Eisenberg said that abortionists at the facility did not report complications because, according to the lawsuit, “they did not expect the state to enforce the law.”

The Bottom Line:

Illinois officials continue to turn a blind eye to the abortion industry, and women will continue to be injured in the meantime.

The fellowship exists to train emergency department staff to commit abortions and "address institutional changes" regarding abortion. The funding comes from the state's Health Department; in other words, taxpayers are footing the bill.

Key Takeaways:

• The University of Illinois Chicago College of Nursing is accepting applicants for its RADIANT ED Fellowship.

• The fellowship provides training and mentorship for physicians, physician assistants, and Advanced Practice Clinicians working in state Emergency Departments in order to build "champions" of "reproductive care" who also work to expand abortion access.

• Each participant will receive a $5,000 stipend, paid for by Illinois taxpayers through the Illinois Department of Public Health's Abortion Provider Capacity Building Grant Program.

The Details:

The RADIANT (Reproductive Advocacy and Diversity in Advanced Nursing Training) Fellowship is a training program that provides two abortion related programs.

The first is "focused on integrating abortion care into practice," and the second is focused on "advancing emergency department clinicians' skills" in committing abortions. It uses both online and in-person training for advanced practice clinicians (APCs) in state emergency departments.

"Each participant completing the program will receive a $5,000 stipend and travel support," states the website. That money is coming from taxpayers through the Illinois Department of Public Health's Abortion Provider Capacity Building Grant Program.

According to the fellowship's website:

"RADIANT Emergency Department (ED) is a FREE, hybrid online/live training program with ED experts to identify and address institutional challenges and develop strategies to implement change while expanding their capacity to be first-line responders to conditions such as ectopic pregnancy, early pregnancy loss and improving their skills in obstetric care. RADIANT ED Fellows meet online with experts in emergency medicine and obstetrics/gynecology over an 11-week program, then meet in-person on the UIC campus for a two-day, live training event.

Both the RADIANT and RADIANT ED Fellowships are supported through a partnership with the Illinois Department of Public Health’s Abortion Provider Capacity Building Grant Program."

The fellowship appears to be focused on expanding access to abortion.

After Roe v. Wade was overturned in June 2022, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker said, ”When I said Illinois would be an oasis for women seeking reproductive care, I meant it."

UIC has partnered with several nonprofit organizations, like Access Bridge and FemInEM, as well as Carafem, an abortion business with a facility in Illinois that has a history of injuring women.

Zoom In:

According to the fellowship website, the goals of the RADIANT Fellowship are to:

1. Train Providers
Provide training and mentorship for APCs, Physicians and Physician Associates/Assistants in gender-affirming and trauma-informed abortion care.

2. Educate Students
Implementing a standardized abortion curriculum and clinical practice opportunities for APRN students at UIC’s College of Nursing. RADIANT alumni will be offered additional training to serve as preceptors and mentors to the next generation of advanced practice nurses providing abortion care.

3. Expand Access
Offer patient-centered early abortion care to patients through an APC-led abortion clinic at UI Health.  This clinic will provide early abortion services and provide clinical training opportunities to RADIANT Fellows and other APCs.

The goals of the RADIANT ED Fellowship are to:

1. Train Providers
Provide training and mentorship for Physicians, Physician Associates/Assistants, and Advanced Practice Clinicians working in Illinois’ Emergency Departments to strengthen their skills in delivering essential reproductive care.

2. Develop as Clinical Champions 
Radiant ED Fellows will work with our Emergency Department experts to identify and address institutional challenges related to reproductive health care delivery and develop strategies to implement change.

And all of this is paid for by Illinois taxpayers. The funding for the fellowships comes from the Illinois Department of Public Health, by way of a $2 million grant that was awarded among the UIC College of Nursing, the Midwest Access Project, and Planned Parenthood of Illinois to pay for abortion-related training. It is unclear how much of that funding was given to UIC.

The emergency department training includes weekly online meetings to teach clinical skills in "early pregnancy loss, ectopic pregnancy, emergency contraception, point-of-care ultrasound, abortion follow-up, perinatal substance use disorder, obstetric complications."

A two-day live training at a UIC simulation lab includes "immersive, hands-on skills training... to build clinical confidence in diagnosing and managing early pregnancy loss through high-fidelity ultrasound simulators, standardized patient scenarios, and complication case studies."

The fellowship claims to provide training for "reproductive health" such as "ectopic pregnancy, [and] early pregnancy loss," as well as helping to improve "skills in obstetric care." Yet, neither ectopic pregnancy care nor treatment for early pregnancy loss (miscarriage) is considered induced abortion, which always involves the intent to kill the preborn child or hasten the child's death.

Standard obstetrics care for ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage is not prohibited in any state.

The Bottom Line:

In 2024, nearly 25% of all out-of-state abortions were committed in Illinois, and about 35,000 women traveled from other states to Illinois for abortions.

To date, at least 60 clinicians have gone through the training, which is now in its third year. Doctors and nurses who work at Illinois emergency departments are currently eligible to apply for the ED fellowship for spring 2027.

Thousands of pro-life Indians gathered in Chennai on August 8-9 for the National March for Life, held to protest the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act which legalised abortion in India on August 10, 1971.

More than 50 years later, this law now permits the slaughter of babies up to 24 weeks for any reason whatsoever. An estimated 15.6 million abortions took place in India in the year 2015 alone according to a Lancet Global Health report. A decade later this number has surely increased.

It was in response to this horrific genocide that pro-lifers from across the nation converged on Chennai to march for the unborn.

A Life Exhibition for the Next Generation 

Each year the March for Life opens with a Life Exhibition, and this year’s was extended to a day prior to the March.

The exhibition inaugurated on August 8 drew about 3,000 school and college students. The exhibition extended well beyond the issue of abortion: through interactive displays, students learned about the realities of IVF, the harms of contraception, the dangers of gender ideology, and the destructive effects of the pornography industry.

Pregnancy resource centers were also on hand, sharing their work and inviting students to help spread awareness of their services nationwide.

Jericho March & Eucharistic Procession

Following the exhibition, accompanied by bugles, drums, and trumpets, a powerful Jericho March was held where hundreds of pro-lifers walked amidst torrential rains in a Eucharistic Procession led by bishops, priests, nuns and lay leaders praying for the culture of death to be destroyed in India and a culture of life to prevail.

One of the priests shared with us that as they were drenched in the rains it was their ardent prayer that each drop of rain be a symbol of God’s mercy being unleashed for the nation.

Youth Conference Opens the Day of the March

The day of the March, August 9, began with a Youth Conference attended by a thousand youth from Chennai which featured talks by pro-life doctors, a musical, and an energetic pro-life dance performance.

It concluded with a prayer led by Bishop Gerald Mathias for all the babies lost to abortion, with youth placing white flags in memory of the unborn afterward.  

Testimonies, Heartbeat, and a New Memorial

The public gathering of all pro-lifers featured religious and political dignitaries, including the CBCI President Cardinal Poola, the host Archbishop Antonysamy, India’s pro-life in-charge Archbishop Kalist, and the Speaker of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly JCD Prabhakar.

Cardinal Poola proclaimed to the crowds gathered, “Let us continue to March for Life - tirelessly, faithfully, and boldly - until the abortion laws in India are repealed.”

The participants were moved to tears at the testimony of Mrs. Pranali, who shared her heartbreaking experience of three abortions. Afterward, the sound of a baby's heartbeat, played live for the assembly, silenced the crowd.

A beautiful memorial of the unborn depicting an unborn baby within a large cross was unveiled, serving as a lasting testament to the land’s commitment to protecting the preborn. 

Aftermath of the March

For the first time, the March for Life has made it to national news amidst external hate and criticism.

This has renewed the spirits of Indian pro-lifers who have now taken it on as an opportunity to proclaim the Gospel of Life 24/7. The next March for Life will be held in Hyderabad.

Key Takeaways:

• Erin Strotman, 27, pleaded no contest on January 15, 2026 to nine felony child abuse charges for injuring infants at Henrico Doctors’ Hospital between 2022 and 2024, and was sentenced to only three years in prison on June 5, 2026.

• Commonwealth’s Attorney Shannon Taylor told CBS 6 that hospital “actions and inactions” prevented a thorough investigation from the moment the first injuries were identified, and that subpoenaed records were never produced.

• The hospital waited 10 days to report suspected abuse to Child Protective Services (CPS) after a veteran radiologist concluded the injuries were non-accidental — more than nine days past the legal deadline.

• A special grand jury described the hospital’s internal investigation as a “cloak of secrecy.” No administrator or executive faces criminal charges.

The Details:

Erin Strotman, 27, worked as a nurse in the neonatal intensive care unit at Henrico Doctors’ Hospital in Henrico County when surveillance footage and physical evidence caught her mishandling infants in ways that left them with broken bones and lasting injuries. 

Strotman’s attorneys argued she never intended to hurt the infants and attributed some of her conduct to techniques she had learned on the unit, a claim prosecutors disputed with the footage itself.

On January 15, 2026, Strotman pleaded no contest to nine felony child abuse charges for injuring infants between 2022 and 2024. The sentencing judge started at 45 years and worked backward, suspending all but three, which was the hard limit her plea deal set. She left the courtroom in custody, her nursing license gone permanently.

A special grand jury spent months examining whether anyone else at the hospital shared in the criminal responsibility, but it concluded without charging anyone. 

What the Hospital Knew: 

Unexplained fractures in NICU infants at Henrico Doctors’ had been appearing as far back as 2022, but it was not until September 2023 that a veteran radiologist told the hospital’s Chief Medical Officer directly that the pattern of injuries pointed to deliberate abuse.

The hospital’s response, however, was to wait 10 full days before picking up the phone to call CPS. State law, notably, gave them 24 hours.

Shannon Taylor, the Henrico Commonwealth’s Attorney who oversaw the investigation, told CBS 6 she has no explanation for the gap and neither has the hospital.

“That is probably one of the unanswered questions that people would like to know, but I can’t provide that answer to the public or to those families,” Taylor said. 

Because the failure to report carried only a civil fine under Virginia law at the time, Taylor’s office negotiated a remedial agreement with the hospital rather than pursue charges. Cameras were installed, training was mandated, and Strotman was removed from the unit. 

Eventually in September 2024, the hospital decided to bring Strotman back, but it wasn’t long before the NICU had been shut down entirely and she was arrested.

Why No One Else Was Charged:

When the full picture of Strotman’s conduct became public, HCA Healthcare claimed Taylor’s office had been consulted on her return and raised no concerns — a claim Taylor disputed on camera. HCA then produced an August 2024 email in which a member of Taylor’s prosecutorial staff told hospital counsel the office had “no objection at all” to the suspended nurses resuming work after training. Taylor’s office has not addressed it publicly since.

The grand jury sought records that might have sustained charges against hospital leadership, but the documents never materialized. Subpoenas went unanswered and the investigation reached the limits of what it could establish without them. 

“There were actions and inactions that were taken by the hospital that did not allow this matter to be thoroughly investigated,” Taylor told CBS 6. 

The Bottom Line:

The case did produce one concrete legislative result. On May 13, 2026, Gov. Abigail Spanberger signed House Bill 1414 into law, legislation introduced by Delegate Dolores McQuinn after Taylor approached her about carrying it.

Under the new law, staff at facilities that care for children who fail to report suspected abuse within 24 hours can be found guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor, with repeat offenses rising to a Class 6 felony. 

Virginia hospitals, however, still face no financial penalty for the kind of institutional failures that allowed this case to unfold as long as it did. 

Key Takeaways:

• The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) has called for a blanket donation limit across Europe, rather than limits set by each country.

• A position paper recommended beginning with a limit of 50 families per donor across Europe, and reducing it to 15 families over time.

• The unchecked fertility industry has allowed sperm donors to have hundreds, if not thousands, of children.

The Details:

This summer, the ESHRE released a position paper calling for stronger limits on sperm donation, and for them to be universally enacted across Europe. The group specifically pointed out how easily sperm donors are able to cross country lines and continue donating, even if they are banned in one country:

While most European countries impose national limits on the number of offspring or families that can be created using gametes from a single donor in their country, these limits are not always enforced, and there is no agreed international limit.

In Europe, the movement of patients and the export of donor gametes to other countries are common practices. For example, a study from 2014 found that 63% of inseminations with donor sperm in Belgium were carried out with donor sperm imported from Denmark.

In this context, the lack of an international limit on gamete use can lead to large groups of donor-conceived people from the same donor spread throughout multiple countries.

The group used the example of sperm donors who had fathered hundreds of children as the reason more regulation is needed. It was also pointed out that many donor-conceived adults find themselves in difficult situations when they learn they have multiple donor siblings, noting that some have felt mass-produced and commodified. Donors themselves may also be affected, particularly with the advent of online DNA testing:

For a donor, it might be difficult to respond to each contact request in a thoughtful way if there are a great number of offspring, let alone invest in an ongoing relationship with each of them if desired.

Just like with donor-conceived people, the discovery of a large number of donor offspring might feel overwhelming to donors. Donors might also be concerned about the impact of large offspring numbers on their own children. 

Additionally, the group pointed out there is a growing risk of accidental incest, particularly in cases where donor-conceived adults are not told by their parents that they were donor-conceived. Ultimately, ESHRE said the well-being of donor-conceived adults should be the highest priority.

The group's recommendation is to start with a 50-family limit per donor, and to phase it down to 15 families over time; these limits would be international, so donors could not simply travel to another country to donate once they had exceeded the limit in a different country.

