WATCH: New Live Action video busts myth that pro-life laws harm women

A new video from Live Action discusses whether pro-life laws actually harm women, or if that claim is little more than pro-abortion propaganda.

The latest addition to Live Action’s “Pro-Life Replies” series features board-certified OB-GYN Dr. Monique Ruberu, who discusses whether or not women actually need abortion (the direct and intentional killing of a preborn child) to treat health care emergencies during pregnancy.

Do Pro-Life Laws Hurt Women?

 KEY TAKEAWAYS:

• Women are being misled by pro-abortion claims that women will die because pro-life laws prevent them from receiving life-saving care.

• Pro-life laws define ‘abortion’ as intentional killing, and that is what they restrict — not miscarriage care, not ectopic pregnancy treatment, and not early delivery in a medical emergency.

• If doctors believe the lies of the abortion industry and its media allies, women could be harmed through denial of actual medical care — and abortion advocates weaponize these instances to claim it is pro-life laws that are harming women, instead of acknowledging that it is their own deception and misinformation about the laws that are causing harm.

THE DETAILS:

“Is it really true that laws protecting preborn children from abortion are dangerous and harmful to women? Is it true that if abortion is illegal, women will die?” Ruberu begins in the video. “Specifically, we hear that women will die because they will not be able to access ‘medically necessary’ abortions for complications such as sepsis, or treatment for miscarriage, or treatment for an ectopic pregnancy when the embryo implants outside the uterus. But none of these claims about the danger of pro-life laws are true.”

The truth is, women need real health care during pregnancy, particularly when they are facing a medical crisis. And abortion — the intentional, targeted killing of a preborn child — is not health care, and is never medically necessary.

“Pro-life laws only serve to protect the lives of innocent preborn children and pose no threat to the safety of women,” Ruberu says. “It is never necessary to intentionally kill a preborn child to protect the health of a pregnant woman, and treatment for miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy remains legal in every state.”

According to Ruberu, some of the confusion lies in the wording: a miscarriage is often referred to as a “spontaneous abortion” in medical terms. But it’s not the word “abortion” that pro-life activists oppose; it is the intentional taking of a human life. “If someone uses the word abortion to refer to something that is not intentional killing, then that’s not what pro-lifers are talking about,” Ruberu points out, adding that the defining feature of every induced abortion procedure is the intent to kill the preborn child.

Some abortion activists will try to subvert this point by arguing that the same procedures used for induced abortions are often used as miscarriage treatment. But this is intentionally clouding the issue.

“The difference here is that in a miscarriage, the baby has already died before the procedure starts, whereas in abortion, the baby is being intentionally killed,” Ruberu says. “Some will also argue that doctors may be hesitant to provide miscarriage treatment for fear that they will be prosecuted for abortion. But if a doctor doesn’t know the difference between a miscarriage and an abortion, that individual should not be practicing medicine.”

Another example often exploited by abortion activists is that of ectopic pregnancy — an emergency where the developing baby implants somewhere other than the mother’s uterus, most often in the fallopian tubes. If not addressed quickly, it can be a life-threatening complication for the mother. But as Ruberu explains, the difference is, once again, that of intent.

“The child must be removed from an environment that is immediately physically hostile to itself and to the mother,” she says. “And sadly, there’s nowhere for the child to be safely implanted. And as I mentioned earlier, ectopic pregnancy removal is legal in every state.”

Other emergencies, like sepsis, may require an early delivery of the baby, which may secondarily result in the baby’s death due to extreme prematurity. But the intent is not to deliberately kill the baby; it is to save the mother’s life. It is also legal in every single state.

“In my many years practicing as an OBGYN physician, I have spent thousands of hours caring for pregnant women, delivering babies, and caring for mothers who have sadly lost their children,” Ruberu says. “I have never encountered a situation where abortion was necessary. Period. It is important to call out the abortion industry’s strategy here, because what they’re doing is not simply deceptive, but deadly.”

THE BOTTOM LINE:

“By spreading these lies, the abortion industry is actually trying to scare doctors away from providing legitimate medical treatment,” Ruberu said. “If they can successfully scare doctors this way, then women may be denied care, possibly suffer or die. And then the abortion industry will continue to use their tragic stories to blame pro-life laws, when the actual cause of death was pro-abortion lies. We must have truth and clarity on this. The lives of children and their mothers depend on it.”