Pro-abortion reps feign concern for ‘babies’ who survive abortion… while voting to deny them care

The U.S. House passed the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act on Wednesday, but not before pro-abortion House members made shocking comments about the bill, calling it “dangerous,” and feigning concern for the safety of children unintentionally born alive during abortions — even referring to them as “infants” and “babies” who should be left to die without medical assistance.

The bill aims to ensure abortion survivors receive age-appropriate medical care rather than being left to die or actively killed by an abortionist. The bill states:

An infant born alive after an abortion or within a hospital, clinic, or other facility has the same claim to the protection of the law that would arise for any newborn, or for any person who comes to a hospital, clinic, or other facility for screening and treatment or otherwise becomes a patient within its care. 

If the child is born alive during an abortion, health care practitioners who are present must “exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age; and … following the exercise of skill, care, and diligence required … ensure that the child born alive is immediately transported and admitted to a hospital.”

All but two House Democrats voted against this bill. But two pro-abortion reps in particular voiced alleged concerns that providing medical care to a struggling abortion survivor could endanger the babies’ lives.

For every dollar given, 34 more people can be reached with the truth about abortion. Will you join us in this life-saving work as a monthly donor today?

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) said (emphasis added), “The problem with this bill is that it endangers some infants by stating that that infant must immediately be brought to the hospital. It directs and mandates certain medical care that may not be appropriate.” However, Nadler did not attempt to explain or expound upon his remarks.

Likewise, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) claimed that taking the child to the hospital after treatment could be harmful. The legislation (emphasis added) “requires immediately taking a struggling baby to a hospital. That hospital could be hours away and could be detrimental to the life of that baby,” she said.

Then she quickly pivoted: “This is nothing more than part of the effort to make abortion illegal nationally in this country.”

Schakowsky failed to state how providing medical care to a struggling premature infant would make abortion illegal.

Greg Price

@greg_price11

·Follow

Replying to @greg_price11

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL): "[The bill] requires immediately taking a struggling baby to a hospital. That hospital could be hours away and could be detrimental to the life of that baby."

Watch on X

7:45 PM · Jan 11, 2023

843

Reply

Copy link

Read 718 replies

Both Nadler and Schakowsky are pro-abortion and do not consider preborn humans worthy of legal protection. While they claim to be concerned about the well-being of these infants, Nadler and Schakowsky advocated for the deaths of these children just moments before their births and refused to treat these children as “babies” until it came time to vote against a bill aimed at protecting them. They then tried to justify their “no” votes by feigning concern for the well-being of these infants.

They want to appear compassionate towards abortion survivors while working to ensure they don’t make it out of the abortion clinic alive.

The goal of every abortion is a dead baby, and that’s what Nadler and Schakowsky are concerned with — ensuring every abortionist is successful in his or her mission to kill. And when they do fail at that mission, Nadler and Schakowsky want to make sure no one is the wiser and that no abortionist is punished for infanticide. Abortion survivors have long been known as “the dreaded complication” by the abortion industry.

In addition, Rep. Suzanne Bonaici (D-Mich.) called the pro-life bill “extremist, dangerous and unnecessary” and denounced the bill’s punishment of up to five years in prison for abortionists who fail to provide health care to an infant that accidentally survives the abortion meant to end his or her life. If the child is intentionally killed after being born alive, the abortionist could face murder charges for infanticide.

Democratic House Whip Katherine Clark (D-Conn.) claimed the bill was not based on “science.”

Yet, data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has revealed that over the course of 12 years, more than a hundred infants were reported to have survived abortions. Only about half of all U.S. states require the reporting of abortion complications, and there are no federal requirements for abortion reporting of any kind.

In Minnesota, five children were reported by the state to have been born alive during abortions in 2021 alone. And in Florida, eight children were reported by the state to have survived abortions in 2022. And according to data collected by the Abortion Survivors Network (ASN), for every 1,000 abortions, about two babies are born alive. The fate of these children is unknown.

Dr. Christina Francis, CEO-elect of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, supported the bill. She said, “We always care for two patients in the delivery room: mother and baby. It is our duty as physicians to provide both of them optimal care. We cannot discriminate against care based on the circumstances or location of a child’s birth. When a baby is born — that baby deserves age-appropriate medical attention and care, without exception.”