Why It Matters:

Six European Union (EU) nations have already called for stricter limits on sperm donation.

Because of the unregulated fertility industry, donor-conceived children are increasingly treated as products that adults are owed, rather than as actual children with rights of their own.

Some donors are known to have fathered hundreds, if not thousands, of children, including donors who have cancer-causing gene variants, which are then passed down to their children. Sperm donation is also often anonymous, so donor-conceived children are often intentionally deprived of knowing their background, medical history, and heritage.

There are also no safety checks to ensure those buying children are safe. Would-be adoptive parents must pass background checks and other legal requirements, but the same is not true of people who become parents through the fertility industry.

For example, YouTuber Shane Dawson was able to become the parent of twins through egg donation and surrogacy, despite having a history of repeatedly sexualizing children, including infants.

In addition, the Baby Gammy controversy, in which an Australian couple abandoned one of the twins created and born through surrogacy in Thailand, garnered international headlines. However, the child that was not abandoned was taken home to Australia with her purchasers, one of whom was a registered sex offender, yet was still able to keep custody of the little girl.

There are countless more examples.

The Bottom Line:

For too long, the emphasis and priority of the fertility industry has been focused on would-be parents instead of the children being created, even as it is increasingly made clear that this mindset is detrimental to the children.

One Harvard Medical School study found that 62% of donor-conceived adults believe it to be unethical and immoral.

“I am a human being, yet I was conceived with a technique that had its origins in animal husbandry,” one donor-conceived person wrote in a book for Anonymous Us. “Worst of all, farmers kept better records of their cattle’s genealogy than assisted reproductive clinics … how could the doctors, sworn to ‘first do no harm’ create a system where I now face the pain and loss of my own identity and heritage?”

Liberty Counsel represents Charla Bansley, District 3 Supervisor for the Bedford County Board of Supervisors, who is challenging House Joint Resolution 1 (HJR 1). HJR 1 aims to establish a “fundamental right to reproductive freedom” in the Virginia Constitution. However, Bansley claims the ballot initiative is invalid after discovering Virginia’s House of Delegates missed several key procedural steps mandated by the Virginia Constitution before the amendment can go before the voters, such as distributing the amendment to all circuit court clerks statewide and posting it for public inspection three months prior to the 2025 House of Delegates election.

The lawsuit names as defendants Clerk of the Virginia House of Delegates G. Paul Nardo; Commissioner of Elections Steven Koski; and other Virginia election offices and officials.

Bansley is asking the court to block election officials from printing 2026 ballots with HJR 1 and to order its amendment process be restarted for the 2027-2028 legislative and election cycles.

READ: <a href="/news/judge-dismisses-lawsuit-against-virginia-abortion-amendment">Judge dismisses lawsuit against Virginia abortion amendment</a>

In July 2026, Campbell County Circuit Court John T. Cook signed an order dismissing the challenge citing the procedural lapses in the constitutional amendment process were not actually mandatory and have since been repealed.

However, Liberty Counsel objected in the signed order arguing that the amendment procedures where [sic] binding, required, and in effect under state law at the time the failures in the amendment process took place. Before the dismissal, Liberty Counsel had argued that a retroactive repeal cannot erase past unlawful conduct or make a defective process valid. 

In addition, Judge Cook determined Bansley did not have standing to bring the case despite 120 years of legal precedent in Virginia where voters have had standing to challenge flawed constitutional amendment procedures.

Liberty Counsel’s Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “This case will ultimately be determined by Virginia’s highest courts. Virginia’s House Joint Resolution 1 is invalid because the General Assembly advanced it to a second legislative vote without completing the constitutionally mandated notice and posting requirements that must occur after its first passage. Virginia citizens have the right to a transparent, orderly constitutional change, and any misstep undermines the integrity of the amendment process and can interfere with the will of the voters.”

At the same time, HHS has identified that hundreds of hospitals and clinics, including several Planned Parenthood affiliates, may be committing insurance/medical fraud, and is recommending for further investigation. Vice President JD Vance is calling for criminal prosecution if the investigation confirms fraud.

Key Takeaways:

• The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services under the Trump administration released its final rule ending federal funding used for sex-rejecting procedures for minors.

• The federal funding will still be available for up to six months in what the agency calls a “tapering-off period” from October 13, 2026, which is when the final rule is scheduled to take effect. 

• HHS has also released a report and documentary that implicate hospitals and clinics, including Planned Parenthood, in misusing insurance codes to fraudulently obtain taxpayer funds for sex-rejecting procedures.

• Hospitals and clinics identified in the report have been referred by VP Vance and HHS Secretary Kennedy to the Department of Justice and HHS Office of the Inspector General (OIG) for “possible violations of federal law.” 

• The report highlighted “cross-sex hormones” prescriptions that were either allegedly prescribed and written on the same day for minors, or prescribed and then (at least 95%) of the claim was billed through the affiliate, in states with laws prohibiting such actions.

The Details:

An HHS press release noted that the federal funding will still be available for up to six months in what the agency calls a “tapering-off period” from October 13, 2026, which is when the final rule is scheduled to take effect. 

 The Department of Justice (DOJ) defines “sex-rejecting procedures” as: 

… any medical, surgical, or pharmaceutical intervention provided to an individual that is intended to suppress, alter, or eliminate endogenous pubertal development, or to modify primary or secondary sex characteristics, for the purpose of aligning with or affirming an individual’s asserted gender identity rather than the individual’s sex, where such intervention would not otherwise be indicated for a congenital, pathological, or nonmental disorder or disease-related condition. 

Previously, a Congressional Budget Office analysis found that from 2019 to 2023, over $135 million of taxpayer-funded Medicaid and CHIPS money was spent on sex-rejecting procedures, including body-harming surgeries, performed on minors across a five-year span. 

HHS Secretary Robert F Kennedy stated regarding the decision, “Today, we are ending federal taxpayer funding for sex-rejecting procedures on children…These interventions carry serious risks and can cause irreversible harm. The federal government will no longer use Medicaid and CHIP dollars to fund procedures that fail to meet the evidentiary standard our children deserve.”

Dr. Mehmet Oz, administrator of CMS, added that the decision will ensure that “experimental interventions that pose serious risks and convey no proven benefits” are not carried out on minors. He stated that this action is “following the science, saving taxpayer dollars, and, most importantly, protecting children from potentially irreversible harm so they can truly flourish.”

The Report

On the heels of the CMS ruling, HHS released a report entitled “Wolves in White Coats: How Doctors and Hospitals Pushed and Profited from the Fraud of ‘Gender Medicine,’” which investigated more than 225 hospitals and other “pediatric gender programs” across the country, including Planned Parenthood affiliates. 

The report "concludes that a litany of political and financial incentives led providers to offer, and indeed urge, the prescription of sex-rejection drugs and surgeries for minors." It analyzed insurance data claims nationwide from 2015-2025, and identified “approximately $50 million in insurance claims for puberty blockers billed using endocrine disorder diagnostic code E34.9 (Endocrine Disorder, Unspecified).” 

In the HHS documentary, author and medical doctor, Aaron Kheriaty states:

“What sex rejecting procedures do is they take kids who are physiologically and medically healthy and make them dependent upon the health care system–very often–for life. It's a sort of captive patient model that allows for continuous generation of revenue–estimates range between $25,000 and $75,000 per patient.”

This generates enormous profits for clinics and hospitals. The report refers to these procedures as the “pediatric gender clinic model.” 

According to the HHS press release, this analysis found “that nearly $11 million in claims for patients ages 13–17” were billed under questionable ICD codes.

The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10, or ICD for short) is a “classification system developed collaboratively between the World Health Organization (WHO) and 10 international centers so that the medical terms reported by physicians…can be grouped together for statistical purposes,” the HHS report states. 

According to CMS guidelines, ICD codes must be accurately reported when dealing with Medicaid and Medicare: “Specifically, these guidelines mandate that doctors ‘[c]ode all documented conditions that coexists at the time of the encounter/visit and that require or affect patient care, treatment or management.”

Failure to accurately report may be found fraudulent under the False Claims Act in addition to other state laws “barring the submission of false claims.” 

In response to this analysis, Vice President JD Vance – alongside Secretary of HHS Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. – referred the hospitals and clinics identified in the report to the Department of Justice and HHS Office of the Inspector General (OIG) for “possible violations of federal law.” 

VP Vance called for "criminal prosecutions" for any of those named in the HHS report, including Planned Parenthood's named affiliates, if further investigations confirm fraudulent activity.

Fox News reported Vance's statement in a letter to Attorney General Todd Blanche, which stated that "providers who intentionally miscoded treatment to defraud Medicaid or private insurers 'should go to prison.'"

So far, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has settled three cases with children’s hospitals that it claims filed “false billings” of its sex-rejecting services which includes the Texas Children’s Hospital and the Cleveland Clinic Foundation (or ‘Cleveland Clinic’).        

Notably, Planned Parenthood was also named throughout the report. 

Potential fraud 

Last year, Live Action News began reporting on Planned Parenthood affiliates openly describing how they utilize the very same ICD codes for which other clinics were being investigated. Experts in the field also noted this during a workshop hosted by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The HHS report similarly points to the Southeastern and Western Pennsylvania Planned Parenthood affiliates receiving millions in taxpayer dollars while stating on its website how it used the same questionable ICD codes.  

The report further highlighted “cross-sex hormones” prescriptions that were either allegedly prescribed and written on the same day, or prescribed and then (at least 95%) of the claim was billed through the affiliate, in states with laws prohibiting sex rejecting medicalized practices on minors. The report recommended further investigations to “determine potential wrongdoing.”

Organizations listed included several Planned Parenthood affiliates: 

• Planned Parenthood Great Northwest, Hawai’i, Alaska, Indiana, Kentucky 

• Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota

• Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas 

• Planned Parenthood of the Heartland

• Planned Parenthood South Atlantic

• Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region 

• Planned Parenthood Greater Ohio

• Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida 

• Planned Parenthood Health Systems 

• Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast

• Planned Parenthood of Florida

• Planned Parenthood of Greater New York (already facing congressional scrutiny)  

Previously, Planned Parenthood Action called the proposed rules by the Trump administration “a dangerous escalation” while boasting of being “proud to serve patients of all gender identities and expressions.” 

The Backstory:  

Upon taking office, the Trump administration vowed to combat gender ideology and tactics forced upon minors. To date, the administration’s attempts include some initial efforts to prohibit or minimize propaganda-fueled ‘sex ed’ programs like those provided or endorsed by Planned Parenthood, and some attempts to halt select clinics or hospitals from utilizing taxpayer funds for sex-rejecting practices on minors. 

In January 2025, President Trump signed Executive Order (EO) 14187, dubbed “Protecting Children From Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” directing HHS to “take all appropriate actions consistent with applicable law to end the chemical and surgical mutilation of children… including regulatory and sub-regulatory actions for specific programs” with the goal of ending federally funded sex-rejecting care on minors. 

In response, two proposed rules were filed:

• Proposed Rule 90 FR 59463 – “Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Hospital Condition of Participation: Prohibiting Sex-Rejecting Procedures for Children.” 

• Proposed Rule 90 FR 59441 – “Medicaid Program; Prohibition on Federal Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program [CHIPS] Funding for Sex-Rejecting Procedures Furnished to Children.” 

Live Action’s latest report explains the vast negative impacts of sex-rejecting gender ideology and practices, particularly on young minds and bodies. Gender ideology ranges from grooming tactics and propaganda that often continue into medicalized practices euphemistically called “gender affirming care.” This “care” often includes puberty blockers, hormones, and body-damaging surgeries, often with life-altering consequences and they are instead referred to as “sex-rejecting procedures” by the DOJ and other government agencies and experts.

Why It Matters: 

As a self-proclaimed leader in sex-rejecting procedures—in addition to ending the lives of nearly 1,200 preborn human beings every single day—Planned Parenthood now faces serious allegations of fraudulent activity. 

And yet, on July 4, Planned Parenthood regained full access to federal Medicaid funding. 

Congress can still act to unequivocally and permanently defund Planned Parenthood – which kills hundreds of thousands of preborn human beings each year, promotes and performs life-altering sex-rejecting procedures on minors, and engages in fraudulent and deceptive practices – as it doesn’t deserve a single taxpayer funded cent.  

The Bottom Line:

Mark Wiltz, Live Action’s Director of Government Affairs, praised the Trump administration’s ruling, calling it a “significant step by the Trump Administration to protect children and taxpayers.”

Wiltz added, “CMS projects this will save about $138 million in federal funds over the next decade. Taxpayers should not be forced to fund these procedures. This is the kind of action we should expect from an administration committed to protecting children and using taxpayer dollars responsibly.”

Key Takeaways:

• Theo Chatham was born prematurely in 2021.

• At three weeks old, he contracted necrotizing enterocolitis, which led to a number of significant health problems.

• He required hospitalization for five years, and was discharged for the very first time in June.

The Details:

Theo Chatham of Scotland was born to Gary and Sarah Chatham on April 1, 2021, when Sarah was 32 weeks pregnant. He weighed just three pounds at birth, which necessitated a stay in the hospital as he continued to grow.

When Theo was three weeks old, he contracted necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), a gastrointestinal illness that led to numerous other health challenges. According to Glasgow Live, young Theo experienced brain damage, cerebral visual impairment, and focal epilepsy, all due to the NEC.

Over the course of the next few years, Theo underwent more than 200 procedures — 48 of which were considered life-saving.

READ: <a href="/news/born-at-23-weeks-miracle-baby-abiageal-is-the-youngest-person-to-survive-major-abdominal-surgery">Born at 23 weeks, miracle baby Abiageal is the youngest person to survive major abdominal surgery</a>

Sarah told PEOPLE that at one point, doctors had asked them to consider giving up hope.

“On his third ever operation, they gave us a talk that we might have to sign his life away,” she said. “I refused. I said, ‘I’m not God, and neither are you, so please put my son through that operation.’”

Though on several occasions Theo was allowed to go home for the day, he was always required to return to the hospital overnight.

“There was never a day when he wasn’t in the hospital, and he would have to be on IV drugs,” Sarah explained.

Zoom In:

Though his parents felt at times he would never leave the hospital, Theo slowly improved. On June 23, after 1,909 days, he was officially discharged. Theo is now preparing to start at a specialized school, and his parents are excited to watch him thrive.

"This is now our time to enjoy us as a family. Theo's journey shows that there is always light at the end of the tunnel," Gary said.

"It's been such a whirlwind, but we've been ready for this," Sarah added. "But Theo is Theo, he adapts so quickly."

The Bottom Line:

Theo's story is a testament to what can happen when even the smallest and sickest children are given loving care and the best treatment possible.

Led by Javier Milei, Argentina is the first country to join the coalition while the United States is serving as secretariat. The U.S. assumed the position of secretariat in June, replacing Hungary. 

“The United States is so grateful for the friendship we share with Argentina, and we are thrilled to welcome your nation as a signatory to the Geneva Consensus Declaration,” Bethany Kozma, director of Global Affairs at the Department of Health and Human Services, said at the signing ceremony in Argentina.

The Geneva Consensus Declaration “seeks to expand health and thriving for women, and protect the sovereign right of nations to support health, life, and family through national policy and legislation.” 

The declaration was established under the first Trump administration with the U.S. as secretariat, but the Biden administration left the coalition of pro-life countries. The U.S. rejoined after President Donald Trump’s inauguration in January 2025, and the departments of Health and Human Services and State jointly lead the administration’s effort with the HHS Office of Global Affairs housing the secretariat.

Kozma told the Daily Signal it’s “amazing” for the U.S. to once again lead the coalition and to celebrate Argentina’s membership.

“It will help families become stronger, safer, and more prosperous,” she said, “and we need to focus on families as a fundamental unit of society, and that is what’s going to help economies and countries thrive and succeed.”

While Kozma says many countries have pushed anti-family ideology, the Geneva Consensus Declaration seeks to acknowledge families as the building blocks of society.

“Other countries have been pushing, including the United States under the Biden administration, a far-left woke ideology that is anti-family, anti-religion,” she said. “Because of this woke, globalist idea of trying to invoke other countries’ ideologies on other countries, the GCD is a tool that we can use to bring countries together to stand up.” 

She said the document would help increase declining birth rates and rid society of the demand for abortion. 

“If you support the family, there’s no need for abortion,” she said, “and then you will have thriving societies.” 

Kozma is hopeful more countries will join the coalition.

“I expect that countries will see Argentina is a leader in the Western Hemisphere,” she said, “and I hopeful that other countries will race to see who will be the next country to sign on.”

Key Takeaways:

• HHS is sending a letter to two Texas hospitals, reminding them that they are required to provide care to persons with disabilities such as Baby Gabriel.

• Baby Gabriel was born in Texas on Wednesday via his surrogate, McKenna West. He requires life-saving heart surgery within the first two weeks after birth due to a diagnosis of hypoplastic left heart syndrome.

• The couple who hired West had attempted to force her to get an abortion after the diagnosis was given at 20 weeks, but West refused.

• When the couple would not commit to getting Gabriel the surgeries he needed after birth, West went to Texas, where doctors have achieved a 100% success rate with the first needed surgery, and she sought custody of the baby.

• She is currently prohibited from having contact with Gabriel, and though the couple is in Texas with Gabriel, it is unclear when his first surgery will take place.

The Details:

HHS told Fox News Digital on Thursday that it is watching baby Gabriel's case and will provide technical assistance to the hospitals as doctors care for him.

It explained in the letter that under federal disability law the hospitals cannot withhold medical treatment for a patient based on that person's disability, "including based on judgments that the life of someone with a disability has less value or that the individual would impose a burden on others," reported Fox News. That includes life-sustaining care.

It is currently unclear when Gabriel will receive the first of the three surgeries he needs — the Norwood Procedure, which must be carried out within the first two weeks after birth.

The Backstory:

Baby Gabriel was born on Wednesday in Texas after his surrogate mother, McKenna West, relocated there from Alaska so he could be treated by medical experts in treating hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS).

West had signed on to be a surrogate mother for a couple in California, now known to be Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed. As a single mother, she wanted to both help an infertile couple have a child and make money to support her family without having to be away from her children. She also works as a nurse.

All was going well until the 20-week ultrasound, during which West learned the baby had a serious heart condition. Ultimately, Gilkar and Ahmed requested that she undergo an abortion in Seattle, but West did not want to go through with it. She felt the baby deserved a chance at life.

Despite facing a potential lawsuit if she did not have the abortion, West bravely found the best doctors she could for Gabriel, sought assistance in protecting him, and moved her family to Texas so Gabriel could get the care he needed.

Doctors at Dallas Children's have achieved a 100% success rate in recent years with the first of three surgeries Gabriel needs.

If Gllkar and Ahmed would have been willing to commit to getting Gabriel the necessary surgeries, West said she would have gone to California and give birth there as they wished. However, they would not commit to providing Gabriel with life-saving care at birth. Therefore, she sought custody to ensure Gabriel was not denied that care.

In the meantime, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed — and a judge granted — a petition instructing doctors to provide Gabriel with care at his birth, including at least the first of the three surgeries he would require. The petition also said that Gabriel could not be taken out of Texas.

After his birth, Gabriel was immediately taken from West, an act that has proven to have long term detrimental effects on children that can extend into adulthood.

Gilkar and Ahmed are now in Texas.

Key Takeaways:

• Sam King went into sudden cardiac arrest when his wife, Emma, was 39 weeks pregnant.

• Emma immediately performed CPR and is credited with saving Sam's life.

• She gave birth three days later to a daughter, Sophie.

• After being introduced to Sophie, Sam cried — his first cognitive response since his medical event.

The Details:

Sam and Emma King visited This Morning to detail their surreal experience.

Sam said he had a completely normal day, which included going for a run and visiting a pub, before going to bed as usual. However, around 4:00 a.m. the next morning, his heart suddenly stopped.

Thankfully, Emma, who was 39 weeks pregnant and having trouble sleeping, was awake to realize something terrible had happened.

“He’s, like, gasping for breath, like three huge gasps, and then his eyes go to the back of his head,” Emma explained, noting she had briefly spoken to Sam just 10 minutes earlier.

Because she had her phone handy, Emma was quickly able to call for emergency assistance. A dispatcher walked her through how to perform CPR, which she managed for 15 minutes before an ambulance arrived.

Emergency responders then worked for two hours to get Sam's heart beating again.

"My heart stopped for two hours," Sam said. “They managed an ultrasound, and it’s one of the things that meant they kept going, because they could see it was fluttering,” he explained, saying his heart “wasn’t producing a pulse or any kind of blood pressure, but it was still... there was something going on."

"That’s one of the reasons they didn’t call it,” he shared. “They said, quite bluntly, they would have called if it wasn’t for that.”

The on-call doctor, Edward Langford, told the BBC that Sam's prognosis wasn't good.

"A downtime of almost two hours usually means the outcome is unlikely to be survivable, or only survivable with the patient suffering life-changing effects," Langford said. "So I think we all hoped for the best, but were fearing the worst."

After he arrived at the hospital, Emma was told Sam was "probably the third or fourth sickest person in the country.”

He was placed in a medically induced coma, but doctors were unsure of the extent of his brain activity or cognitive understanding.

"We didn't know, and no one could really tell us, what sort of condition Sam might be in if he were to come out of his induced coma and survive," Emma says. "We just had to wait and hope."

At nine months pregnant, Emma said her focus throughout the ordeal was to remain calm, so that their baby, Sophie, would be ok.

“Because I was so pregnant, I just had to stay calm because I didn’t want anything to obviously happen to Sophie,” she said, noting that she was relieved when she felt baby Sophie kick the next morning, reassured that all was well.

Emma gave birth three days later, in the same London hospital where Sam was being treated. Doctors had been slowly lowering Sam’s level of sedation, however, Emma explained, “We still didn’t know if there was like any brain activity and and cognitive understanding at that point.”

She brought Sophie to meet Sam, who, by this point, was lying unresponsive with his eyes open.

"When the midwife held Sophie in front of his eyes, he actually had tears coming out of them," Emma said. "We just knew that he knew that Sophie was born — so we knew that there was some cognitive function there."

"It was the craziest experience of my life," she told This Morning.

Sam explained that he “half-remembered” it, saying, “It’s kind of like almost like a dream.”

Sam credited Emma's knowledge of CPR for saving his life, an acknowledgement that was echoed by the dispatcher on the other end of the line, Sarah Smith.

"It was only by her quick actions in immediately starting CPR that ultimately gave Sam the chance of surviving once all the additional help arrived," Smith told the BBC.

The family also believes that Sophie's arrival pushed him to get well.

"It was perfect," Emma said. "He knew exactly who Sophie was, and I think that really helped."

The Bottom Line:

Sam is now healthy, and doctors are running tests to figure out why his heart suddenly stopped.

He was give a defibrillator “should anything happen again,” but he has otherwise returned to life as "normal."

He noted that a diagnosis would be "more for Sophie" so that she and other family members may be prepared in the future.

Key Takeaways:

• The Canadian Medical Association Journal, the leading medical journal in Canada, published commentary analyzing stillbirth data.

• Stillbirths occur much more frequently in Canada than elsewhere in the world, statistically.

• The reason, however, is that the vague definition allows elective late-term abortions to be counted as stillbirths.

• The journal authors want this determination changed.

The Details:

Canada has been counting abortion deaths after 20 weeks as stillbirths. The commentary was recently highlighted by Right Now HQ, a pro-life nonprofit organization in Canada, in a video posted to social media. Right Now's Alyssa Globe said in a Facebook video:

"Those of you who aren't glued to the Canadian Medical Association Journal, they actually admitted earlier this year that Canada's stillbirth rate appears unusually high because abortions after 20 weeks are included in the country's stillbirth data, not abortion data."

Globe said that this explains how pro-abortion groups can claim that there are no late-term abortions unless a woman's life is in danger. "They point to abortion statistics which show that virtually no abortions happen in the late trimester," she said. "Yeah, that's all crap."

She continued:

"The Canadian Medical Association is telling you that it's all crap. Just to reiterate, abortions after 20 weeks are recorded in our country's data as stillbirths, not abortions, and they're so high that our stillbirth data is double compared to other high-income countries. The article literally says that a key contributor to Canada's international outlier status is the inclusion of the stillbirth count of fetal deaths that follow late termination of pregnancy, so after 20 weeks.

So the Canadian Medical Association is telling us that late-term abortions happen so often that they're being recorded as stillbirths, and now our stillbirth ratio is so high it's double that of other countries, and you're trying to tell us that late-term abortions don't happen in Canada?"

She then added that she went undercover into the Vancouver Women's Hospital at nearly 24 weeks pregnant and was told that after 20 weeks of pregnancy, regardless of if the baby dies by abortion or naturally, that death is counted as a stillbirth.

"Any type of end of pregnancy," she said, "however it happens, is considered a stillbirth."

Zoom In:

She's right. Authors of the peer-reviewed commentary published earlier this year in the Canadian Medical Association Journal say the system for measuring stillbirth in Canada is outdated and misleading.

Because of this, the rate of stillbirth in Canada appears significantly higher than in other developed nations.

"Canada’s stillbirth rate is more than double that of comparable high-income countries and rising, in part because of stringent stillbirth registration criteria," the authors said, adding, "Canada requires the registration of all fetal deaths with a birth weight of 500 g or greater or a gestational age of 20 weeks or greater."

The authors noted that there is no international standard for measuring stillbirth, but that alone does not account for the discrepancies in Canada's high stillbirth rate. Instead, it is the inclusion of late-term abortion, despite this not being in line with international medical standards:

"A key contributor to Canada’s international outlier status is the inclusion in stillbirth counts of fetal deaths that follow late termination of pregnancy (at 20 to 24 weeks’ gestation). Widespread uptake of prenatal diagnosis and, consequently, in terminations of pregnancy for serious congenital anomalies has meant that late fetal deaths (at ≥ 28 weeks’ gestation) and infant deaths have substantially reduced in recent decades.

Yet these terminations undertaken at 20 to 24 weeks’ gestation are included in Canada’s stillbirth counts.

Current WHO recommendations advocate for the exclusion of terminations of pregnancy from stillbirth counts. Countries such as Denmark, Finland, Italy, Norway, Sweden, and the United States simply exclude all such cases from their counts, and the use of a 24 weeks’ gestation registration threshold similarly results in the exclusion of virtually all such terminations in the statistics of countries such as the Netherlands and United Kingdom."

Furthermore, the authors say that so-called "selective reduction" abortions — in which a woman carrying multiple babies chooses to abort one or more of the preborn children — are included in the stillbirth data, even though the abortion procedure is usually committed in the first trimester. The authors explained, "Although the procedure is carried out at 10 weeks’ gestation, the reduced fetus requires registration as a stillbirth in Canada if the pregnancy ends at 20 weeks’ gestation or later, distorting Canada’s stillbirth rates."

People who undergo late-term abortions are legally required to record their abortions as stillbirths, which the authors said was insensitive and traumatizing:

Beyond distorted statistics, outdated processes associated with the registration of stillbirth in Canada may be traumatizing, culturally insensitive, or, at the very least, unkind.

The contemporary laws and regulations of several provinces and territories require parents to complete a stillbirth registration form soon after stillbirth, modelling the process for registering livebirths.

Unlike death registration, which is deemed a physician responsibility, the requirement for parents to register stillbirth reflects a bygone era when the impact of pregnancy loss was typically minimized. Traumatized patients may leave hospital without completing registration and other procedures that would amplify their emotional and psychological distress. Patients seeking abortion due to personal, social, or traumatic circumstances — for example, pregnancies resulting from sexual assault — experience added distress when required to comply with stillbirth registration and funeral home mandates.

Furthermore, the current processes perpetuate systemic cultural insensitivity by dismissing the deeply personal and diverse ways individuals and communities process grief. Current legislation also conflicts with the constitutionally protected rights of Indigenous Peoples, particularly in relation to ceremonial practices and culturally specific burial traditions.

Despite all of this, the Canadian government has refused to institute a nationwide standard. The authors rightly argued that late-term abortions need to be tracked and recorded separately from stillbirth.

Why It Matters:

As noted by the authors of the article, late-term abortion data can be difficult to determine, as it is frequently included with stillbirth data. But the information that is available is often disturbing.

Last year, for example, it was reported by the Canadian Institutes for Health Information that 133 late-term abortions were committed in the province of Alberta between 2023 and 2024; of these, one-fourth survived. Seventeen babies were born alive after attempted abortions in 2025. No active care was given to abortion survivors before 23 weeks, meaning these babies were often left to die.

Alberta is not an outlier, though it holds its place as having one of the highest numbers of late-term abortions committed. One recent study, published in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, found that 11.2% of second-trimester abortions committed in Quebec between 1989 and 2021 resulted in live births. There were a reported 1,541 live births out of 13,777 abortions. Of these, 25% of the babies were sent to the NICU, and 5% were given palliative care; what happened to the rest is unknown.

Ultimately, what can be known for sure is that late-term abortions occur far more often than many believe, typically not for medical reasons, and abortion survivors are vastly underreported.

On Monday, August 10, the City Council of Seminole, Texas (pop. 7,952) – located on the Texas-New Mexico border – considered a Sanctuary City for the Unborn (SCFTU) ordinance outlawing abortion trafficking. The ordinance — the result of a successful citizen-initiative petition containing 1,500+ signatures of Seminole residents — was unanimously rejected by the Seminole City Council. 

Had the proposed Ordinance been approved by the Seminole City Council, the law would have put into place some of the strongest levels of protection for pregnant mothers and their unborn children – closing several loopholes in Texas’ abortion laws.

The ordinance would have been enforced the same way as the Texas Heartbeat Act, not by law enforcement, but by giving private citizens the ability to file a lawsuit against any individual or organization in violation of the ordinance.

Seminole Residents Speak Out:

Almost everyone at the packed city council meeting was in favor of the ordinance, which is supported by some of Texas' and New Mexico's strongest pro-life legislators, and is backed by the pro-life planks of the Republican Party of Texas 2026 Party Platform.

Out of the 13 people who spoke during the public comment portion of the meeting, 11 spoke in favor of the Ordinance, and two spoke against it. Of those 13, four were residents of Seminole – two speaking in favor and two speaking against.

Speaking in Favor

Of the two residents speaking in favor of the measure, Barbara Broseker shared:

“After all of these people, Mayor and Council, I'm here just to say we need to protect the unborn.... I'm a substitute teacher, 78 years old, but God gives me the grace. And God puts those little babies in that womb, no matter how they come about.

Life still comes from God, and we have no right to take that life. I'm here to support that. Whatever way we can to protect them, we need to do it. I'm praying concerning that, and so are our supporters here.”

The other resident who spoke in favorwas Seminole First Assembly of God Pastor Joe Lapusan, who shared:

“Many of the city officials you've heard from have agreed that it was needed to fill loopholes. Many of you heard the loopholes, as the Texas state abortion ban does not automatically address conduct outside of the state.”

Pastor Lapusan went on to cover what the Ordinance solves for Seminole that existing Texas law does not already address, such as trafficking of minors across state lines for abortion, and aborted fetal remains that are picked up at out-of-state abortion facilities and transported into Texas for disposal in landfills.

Speaking Against

One of the two residents speaking in opposition to the measure was local attorney Bonnie Ericson. After several speakers had testified, Ericson shared:

“Lots of sad stories, but let me tell you what this ordinance does not do. It does not protect the unborn. Don't be misled. Senate Bill 8 [The Texas Heartbeat Act] is the law. This isn't the law. This ordinance will not be the law. Your law enforcement does not have the power to do a darn thing under this ordinance, and neither do you… It doesn't carry a fine. What happens?

An individual citizen can sue any other individual citizen, and if they win, the person that was sued has to pay attorney's fees and court costs, plus a $10,000 fine. If they lose, if the person who brought the lawsuit loses, the person who has been sued does not have the right to attorney's fees.

What does Senate Bill 8 do? Senate Bill 8 made a felony lawsuit; a felony case can be brought against those people that have performed abortions. Good or bad, it's there.”

Despite being an attorney, Ericson was wrong on several fronts relating to both the state law and the proposed ordinance — which, if passed, would be a local law.

The Texas Heartbeat Act did not make performing an abortion or aiding or abetting an abortion a criminal offense, allow for felony charges, or allow for a felony lawsuit. The Texas Heartbeat Act, like the proposed Seminole SCFTU ordinance, is enforced solely by private civil lawsuits, and both the Texas Heartbeat Act and the proposed Seminole SCFTU Ordinance allow for “statutory damages in an amount of not less than $10,000” for committing or aiding and abetting elective abortions in violation of the laws.

The 13th and final to speak during public comment was Angela Pustejovsky-Carter – the only other speaker who spoke against the measure.

Carter serves as an At-Large Board Member on the Seminole Hospital District Board of Directors. At a previous meeting, Carter expressed concern that the anti-abortion ordinance would make it harder to recruit qualified healthcare workers and questioned whether the citizens of Seminole truly understood what they were signing.

Carter asked the council to vote no and to let the voters decide in November. Carter shared:

“Voting no on adopting this ordinance is not the same as being against pro-life. It is simply a decision to allow every registered voter in Seminole the opportunity to make an informed decision after understanding the entire ordinance.

I believe someone can be strongly pro-life and still conclude that this particular municipal ordinance is not necessary for Seminole. Texas already has some of the strictest abortion laws in the country, and elective abortions are already broadly prohibited under state law. That brings me back to one simple question for all of you.

What problem does this ordinance solve for Seminole that existing Texas law does not already address?”

Since the beginning of the citizen initiative, Seminole SCFTU Guidesheets and One-Pagers describing the ordinance have been circulated throughout the community.

The Council Votes:

After a five-minute presentation from Right To Life Across Texas, Councilman Lloyd Glass made a motion to “not approve” the ordinance. Councilman Landon Sims followed, seconding the motion.

Before the vote, Councilman Joe Stewart asked to comment. Councilman Stewart, who serves as Pastor of First Baptist Church of Seminole, shared that the ordinance had put him in a “unique position” as a pastor. Councilman Stewart said he found the meeting participants' “passion for protecting the most vulnerable among us” inspiring.

Councilman Stewart stated that he had marched in the March For Life in Washington, D.C. and had participated in pro-life activities, including working with CASA. He shared:

“I just want to say from the very bottom of my heart that I am pro-life to the core, from the womb to the tomb, and I don't see how . . . casting a vote that doesn't see how this ordinance is effective in doing things, necessarily, would categorize you as somebody who's not pro-life.”

Councilman Stewart concluded:

“The fundamental question before me is whether this specific ordinance is necessary, prudent, and the most effective way to accomplish our shared goal… My primary concern with the ordinance is it relies on private citizens suing private citizens, and that mechanism is essentially unprecedented. It's never been used. It's highly difficult to enforce.

We have the staunch pro-life laws with the Texas Heartbeat Acts and the Texas trigger laws, which prohibit elective abortion and provide robust legal protections for the unborn across our state... When it comes to supporting mothers and unborn babies, I believe our calling is to build actionable, compassionate support networks right here in Seminole.”

Mayor Chet Clark thanked Councilman Stewart and called for a vote “to not approve” the ordinance. The vote to reject the ordinance further prohibiting abortion was unanimous.

A Proclamation and the Calling of an Election:

Mayor Clark immediately went to the next agenda item – a “Proclamation of the Mayor and City Council regarding the Certified Initiative Petition, the Texas Heartbeat Act, and the City Council’s Findings and Conclusions.” 

The proclamation, read by Councilman Sims, recognized the legitimacy of the 1,551 signatures collected as part of the citizen initiative petition, expressed support for the Texas Heartbeat Act, and stated the council's beliefs about the ordinance. The proclamation passed unanimously. Following the passage of the proclamation, an election was called for November 3, 2026, for the citizens of Seminole to consider the proposed Seminole SCFTU ordinance. The vote to call the election was also unanimous.

In his closing statement, Mayor Clark shared:

“As Mayor of Seminole, I believe everyone has the right to life. Texas has a law against abortion, and the City of Seminole is already advised by that law – The Texas Heartbeat Act, passed in September 2021.

As Mayor of Seminole, I wholeheartedly support Texas and federal law. This proposed ordinance raises constitutional questions because it contains certain provisions addressing transportation associated with interstate travel. This ordinance is not enforceable by law enforcement. What it will do is allow neighbor to sue neighbor in civil court if they find out you traveled across state lines for an abortion.

I believe it's up to the voters in November.”

Mayor Clark erred in saying that the proposed Seminole Ordinance allows “neighbor to sue neighbor in civil court, if they find out you traveled across the state lines for an abortion.”

The proposed Seminole SCFTU Ordinance is clear that a civil action “may not be brought: against the woman upon whom the abortion was performed or induced or attempted to be performed or induced in violation of this ordinance, or against a pregnant woman who intends or seeks to abort her unborn child in violation of this ordinance" (emphasis added).

The Aftermath:

Former Seminole ISD employee and Gaines County resident Amanda Byers, who was in attendance for the council meeting, took issue with Mayor Clark’s closing statement. Byers said, 

"Mayor Clark does not appear to understand the Texas Heartbeat Act or the proposed SCFTU Ordinance – as both would allow for neighbors to sue their neighbors in civil court IF their neighbor was found violating the law.”

She continued, “You can’t claim to support the Texas Heartbeat Act while opposing the SCFTU Ordinance solely because it includes private enforcement. If you support one, but reject the other for the very same enforcement mechanism, that’s a contradiction. It simply doesn’t add up.”

After the meeting, Councilman Stewart appeared to recognize the contradiction of being against the proposed SCFTU ordinance because of the private enforcement mechanism, and for the Texas Heartbeat Act, which uses the same private enforcement mechanism. He responded that Texas should change the law. The day after the meeting, he was praised by a member of the governing board of Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas. 

Councilman Stewart’s comments did not sit well with many. Pastor Taylor Wood of First Baptist Church O'Donnell, who was in attendance at the meeting, shared:

"I am disappointed in the results, but even more disappointed that the pastor of the First Baptist Church seemingly led the charge to reject this ordinance. As Baptists, protecting the unborn is a sacred duty, and the cowardice on display was appalling.

Still, God is sovereign, and I am confident that in the end Seminole will establish justice for Texas babies and mothers, even if its city council will not."

Pastor David Rhoades of Broadview Baptist Church in Lubbock, who was also present for the meeting, agreed with Pastor Wood: "Why should the other members of the council take a stand for life if the one pastor on the council doesn't?”

A total of 98 cities and 24 counties across 7 states have passed local ordinances further outlawing abortion in their community – 81 of those cities and 22 of those counties have passed such ordinances in the State of Texas. On November 3, 2026, the registered voters of the City of Seminole will determine if their city will be added to that number. 

A recording of the Seminole City Council’s consideration of the ordinance can be viewed here.

Key Takeaways:

• The full Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Planned Parenthood's appeal, which claimed that its attorneys have immunity from being sued after they advised Planned Parenthood to continue billing state Medicaid in Texas during an ongoing lawsuit.

• The Fifth Circuit dismissed the lawsuit, stating that it does not have jurisdiction; it returned the case to the federal district court.

• The trial involving Texas and Planned Parenthood continues now in the district court, with Planned Parenthood potentially liable for $1.8 billion in damages, civil penalties, interest, and legal fees.

The Backstory:

The case began with "Alex Doe," the pseudonym of the whistleblower who conducted an undercover investigation to learn if Planned Parenthood was selling fetal tissue to researchers and tissue procurement companies.

In response to that investigation, Louisiana and Texas ended Planned Parenthood's eligibility for state Medicaid; however, the three Planned Parenthood affiliates in those states continued to bill Medicaid, and claimed its lawyers told the affiliates to continue billing Medicaid as the lawsuit to restore Medicaid funding proceeded.

In 2023, a federal judge ruled that Planned Parenthood must stand trial in a $1.8 billion lawsuit brought by Doe, and joined by Texas. That suit alleges that Planned Parenthood took Medicaid funds from the state, and then failed to repay those funds after its status as a Medicaid provider was terminated.

Neither Texas nor Planned Parenthood wanted a trial, but U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk scheduled a trial for April 2024.

Planned Parenthood appealed, arguing for attorney immunity regarding its decision to continue billing Medicaid while the courts decided whether or not Texas and Louisiana could legally terminate the abortion giant's Medicaid eligibility.

In February 2025, a three-judge panel from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Kacsmaryk's decision and shielded Planned Parenthood's attorneys from being sued by third parties over its legal advice.

The Details:

On Wednesday, the full (en banc) Fifth Circuit dismissed Planned Parenthood's appeal, vacating its panel's February 2025 decision. It determined that it lacks jurisdiction to consider Planned Parenthood's appeal, and it has returned it to the district court.

The court's ruling states (emphases added):

Relator Alex Doe alleges that, after three regional affiliates of Defendant–Appellant Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc.,were terminated from Medicaid, the Federation masterminded an in-court and out-of-court scheme to maximize the affiliates’ ability to continue submitting Medicaid claims, in violation of the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729–32, and its Texas and Louisiana state-law analogues, Tex. Hum. Res. Code § 36.002; La. Rev. Stat. § 46.438.

On cross-motions for summary judgment, the district court concluded that the Federation was not entitled to attorney immunity and denied summary judgment to the Federation on Relator’s implied-false-certification and conspiracy claims. United States ex rel. Doe v. Planned Parenthood Fed’n of Am., No. 2:21-cv-22, 2023 WL 11898264, at *20– 25 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 23, 2023). The Federation appealed under the collateral-order doctrine, asking us to hold that attorney immunity shields the Federation from liability.

Bloomberg Law posted on Facebook, "Planned Parenthood’s appeal of an interim ruling cannot be considered by the Fifth Circuit, the full court held Wednesday, returning the case to a federal district court that previously said the nonprofit’s attorneys aren’t immune from a False Claims Act lawsuit."

The court ruled, "A panel concluded that this court has appellate jurisdiction under the collateral-order doctrine. ... On the merits, the panel reversed and remanded, reasoning that the Federation 'is entitled to immunity for the acts of its attorneys.' ... We now hold that we lack jurisdiction to consider this interlocutory appeal, and we dismiss the appeal."

Bloomberg Law reported:

The en banc opinion rejected Planned Parenthood’s argument that the court could consider the attorney immunity issue under the collateral-order doctrine, a legal principal [sic] that allows immediate appeals of interim rulings in certain instances.

That doctrine doesn’t apply in this case because 'resolving the immunity question would not conclusively determine a separable legal issue in a way that meaningfully advances the litigation,' the en banc court wrote.

What's Happening Now:

The trial will continue in the federal district court to determine if Planned Parenthood must return Medicaid funding to Texas.

In all, Planned Parenthood may be liable for treble damages, civil penalties, interest, and legal fees, totaling $1.8 billion.  

Key Takeaways:

• Abortion is illegal in Liechtenstein, a small European nation.

• A pro-abortion committee has launched a petition initiative to legalize abortion, hoping for enough signatures to launch a referendum.

• Even if the referendum passes, Hereditary Prince Alois has promised to veto it and uphold pro-life protections.

The Backstory:

Abortion is currently not legal in Liechtenstein, and doctors are prohibited from discussing abortion as an option with patients. Abortion advocates within the nation are seeking to change that, and have launched a referendum initiative called “Time Limit Solution for Liechtenstein.”

On a dedicated website, the pro-abortion committee explained the initiative's aim, saying, “We are advocating for legal abortion up to the third month, the repeal of the ban on providing information, and coverage of the costs by health insurance.”

The initiative committee says they have collected 4,970 signatures, making the petition drive the "second highest number of signatures in Liechtenstein's history." The attempt to legalize abortion may soon come before voters in a referendum. The population of Lichtenstein is just over 40,000.

The Details:

Despite the referendum initiative, it appears that preborn children in the nation may continue to be protected, as Prince Alois stated his opposition to abortion in a June interview.

“From my point of view, it is not right,” said Prince Alois in the interview, noting that abortion violates "the fundamental legal right to the protection of life."

As reported by Blue News, the prince of Liechtenstein has the final say on any legislation and can even veto the results of referendums.

Prince Alois has never used his veto power, though he did threaten to use it when legalized abortion was previously considered in 2011.

The Bottom Line:

''Every human life, especially that of an unborn child, needs to be protected," Prince Alois said in 2011. ''Abortion is not an acceptable solution for the problem of an unwanted pregnancy.''

Key Takeaways:

• Reisinger-Kindle was working at the Equity Clinic in Champaign, Illinois, in 2023 when he committed an abortion at 22 or 23 weeks on a mother of four.

• After a dilation and evacuation (D&E) abortion, the woman said she was in excruciating pain, but the facility reportedly told her to take Tylenol.

• He had perforated the woman's uterus and left half of the baby's body inside of her; one surgeon called it "the worst thing I’ve ever seen at surgery."

• The woman sued, and Reisinger-Kindle tried to strip her of her anonymity in response.

• The lawsuit has now been settled for an undisclosed amount, and Reisinger-Kindle has continued to commit abortions.

The Backstory:

Last year, Keith Reisinger-Kindle was sued for botching a D&E abortion in 2023. The patient was a mother of four who was between 22 and 23 weeks pregnant, a point at which premature babies are known to have survived with medical assistance. She said she felt "pressured" to have the abortion, and underwent a D&E abortion procedure. This procedure typically takes multiple days, though some abortionists attempt to commit them in one day. In this procedure, the abortionist dismembers the baby limb from torso.

She was in excruciating pain after the procedure, and repeatedly called Reisinger-Kindle for help. He allegedly responded callously, telling her to take Tylenol and laxatives.

“I didn’t agree with that,” she said. “It was not supposed to be that bad.”

Instead of following this advice, the woman went to the hospital, where the gruesome extent of her injuries was made clear.

Zoom In:

Emergency personnel discovered Reisinger-Kindle had left over half of the baby’s body inside her, and had also perforated her uterus. According to an expert witness report:

The patient was found to have half of a deceased pre-born human being in the right pelvis of the patient with evidence of severe and intentional trauma. The baby’s body was transected at the pelvis with no legs or feet present. Stumps of both femurs extended from the soft tissue of the torso.

The upper extremities were missing from elbow distally on both sides. The skull was crushed and no brain was present. The face was non-recognizable … there were small bony fragments in the mother’s pelvis.

“We knew from the CAT scan that she could have a perforated uterus, because you could see what looked like a human body. You could see a spine,” one of the surgeons said, and added that it was "the worst thing I’ve ever seen at surgery and I’ve been doing this for over 30 years” (emphasis added).

Parts of the baby’s skull had also adhered to the woman’s intestines.

Reisinger-Kindle allegedly refused to provide any information about the woman's case or condition to hospital staff, claiming he did not have the woman’s consent to do so.

For this, he received a mere slap on the wrist and was not only allowed to continue committing abortions, but was featured by ACOG as a guest speaker on maternal health.

Following the woman's lawsuit, Reisinger-Kindle filed a motion to strip her of her anonymity.

When a plaintiff seeks to publicly challenge reproductive healthcare providers in court — especially in a matter of statewide media interest — transparency in the proceedings is paramount. Having already leveraged multiple high-profile media outlets to elevate her narrative and target named providers, Plaintiff should not now be permitted to evade the transparency and accountability that open litigation requires.

His request was ultimately granted in August of 2025, and she was identified as Michelle Hardy.

“Given the facts and circumstances of this case, the court concludes that the plaintiff and her attorney have used publicity as a sword against the defendants,” Judge Jason Bohm wrote. “Those efforts make it inequitable for the patient to simultaneously be given a shield from the same publicity.”

The Details:

Local news reported that the lawsuit against Reisinger-Kindle had been dismissed after the two parties came to a settlement agreement. Details about the settlement are not public, as the two engaged in private mediation and came to a private agreement. However, in her initial lawsuit, she claimed medical negligence and emotional distress, and sought damages in excess of $50,000.

“On July 8, 2026, the parties engaged in a private mediation and reached a settlement agreement,” Terrance Nofsinger, who represented Hardy, said.

Pretzel & Stouffer, the law firm representing Equity Clinic and Reisinger-Kindle, had no comment. In the meantime, Reisinger-Kindle is still the medical director at Equity Clinic, even though this is not his first lawsuit.

He was previously sued, and was a defendant in Massachusetts in a 2021 malpractice case involving a woman with a high-risk pregnancy.

The Bottom Line:

Reisinger-Kindle got his start working at the scandal-ridden Women’s Med Center in Dayton, Ohio, with abortionist Martin Haskell, inventor of the gruesome D&X (“partial-birth”) abortion. Women's Med Center also has a long history of injuring women.

The FDA has specific requirements for prescribers of the abortion pill, listed under its safety requirements, known as REMS. Prescribers must have the ability to confirm pregnancy, to handle abortion pill complications, to properly rule out ectopic pregnancies, and must also prescribe the abortion pill within FDA-approved gestational limits.

Key Takeaways:

• Abortion pill manufacturers (also known as "sponsors" — Danco Laboratories, GenBioPro, and Evita Solutions, LLC — appear to be allowing certified prescribers of the drug to violate FDA protocol without decertifying them, as is required.

• Sponsors are tasked with training, certifying, and decertifying out of compliance prescribers.

• The FDA says sponsors must "[e]nsure that healthcare providers who prescribe their mifepristone are specially certified in accordance with the requirements… and de-certify healthcare providers who do not maintain compliance with certification requirements." 

• Prescribers must sign a Prescriber Agreement Form, agreeing that they have the ability to assess the duration of pregnancy accurately, diagnose ectopic pregnancies, provide surgical intervention in cases of incomplete abortion or severe bleeding, or to have made plans to provide such care through others, and ability to assure patient access to medical facilities equipped to provide blood transfusions and resuscitation, if necessary." They must also agree that "they will follow the guidelines for use of mifepristone."

• Multiple prescribers are dispensing abortion pills past FDA-approved gestational limits, and some are dispensing them to women who are not pregnant.

• Though prescribers are required to have the ability to "provide surgical intervention in cases of incomplete abortion or severe bleeding, or to have made plans to provide such care through others," the abortion industry has, for decades, participated in a scheme to hide abortion pill complications by instructing women at the point of sale to present to the ER and lie, claiming a natural miscarriage instead. 

• The FDA says that "REMS are designed to reinforce medication use behaviors and actions that support the safe use of that medication." If the safety protocol isn't followed and no one is decertified as a result, then no one is ensuring the "safe use" of mifepristone.

Defining the Terms:

What is REMS?

The safety protocol, or Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS), for mifepristone was put in place in 2011, more than a decade after the abortion pill was approved by the FDA in 2000 and after multiple women had died in association with use of the abortion pill regimen. The most recently published REMS for mifepristone is dated September 2025.

The FDA's website explains:

• The drug safety protocol is something the FDA "can require for certain medications with serious safety concerns to help ensure the benefits of the medication outweigh its risks."

• The "REMS are designed to reinforce medication use behaviors and actions that support the safe use of that medication."

If the safety protocol isn't followed and no one is decertified as a result, then no one is ensuring the "safe use" of mifepristone. The goal of REMS is to mitigate the risk of serious complications associated with mifepristone.

The abortion pill was originally for use up to 7 weeks of pregnancy in a regimen along with the drug misoprostol. It was later expanded to allow for its use through 10 weeks/70 days gestation.

Who are Sponsors?

"Sponsors" are the drug's manufacturers. Abortion pill prescribers are certified by the following sponsors:

• Danco Laboratories: A secretive, single-entity company which oversees the manufacturing of Mifeprex. Danco was recently forced by law to reveal that the drug is currently manufactured in Spain.

• GenBioPro (GBP): Oversees manufacturing of the generic abortion drug — mifepristone (200mg) — which was approved in 2019 by the Trump FDA. GBP manufactures generic versions of both drugs, mifepristone and misoprostol.

• Evita Solutions, LLC the second generic abortion pill was approved by the Trump FDA in 2025. Like Danco, their company is also fairly secretive.

Sponsors are tasked with training, certifying and decertifying out of compliance prescribers.

Mifepristone sponsors must:

Ensure that healthcare providers who prescribe their mifepristone are specially certified in accordance with the requirements…and de-certify healthcare providers who do not maintain compliance with certification requirements. 

Who are Prescribers?

Prescribers are approved and certified to dispense the abortion pill by one (or more) of the three U.S. sponsors (manufacturers) of the drug; however, there is no public list specifying which sponsor approved which prescriber.

The REMS for mifepristone states (emphasis added):

By signing a Prescriber Agreement Form, prescribers agree they have ability to:

a) assess the duration of pregnancy accurately

b) diagnose ectopic pregnancies

c) provide surgical intervention in cases of incomplete abortion or severe bleeding, or to have made plans to provide such care through others, and ability to assure patient access to medical facilities equipped to provide blood transfusions and resuscitation, if necessary

They must also agree that "they will follow the guidelines for use of mifepristone."

The Problems:

No ability to assess duration of pregnancy

• Some prescribers are advertising and even distributing abortion pills well beyond the FDA's 10-week limit. Some are selling pills "just in case" a woman becomes pregnant. This looks nothing like an attempt to comply with having the ability to assess the duration of a woman's pregnancy.

The REMS is clear that prescribers must have the "ability to assess the duration of pregnancy accurately."

The Prescriber Agreement specifies that mifepristone is "indicated, in a regimen with misoprostol, for the medical termination of intrauterine pregnancy through 70 days gestation."

This is confirmed by the FDA website, the drug’s March 2023 label, and REMS documents.

Danco, GenBioPro, and Evita Solutions websites all acknowledge these gestational limits.

➡ The National Abortion Federation (NAF) claims "Providers who mail pills may send different medication regimens."

The abortion industry has been:

• prescribing the abortion pill "just in case" in "advance" of confirmed pregnancy.

• selling the pill for "future use."

• selling it as "missed period" pills.

• advertising its use into the second trimester or third trimester, despite its increased rate of failure as pregnancy advances.

In 2023, Dr. Linda Prine, co-founder of the Miscarriage and Abortion Hotline, told Vox News

“The pills are approved by the FDA for up to 10 weeks… Most of the time, though, they’ve been used in our country under eight weeks... But now, they’re using them whenever they can get them. And sometimes that is quite a bit later. Sometimes it’s 14 weeks, 18 weeks. And so we get calls from people completely freaked out, crying, sobbing.” [emphasis added] 

AbortionFinder.org states clearly that "some [prescribers] will offer it through around 14 weeks of pregnancy ..."

➡ Planned Parenthood advertises the abortion pill past the approved gestational limits: "In general, you can have a medication abortion up to 84 days (12 weeks) after the first day of your last period.” 

They separately acknowledge that "The abortion pill... works less well when you’re more than 8 weeks pregnant.... After 12 weeks, there’s a bigger chance of stronger bleeding or cramps."

A news release published by Planned Parenthood Great Northwest, Hawai‘i, Alaska, Indiana, Kentucky (PPGNHAIK) announced the launch of Just In Case Abortion Pills so women can "have them on hand if and when they need them."

"PPGNHAIK joins a growing number of sexual and reproductive health care providers offering this model of care."

Planned Parenthood’s general “abortion services” website page reiterates this: “Some Planned Parenthood health centers offer abortion pills before you’re pregnant — just in case you need them.”

➡ Carafem, a study site for abortion pill clinical trials, advertises “missed period pills” as “FDA-approved abortion medications..."

On a separate webpage, it claims, “Missed period pills are safe, evidence-based care."

Yet, the drug has never been approved as a "missed period pill."

Plan C advertises multiple companies that it claims will prescribe abortion pills "for future use" against REMS. 

Danco, GenBioPro, and Evita Solutions all link to Abortion Finder, Planned Parenthood, and others who refer to non-compliant prescribers.  

And yet, Danco’s emergency application before the Supreme Court claimed it "understands the law to require Mifeprex to have an approved REMS and to be distributed in accordance with that REMS." 

No ability to diagnose ectopic pregnancies

"MIFEPREX is contraindicated in patients with a confirmed or suspected ectopic pregnancy because MIFEPREX is not effective for terminating ectopic pregnancies," wrote Danco.

Prescribers are required under REMS to have the “[a]bility to diagnose ectopic pregnancies.” The abortion pill's label notes potential serious complications, including a black box warning for sepsis risk. 

The abortion industry, by its own admission, does not rule out ectopic pregnancy for each woman seeking the abortion pill. This places the woman at risk for potentially life-threatening complications.

In 2020, when the abortion industry implemented the “no-test” protocol, it did so despite openly admitting that the abortion pill's 'no-test' criteria would not rule out “every ectopic pregnancy” — meaning ectopics would be detected sometime "after treatment….”

In correspondence to the New England Journal of Medicine, emergency room physicians alerted staff to a potential increase in undiagnosed ectopic pregnancy cases due to the no-test protocol used by most prescribers. 

No ability to handle complications

REMS requires that prescribers have the...

[a]bility to provide surgical intervention in cases of incomplete abortion or severe bleeding, or to have made plans to provide such care through others, and ability to assure patient access to medical facilities equipped to provide blood transfusions and resuscitation, if necessary.

Instead of providing intervention, for decades, the abortion industry has participated in a scheme to hide abortion pill complications by instructing women at the point of sale to present to the ER and lie, claiming a natural miscarriage instead. 

Disturbing Examples (emphases added): 

• Dr. Franz Theard advised an abortion client to lie and instead claim a natural miscarriage: watch video here.

• INeedanA: “If you're having a medical emergency... You don't need to say anything about taking abortion pills or why you think you might be bleeding.”

• Abortion pill provider Southern Woven: “You are never required to disclose that you took abortion pills to get emergency care. It is both legal and medically safe to say you are having a miscarriage… Telling a provider 'I'm having a miscarriage' or 'I'm bleeding and I don't know why' is accurate and gets you proper care.” 

• Roxy Clinic: “If you need medical care after taking abortion pills... You don't have to tell the provider you took pills. Saying 'I think I'm having a miscarriage' or 'I'm bleeding and I was pregnant' is completely true and leads to exactly the same clinical workup and treatment.”

• Women’s Reproductive Clinic of New Mexico: "If you go to the ER, tell them you think you are having a miscarriage."

• Planned Parenthood claims, "An incomplete abortion is generally treated the same way as an incomplete miscarriage, even if you live in a state with abortion bans. So it’s up to you to decide whether you want to tell your nurse or doctor about your abortion."

💊 This has been going on for years and years; if women follow this advice, none of the complications they experience will be attributed to the abortion pill.

The Bottom Line: Accountability is needed

Medical malpractice attorney Michael Seibel wrote that the "evidence suggests widespread non-enforcement":

"Studies of abortion-seeking patients show that while many can self-assess early gestation reasonably well, the error rate is non-trivial, and the REMS places the accuracy obligation on the certified prescriber."

Seibel, who operates the website AbortionInjury.com, added:

"The FDA is the primary regulator, but private plaintiffs harmed by alleged violations have standing to seek remedies when manufacturers breach duties that directly protect patients.

A class action focused on systemic failure to enforce the prescriber and pharmacy agreements could... force the companies to either police their network rigorously or face financial consequences... that leave women exposed to the very risks the REMS was designed to prevent.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys who care about patient safety... should examine the REMS enforcement records, distribution data, and adverse-event reports.

The manufacturers have the contractual and regulatory tools; the question is whether they are using them. If not, the courts are an appropriate venue to hold them accountable."

Days later, while describing cleaning out her closet and getting rid of her medical scrubs, Sadler wrote: "I absolutely do not intend to return to work in that capacity again.”

Sadler did not identify her employer in the posts or explain the circumstances surrounding her job loss. However, an extensive public record documents her nearly two-decade career with Whole Woman’s Health and her senior role within the organization.

Who is Marva Sadler? From Texas to New Mexico

Marva Sadler held significant clinical and operational responsibilities within Whole Woman’s Health for years.

In federal litigation challenging Texas Senate Bill 8, Sadler was identified as Senior Director of Clinical Services for Whole Woman’s Health and Whole Woman’s Health Alliance. Court filings stated that she oversaw clinical operations at the organizations’ Texas clinics and was personally involved in aspects of patient care.

Sadler was also present during a pivotal period for Whole Woman’s Health in Texas. In August 2021, as the state’s heartbeat law was about to take effect, Whole Woman’s Health publicly identified Sadler as its Senior Director of Clinical Services and reported that she was working at its Fort Worth facility as staff continued seeing patients ahead of the law’s midnight effective time.

Following the Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs decision, Whole Woman’s Health closed its Texas abortion facilities and expanded into New Mexico. The organization subsequently documented equipment and supplies from its closed Texas facilities being moved into Albuquerque and identified Sadler as its Senior Director of Clinical Services and a new Albuquerque resident.

When Whole Woman’s Health of New Mexico opened on March 23, 2023, Sadler was prominently involved in announcing the new facility. Whole Woman’s Health again identified her as Senior Director of Clinical Services and quoted her describing the Albuquerque location as the organization’s “next chapter.” The organization said more than $300,000 had been raised to establish the facility.

Independent reporting further documented Sadler’s lengthy tenure. In 2024, The Wall Street Journal reported that she had worked at Whole Woman’s Health clinics in Texas for 17 years before moving to Albuquerque and photographed her preparing a procedure room at the New Mexico facility.

Taken together, the public record shows that Sadler was not simply an employee at the Albuquerque facility. She held senior clinical responsibilities, oversaw operations in Texas, represented Whole Woman’s Health publicly and relocated to Albuquerque as the organization established its New Mexico operation.

Announcement comes one year after AFNM's water report

Sadler’s announcement comes approximately one year after Abortion Free New Mexico documented Whole Woman’s Health of New Mexico remaining open to arriving patients while the Albuquerque abortion facility lacked running water.

On August 16, 2025, AFNM’s team was outside the facility as part of its ongoing presence at the Albuquerque location when Water Authority personnel arrived at the property. AFNM reported that abortion patients continued entering the facility during that period. Photographs taken at the scene show Sadler and her husband working at the property while efforts were underway to get the water back on.

The incident raised questions about compliance with New Mexico facility requirements concerning safe and sanitary water and hot and cold running water.
​
Sadler has not publicly stated why she lost her job or whether her departure is related to conditions at the Albuquerque facility:

For nearly two decades, Marva Sadler was deeply involved in Whole Woman’s Health’s clinical operations and became a key figure in bringing its abortion operation from Texas to New Mexico. Now, after 18 years, Sadler says she has lost her job and does not intend to return to this work. Her departure marks a significant change for an organization she helped lead for nearly two decades,” stated Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico.

​Since Whole Woman’s Health opened in Albuquerque, our team has consistently prayed for Marva, reached out to her with the love of Christ, and encouraged her to leave the abortion industry. We sincerely hope this unexpected change becomes an opportunity for a new beginning—one where she can walk away from the abortion industry for good.

— Tara Shaver, Leader, Abortion Free New Mexico

Sadler’s public statements do not say whether she was fired, laid off, whether her position was eliminated, or whether her departure will affect Whole Woman’s Health’s Albuquerque operations.
​
What is clear from the public record is that after approximately 18 years with Whole Woman’s Health—including years in senior clinical leadership and a central role in the organization’s move into New Mexico—Sadler says that chapter of her career is over.

On August 12, he posted a goodbye message on Facebook, saying, "Tomorrow morning, I’m leaving Iowa for the last time." He urged people to vote to legalize assisted suicide:

Alzheimer's is a fatal, incurable disease that gets worse as you go along. That’s why I started planning to legally end my life the day I was diagnosed. Unfortunately, to end my life in a legal, dignified manner, I’m forced to travel halfway around the world to Switzerland.

Why? What is the point of keeping my body alive years after I’ve lost my mind? I believe each of us has the right to a dignified death.

Many Iowans have told me they agree. They want the option to die peacefully, at home, while they are still able to make this decision. There are too many painful stories of loved ones who needlessly suffered, sometimes while begging for a more dignified death.

Iowans, we can and should do better.

There’s an election this November. Please ask the candidates for governor and the state legislature if they support the right to die with dignity.

It’s up to you to change our state’s laws.

Martin wondered what the point was in keeping his body alive and believed that "a more dignified death" required him to carry out suicide. He was wrong. There is nothing undignified about living out every day of your life, regardless of the circumstances surrounding those days. Human dignity does not depend on memory, mental clarity, or level of independence. Martin would not have been a burden and his life would still have meaning.

8/12/26: Rusty Martin, a former senate staffer from Iowa, recently announced that he has been diagnosed with early-onset Alzheimer's disease and plans to travel to Switzerland to be euthanized. He is also calling for assisted suicide and euthanasia to be more widely legalized in the United States.

Key Takeaways:

• Martin spent over 20 years as communications director for Iowa Senate Democrats, and retired when he began struggling with the duties of his job.

• Not long after retiring, he was diagnosed with early-onset Alzheimer's.

• He has announced that he will travel to Switzerland to be euthanized, and called for assisted suicide and euthanasia to be legalized more widely across the country.

The Details:

Martin, 66, made an announcement on social media last month, as well as in an op-ed, about his diagnosis. He also stated his decision to travel to Zurich, Switzerland, to be euthanized.

Writing for the Des Moines Register, he explained that he was struggling during his last few years as a senate staffer, symptoms he didn't realize were from Alzheimer's:

I was miserable during my last couple of years in the Legislature. The systems I had built were falling apart. I was missing meetings and making lots of mistakes. I responded by doubling down and trying harder. It didn’t work.

The people I worked with knew I was struggling. So did I. I saw my doctor. I saw counselors. I took antidepressants. I made lots of to-do lists. Things just kept getting worse.

Finally, I gave up and retired.

It was only after retiring that he was diagnosed with early-onset Alzheimer's, a less common version of the disease. While Martin was devastated, he also was relieved to have an explanation for what had happened to him.

For now, he is on medication and says physical activity helps his mind remain sharp. His family is supportive and caring for him, and his life — despite the diagnosis — is good.

"I have an amazing wife, family, and friends. I enjoy travel and being outdoors," he said. "Kay Meyer, my wife of 28 years, is primary reason my life is so good. She does almost everything. She handles the money, the doctor visits, makes sure I take my medicine, manages my daily schedule, and so much more."

Yet he still plans to undergo euthanasia in Switzerland.

Zoom In:

Martin said he will die in August, while he is still lucid enough to make that decision.

"The day I was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s, I decided I would not let the disease slowly kill me. Instead, I would choose the day of my death. I will not let Alzheimer’s completely take my mind. Or warehouse me in a nursing home. Or set me in conflict with my wife or other loved ones," he explained. "I’m going to Switzerland instead. Several organizations there help people end their lives, legally, peacefully. My Alzheimer’s journey will end this month. With my wife and my two sons, I will travel to a suburb of Zurich to die."

He further wrote that he would prefer to be killed in Iowa, and decried safeguards that prevent abuse; bizarrely, he pointed to Canada as an example of a country with easily-accessible assisted suicide and euthanasia while still maintaining what he said were "adequate" safeguards:

Why am I forced to travel to a foreign country, far away from my family and friends, to exercise this right? I would rather stick around longer and take physician-prescribed medication to end my life in Iowa. Surely we can do better.

More states, including Illinois, are giving their residents more end-of-life autonomy.

Even those laws, however, require a doctor to declare that the person seeking to end their life has six months or less to live. That requirement fails Alzheimer’s patients. My body could live on for years after my mind is gone.

He concluded that killing himself is a "rational, reasonable" response to being diagnosed with Alzheimer's, and called for euthanasia to be legalized in Iowa.

Why It Matters:

Promoting assisted suicide and euthanasia as solutions for Alzheimer's and dementia is irresponsible at best.

As it is, people who suffer from dementia and Alzheimer’s are being increasingly pressured toward assisted suicide, and all the while, people who murder their spouses in so-called "mercy killings" are similarly romanticized, with the murders culturally justified because caring for someone with a terminal disease is seen as too much of a "burden."

This argument also weakens the moral requirement of "do no harm," and instead furthers the idea that patients with dementia are better off dead than alive.

Allowing advance requests for euthanasia is also rife with potential for abuse. It removes one of the most significant safeguards ensuring people being killed are not being pressured or abused.

There are already many stories of people who initially thought they would want to die in the future, but changed their minds later. Yet with an advance request in place, that person could still legally be killed against their will.

Canada — the country Martin promoted for how easily accessible assisted suicide and euthanasia are — has become so extreme on the issue that it has caused international controversy, with deaths from the program skyrocketing. As Live Action News previously explained:

The hyper-promotion and acceptance of MAiD in Canada has certainly been successful; an estimated 17,000 people were killed in 2025 alone, and deaths from MAiD now make up five percent (5%) of all deaths in Canada. The country is slated to allow MAiD for mental illness in 2027.

Reports have shown that people have been offered MAID for reasons like poverty, homelessness, and an inability to access disability or mental health services; already, over a fifth of applicants claim “isolation or loneliness” as reasons for their request to die.

The Bottom Line:

Living with an Alzheimer's diagnosis is undeniably difficult and tragic. However, that does not mean people with dementia are better off dead than alive.

Key Takeaways:

• In 1982, Mary Ellen Lukezich (then Laedtke) went to Dr. Frederick Dettmann for fertility help.

• Dettmann ultimately suggested that she use a sperm donor and said he could provide sperm from an anonymous medical student.

• Lukezich agreed and became pregnant. She gave birth to a son, Joseph Laedtke Heider.

• More than 40 years later, Heider took an at-home DNA test and discovered that Dettmann is his biological father.

• The mother and son have filed a lawsuit against Dettmann, who is now 91 years old.

The Details:

Mary Ellen Lukezich and her son, Joseph Laedtke Heider, are suing Wisconsin Dr. Frederick Dettmann, alleging that he lied when he told Lukezich in 1982 that he would use the sperm of an anonymous "healthy young medical student" to impregnate her. Instead, he used his own sperm. Dettmann is now 91 years old and retired. He has denied any wrongdoing.

Heider said he learned Dettmann was his biological father after he took a DNA test through Ancestry.com in 2024. He also learned he has multiple half-siblings.

"Upon tracing these DNA connections, Joseph identified a direct genetic link to Dr. Dettmann's family; that upon information and belief, this genetic information established that Dr. Dettmann is Joseph's biological father," the lawsuit stated.

Heider explained how it felt to learn the truth:

"The anonymous medical student donor that my mother was promised as my biological father never existed. Instead, the DNA led back to one person. Dr. Frederick Dettmann, the very doctor my mom trusted to help her have a child. Words cannot fully express what it feels like to learn that your entire identity is built on a lie."

According to a statement from Dettmann's attorneys, "Dr. Dettmann has no independent recollection of the individuals making these allegations and is unaware of any evidence supporting the claims being asserted."

The lawsuit does not ask for a specific amount of damages, but for the court to determine what those damages should be at trial.

Other former patients of Dettemann, who suspect he may have used his own sperm to impregnate them without their knowledge, are being asked to come forward.

The Bottom Line:

Thanks to the rise in at-home DNA test kit usage, many individuals have learned of the true circumstances of their conception and have faced identity crises as a result.

A woman named Brianna learned her mother's fertility doctor had also used his own sperm. She said, "I went through an identity crisis. It’s ongoing. I’ve had to come to terms with the idea that someone committed this act against my mom. And that I’m a product of it.”

More of these stories will likely come out as more individuals take DNA tests and make similar life-changing discoveries.

Key Takeaways:

• The ACLJ has filed a discrimination charge after a doctor was discriminated against for seeking a religious exemption from providing abortions.

• The doctor felt he was forced to resign from his position as Chief of Medicine at a VA Hospital. Two years later, he was offered a job at the same hospital, but that offer was rescinded weeks before he was slated to start, without any explanation.

• The VA began committing abortions under the Biden administration. That order was rescinded by the Trump administration.

The Details:

The ACLJ announced last week it had filed a formal discrimination charge against the VA for violating the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

The ACLJ's client, identified as Dr. Mohr, worked as a Chief of Medicine at a VA Hospital when, in 2022, the Biden administration announced that VA hospitals would begin offering abortions. As the ACLJ reported in May:

Under the Biden Administration, a highly qualified, board-certified internal medicine physician with years of exemplary service at a Veterans Affairs medical center faced an impossible choice: violate his deeply held Christian beliefs by prescribing abortion-inducing drugs or lose his ability to serve veterans. When he and his entire emergency department invoked federal conscience protections, leadership responded with threats and coercion.

The Medical Director at the hospital where Dr. Mohr worked told him he could “either get on board or find another job.” In June 2023, Dr. Mohr resigned to avoid compromising his religious beliefs.

According to the ACLJ, in December 2025 a position opened up at the same VA hospital where Dr. Mohr had previously worked; he applied and was accepted. However, in March 2026, the same administration that had previously threatened him rescinded his employment offer just weeks before his start date, without any reason or explanation.

Zoom In:

In its formal complaint, the ACLJ contended that Dr. Mohr was wrongfully discriminated against for his religious beliefs. In a press release, the group said:

Federal law could not be clearer. Title VII protects employees from employer discrimination on the basis of religion, and the Coats-Snowe Amendment provides additional protections for health care professionals who decline to participate in, refer for, or facilitate abortions. These statutes exist for precisely this situation.

The group further stated:

Through the EEOC process, we seek a full investigation, a finding that the facility violated federal anti-discrimination and conscience statutes, meaningful corrective action, and assurances against future retaliation.

Learn More:

In 2022, Stephanie Carter, a nurse practitioner at the Olin E. Teague Veterans’ Center in Temple, Texas filed a lawsuit against the Department of Veterans Affairs over the abortion mandate, arguing that it violated her beliefs.

Carter's attorneys at First Liberty Institute announced in July 2023 that as a result of that lawsuit, the VA issued a nationwide religious accommodation process for employees who had religious objections to participating in abortions. This accommodation process seemingly came too late for Dr. Mohr.

After taking office in 2025, President Trump ended the Biden-era policy of mandating abortions at VA hospitals.

Key Takeaways:

• AOC has started freezing her eggs, something she previously said she would consider.

• She is 36, which is considered "advanced maternal age," and she has been engaged for more than four years.

• While some social media users supported her efforts, others urged her to get married and have children now; others warned her that egg freezing does not guarantee pregnancy and children in the future.

The Details:

It was nearly six years ago that AOC first <a href="/news/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-egg-freezing-ivf">hinted</a> that she might freeze her eggs. Now it's clear she has started the process, which she says helps her "feel more in control" and "like a badass."

There are plenty of opportunities for speculation — and social media users definitely did.

But beyond that, there are serious medical and ethical concerns associated with egg freezing, IVF, and surrogacy. Whether or not AOC is gearing up for a 2028 presidential run doesn't change any of that.

Commentary:

Live Action president and founder Lila Rose responded to AOC's video on X, writing, "It’s not 'badass.' It puts you and your future babies at higher risk. It necessitates IVF, which is extremely dangerous for children and has led to millions of babies being destroyed or frozen. Stop normalizing egg freezing. Get married and be open to new life."

Conservative commentator Allie Beth Stuckey made similar points, writing, "She's been with the same guy for years. There is no reason she couldn't have kids yet." She pointed out that pregnancy for AOC would now require IVF and potentially surrogacy. Stuckey also said that freezing your eggs is not healthy and that it's difficult for a woman to get pregnant after 40, even if she has frozen her eggs, because pregnancy success also depends on uterine health and hormonal balance.

Egg freezing offers no guarantees of a future pregnancy or live birth.

AOC was just 30 when she first spoke about egg freezing, but now, she has entered the age at which she would be considered "geriatric" if she were to become pregnant. Cleveland Clinic defines "advanced maternal age" as women who are 35 or older and pregnant.

One Facebook user wrote:

Thomas Sowell famously said, "There are no solutions. There are only trade-offs."

Modern technology keeps promising us otherwise.

Technology tells us that we can control everything. We can have sex without babies. We can have babies without sex. We can postpone fertility until it is convenient. We can freeze eggs. We can do IVF. We can hire surrogates. We can schedule conception around our careers.

We can become sovereign over our own biology.

Except we can't.

There are still trade-offs.

Those trade-offs, he said, include fertility decline with age, and a decline in egg quantity and quality. "No amount of money or planning changes that curve. It is simply how the body works," he wrote. (And he took a great deal of flack from commenters who didn't feel that a man should be voicing such an opinion.)

Women who harvest their eggs are put on drugs — often Lupron — which suppress a woman’s normal ovarian function so fertility doctors can time when her eggs are released. (This drug is also used to chemically castrate sex offenders.) She is then put on fertility drugs to increase egg production and then a trigger shot of HCG (Human chorionic gonadotrophin), a hormone produced by the placenta, to release the eggs from the follicles. A needle is used to puncture the ovaries multiple times to suction out the eggs. This can carry complications of internal bleeding or even the loss of an ovary.

In addition, a smaller percentage of these eggs is likely to be "normal," which could lead to embryos that test "abnormal" and are destroyed. In addition, it could mean the woman goes through more than one round of egg harvesting and hormone injections, increasing her risk of complications.

The Bottom Line:

<a href="/news/jennifer-lahl-dangers-egg-donation-surrogacy">Egg harvesting</a>, <a href="/news/pro-life-couples-opt-adoption-ivf">IVF</a>, and <a href="/news/surrogacy-riskier-women-babies-most-realize">surrogacy</a> all carry significant risks and <a href="/news/is-natural-ivf-ethical">ethical dilemmas</a>. No one is being "weird" to acknowledge the facts.

It is named in honor of DeOndra Dixon, a Down syndrome self-advocate and sister of actor Jamie Foxx, who passed away in 2020.

Key Takeaways:

• Dixon lived with Foxx after she graduated from high school in 2002 until she passed away in 2020, which left Foxx heartbroken.

• She was a Special Olympian, the 2011 Ambassador for the Global Down Syndrome Foundation, and the first ever recipient of the Quincy Jones Exceptional Advocacy Award.

• After his sister's death, Foxx created a research fund in Dixon's name for the Global Down Syndrome Foundation.

• A bipartisan bill authorizing the first NIH-wide Down syndrome research program has now unanimously passed the Senate, following a unanimous vote in the House of Representatives.

The Backstory:

Jamie Foxx and his sister DeOndra Dixon were very close, and after he found success in Hollywood, he moved his entire family to live with him in Los Angeles, largely to ensure Dixon was well-supported. She was known for her love of dancing, and she competed in the Special Olympics. She worked often with the Global Down Syndrome Foundation and was named the 2011 Ambassador, as well as the first ever recipient of its highest honor, the Quincy Jones Exceptional Advocacy Award.

Dixon tragically passed away in 2020, leaving Foxx understandably heartbroken:

“My heart is shattered into a million pieces… my beautiful loving sister Deondra has transitioned… I say transitioned because she will always be alive… anyone who knew my sis… knew that she was a bright light,” he wrote, adding, “Well I know she is in heaven now dancing with her wings on… tho my pain is unbelievable I smile when I think of all of the great memories that she left me… my family… and her friends.”

He honored her a year later on World Down Syndrome Day, writing, “My heart… my breath… my soul… I hear your laughter in the house… I hear you sliding down the stairs… my heart… my breath… my soul… I love u Deondra my angel.”

Foxx then worked with the Global Down Syndrome Foundation to create the “DeOndra Dixon Down Syndrome Research Fund," which focuses on improving the disparity in life span for Black Americans with Down syndrome.

For their part, the Global Down Syndrome Foundation further honored her in its work on the DeOndra Dixon INCLUDE Project Act. The bill, which unanimously passed the House last month, is meant to ensure funding for Down syndrome research. The group wrote:

This landmark legislation would permanently authorize the [NIH] INCLUDE Project, the only NIH-wide research program dedicated to improving the health and lives of people with DownSyndrome. The INCLUDE Project is already driving groundbreaking research and medical advances in inflammation and immune system dysregulation, Alzheimer’s, sleep apnea, cancer, and more.

The INCLUDE Project already receives funding, but this legislation permanently authorizes it, so research can continue in an effort to improve the lives of future generations of people with Down syndrome.

The Details:

While the House unanimously passed the legislation in July, the Senate has now followed suit, unanimously passing it. Foxx celebrated by posting on his Instagram page a video of Senator John Hickenlooper testifying about the bill.

"Boom!!! This is incredible and huge news for the down syndrome community," Foxx wrote. "My sister. DeOndra Dixon… was blessed to be the spokes person for Down syndrome… by way of the [Global Down Syndrome Foundation]… she was spotted by the late great Quincy Jones… who brought her to the [Global Down Syndrome Foundation]… she became a beacon and a tremendous sign of hope… that more attention and more finances will be concentrated on the down syndrome community."

Hickenlooper spoke about the need for this funding in his testimony, arguing that Down syndrome is currently under-researched due to a lack of funding:

"Thousands of Americans live with Down syndrome, and yet research has been underfunded for decades. In 2017, Congress encouraged the National Institutes of Health, the NIH, to launch the INCLUDE Project, an effort to make groundbreaking discoveries about conditions that disproportionately affect people with Down syndrome, like Alzheimer's disease. 

The INCLUDE Project brings together multiple NIH institutes under a coordinated approach that is already delivering significant scientific discoveries, as well as new treatments. The bipartisan, bicameral DeOndra Dixon INCLUDE Project Act will officially authorize the INCLUDE Project into law. The bill will ensure that Congress and the American people have visibility into the scientific breakthroughs that are so needed for this community."

Actress Caterina Scorsone, who has a child with Down syndrome, also celebrated the news.

Michelle Sie Whitten, President and CEO of the Global Down Syndrome Foundation, said in a press release that she was thankful for the senators, who made a bipartisan effort to pass the legislation:

We are profoundly grateful to Senators John Hickenlooper and Jerry Moran for their friendship, tenacity, and years of leadership, and to their colleagues on both sides of the aisle who recognized that people with Down syndrome deserve the same investment in research and opportunities to participate in clinical trials as everyone else.

The DeOndra Dixon INCLUDE Project Act will honor our beloved GLOBAL Ambassador DeOndra Dixon and help ensure that the transformative progress made through INCLUDE continues. We look forward to working with our congressional champions to complete the final steps and see this landmark legislation signed into law.

The Bottom Line:

Foxx said in the press release that this effort is especially meaningful for his family.

"DeOndra brought so much joy, love and light into our lives, and she was incredibly proud to be a GLOBAL Ambassador and advocate," he said, adding, "Knowing that DeOndra’s name and advocacy will help people with Down syndrome live longer, healthier lives means more to us than words can express.”

Key Takeaways:

• The Thalidomide Survivors Association and the Malta Federation of Organizations for Persons with Disability are asking for a pause on pre-implantation genetic testing of embryos, which they view as discriminatory.

• “Medical advancement must be consistent with the dignity and human rights of persons with disability. Disability must not be framed as a life to be avoided,” the groups noted.

• The groups have a list of six requests they are seeking to have met before any expansion of testing is authorized. In 2022, PGT was allowed to test for nine conditions; now, 17 more conditions are set to be screened in addition to the first nine.

The Backstory:

Thalidomide is a prescription medication created in the 1950s for use as a sedative and an anti-nausea drug. It was prescribed to pregnant women to help with morning sickness, but it caused significant birth defects in thousands of babies, including missing or shortened arms and legs, along with internal health issues. It was banned in the 1960s but is used today to treat multiple myeloma and leprosy.

TSA seeks to "empower members and to improve their quality of life." According to its website, it aims "[t]o consolidate the community's sense of solidarity and social wellbeing through the love of Education, Research and Arts."

Pre-implantation genetic testing (PGT) of embryos created via IVF first began in the early 1990s with the successful testing for single-gene conditions such as adrenoleukodystrophy and cystic fibrosis.

It has become a fertility industry standard to test embryos for certain health conditions to avoid transferring, becoming pregnant with, and birthing babies with such conditions. Disability rights advocates have called PGT discriminatory because it is used to seek out certain human beings to eliminate them, not help them.

PGT first began in Malta in 2022 despite opposition from the Catholic Church and the Nationalist Party, and it originally allowed for testing for nine health conditions.

Now, 17 more conditions are being added to the list.

The Details:

TSA has spoken out against the change.

“Medical advancement must be consistent with the dignity and human rights of persons with disability. Disability must not be framed as a life to be avoided,” TSA said. It added, “Our concern is with public policy and the message conveyed when avoiding disability is presented as an unquestioned measure of progress. Medical advancement must be consistent with the dignity and human rights of persons with disability. Disability must not be framed as a life to be avoided.”

Marthese Mugliette, president of the MFOPD, told MaltaToday:

"MFOPD believes that widening the list of conditions for embryo genetic testing may imply that disabilities should be avoided, which could make people with disabilities feel less accepted and valued in society.

MFOPD believes that every person, with or without a disability, has equal dignity and value."

She didn't back away from reality, however, stating, "MFOPD recognises that families may face significant emotional, financial and practical challenges" and argued that "these concerns should be addressed by ensuring access to quality healthcare, disability support services, financial assistance and inclusive community services, so that families are supported and no one feels they are facing these challenges alone."

TSA pointed to Article 10 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which it said affirms the inherent right to life and equality of individuals with disabilities. This, it argues, should be considered as PGT carries "the human-rights implications of state-supported selection based on disability-related characteristics."

What's Happening Now:

The groups are asking the government to:

pause the expansion of PGT-M pending a transparent ethical and disability-rights review

publish the full list of conditions and the criteria used to approve them

consult disabled persons’ organisations, disability-studies academics, families, clinicians and bioethicists

ensure balanced, non-directive counselling that includes lived experience and information about available support

strengthen healthcare, community services, personal assistance and financial support;....

review the governance and independence of the Commission for the Rights of Persons with Disability

Nikita Alamango, president of Nisa Laburisti, the women’s wing of the Labour Party, is in favor of the expansion and told MaltaToday, "Hundreds of genetic conditions can now be identified internationally, yet Maltese couples continue to have access to only a limited number. If we genuinely believe in reproductive healthcare, then our legislation must evolve alongside science."

Those in favor of PGT see the 'evolution of science' as the ability to eradicate certain people. TSA and MFOPD, however, recognize the inherent right to life and value of every human being regardless of the results of a screening test when they are in their most vulnerable form of development.

The Bottom Line:

Using IVF to eliminate certain embryos and ensure that only those deemed "healthy" are allowed to be born turns the IVF process into a seek-and-destroy eugenic mission rather than an attempt to overcome infertility.

"Our clients' son was born yesterday morning and he is now in their physical custody while he receives expert medical care at a tertiary care center. Thankfully, McKenna West's baseless attempt to interfere with his medical care has been soundly rejected by the courts. Right now, our clients are continuing to place their baby's health and well-being first, following the advice of the baby's medical team, as they always have and just as any loving parent would."

He added, "As if the heartbreak of his condition were not enough, they are devastated to see their family tragedy transformed into political theater by the Texas Attorney General's office and McKenna West. Our clients' only focus at this time is ensuring that their baby receives the medical care that he vitally needs and that they, as his parents, are able to spend every precious moment they can with their beautiful newborn son."

Intentionally ending a child’s life through induced abortion is not medical care, as it does not provide a preborn child with greater health or well-being. Induced abortion has one main goal: to ensure the child does not survive.

UPDATE, 8/12/26: Baby Gabriel has been born and is reportedly "on the path to receiving the life-saving medical care he needs."

According to an update from Live Action founder and president Lila Rose, "McKenna gave birth after courageously refusing the contracting parents’ demand that she abort him because of his serious but treatable heart condition. Heartbreakingly, a temporary restraining order issued yesterday prevented McKenna from seeing or holding the baby she carried and fought to protect."

However, she noted, "Gabriel is doing well, and because of a separate court order, he is now on the path to receiving the life-saving medical care he needs. Please pray for this precious baby boy and for McKenna."

UPDATE, 8/11/26, 10:18p EST: Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced on X this evening that he had "secured an emergency court order ensuring that baby Gabriel receives life-saving care in Texas."

The announcement from AG Paxton states:

Under the court order, life-saving medical care will be provided upon baby Gabriel's birth and will not be delayed. The order prevents anyone from withholding or obstructing necessary treatment or removing, discharging, or transferring the child while the court considers the case.

The hospital and treating physicians must immediately notify the court and all involved parties of the child's birth, initial medical assessment, any refusal of consent to medically indicated treatment, and any request to discharge, transfer, or transport the child.

If medically indicated treatment is refused, the court will hold an emergency hearing to determine whether intervention is warranted under Texas and federal law and to protect the child's life. The court notes that nothing in this order limits the right of the surrogate mother to make decisions to safeguard her own health or the health of the pregnancy.

8/11/26: Public officials are beginning to speak out in support of McKenna West, a surrogate mother fighting to protect the life of the baby boy she is carrying.

Key Takeaways:

• McKenna West, a single mother, decided to become a surrogate as a way to provide for her family while also doing something she felt would be rewarding.

• The baby boy she is carrying was diagnosed with hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS), and the couple who hired her demanded an abortion.

• West refused, and is now seeking custody to ensure the baby, who she calls Gabriel, receives the life-saving care he deserves; she said she would happily give Gabriel to the would-be parents if they commit to allowing Gabriel to have surgery rather than simply "comfort care," but they seemingly have not agreed to that condition.

• The would-be parents are suing to force West to deliver in California, with a medical team of their choosing.

• Several legislators have now come out in support of West and baby Gabriel.

The Backstory:

In an interview with Live Action News, West explained she decided to become a surrogate because she thought it would be a rewarding way to make money. "I thought [being a surrogate] would be a really awesome way to make extra income for my family, not have to take extra time away from my kids, and get to provide a family the amazing gift of having a child," she said.

She matched with a couple, known as A.B. and C.D. in court documents, underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF), and got pregnant, with a due date of September 2, 2026. Everything was going well until the 20-week anatomy scan, at which point the baby was diagnosed with hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS).

West was immediately concerned, as the contract she signed included a clause requiring abortion in the event of an “anomaly," though the surrogacy agency told her such a situation is rare. In the meantime, she researched HLHS, and found a Dallas hospital with a 100% success rate with the first of three surgeries the baby would need, and offered to live with a friend in Texas to lessen costs involved.

Most babies with HLHS require three surgeries after birth:  the Norwood procedure shortly after birth, the Glenn procedure at four to six months old, and the Fontan procedure around age two or three. These surgeries have led to drastically improved outcomes for children born with HLHS, and with treatment, the majority of children with the condition survive.

Yet A.B. and C.D. still officially requested that McKenna have an abortion at 22 weeks gestation; she lived in Alaska, and there was no doctor willing to commit such a late-term abortion in the state.

"I had to call the MFM and ask for a referral to an abortion center in Seattle," she said. “And that was really upsetting."

She was scheduled for a 24-week abortion in May, and ultimately, couldn't bring herself to go through with it, especially after her brother promised to support her, even if it meant raising the baby boy, who she named Gabriel, herself.

Podcaster Ellen Fisher and Live Action founder and president Lila Rose helped West fly to Texas, where she could deliver at a hospital with doctors who would work to save Gabriel's life. Yet because she refused to have an abortion, A.B. and C.D. stopped sending West money, demanded she return the money they had already paid her, and pay for additional damages. They have also filed a lawsuit to require West to deliver in California, with a medical team of their choosing; she said she would happily do so if A.B. and C.D. commit to providing Gabriel with the surgery needed to save his life.

In the meantime, she has filed for custody of Gabriel.

"I want to fight for him because he deserves that chance. There's no guarantee; there's not a guarantee with anything. But he deserves a chance of living life outside of my womb. I just really pray he gets that opportunity," she said, adding,

"I want to get them to commit to the surgery or get parental rights so I can get him surgery. My goal is to get him surgery."

So far, the Alaska Superior Court has denied a motion to force West to relocate to California to give birth, but ruled that a California court can dictate where she gives birth and which medical team treats her. 

The Details:

Several legislators have come out in support of West, as well as baby Gabriel.

Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) released a statement calling for Gabriel to receive the life-saving surgeries he needs:

Ms. West has demonstrated heroic courage and love for this baby. According to reports, despite the threat of financial ruin, she refused to abort the baby boy, filed for custody, and relocated to Texas near a hospital that is equipped to begin treatment for his condition after he is born. Ms. West stated, ‘I want to fight for him because he deserves that chance’ and ‘my goal is to get him surgery.’

With Ms. West’s due date fast approaching on September 2, 2026, and the two sides vying to decide whether the baby boy receives care, the courts should act decisively to reject the lie that having a diagnosed disability makes this baby unworthy of life.

We must remain committed to building a nation that values human life, insists upon equal justice under the law, and respects the rights and dignity of the disabled and vulnerable. The Courts should immediately give custody of this baby to those willing to welcome him, protect him, and ensure that he has a chance to receive care that could save his life.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has also released a statement in support of West.

He asked the district court to enter orders directing the child’s care upon birth, barring his removal from Texas, and asking for an expedited hearing on the issue of refusing treatment.

He also sent a letter to UT Southwestern and Dallas Children’s, reminding physicians of their legal duty to give Gabriel life-saving treatment, regardless of how the custody case pans out, even if that means performing surgery without parental consent or a court order.

“Baby Gabriel deserves a chance at life, and I will not allow anyone to unlawfully deny him medically necessary care,” he said. “My office will use every tool available to protect innocent lives and ensure that every child receives the care required under Texas law.”  

The Bottom Line:

West has said she is immensely grateful for the support she has received.

"God has been so evident about it all in the ways He has connected me with people and surrounded me with people who love Him and love life and are completely willing to stand beside me as I go through this," she said. "There are moments when I'm overwhelmed like, 'How am I gonna do this?' And other moments of just, 'Me and this baby are so taken care of, and we're not alone at all.'"