July 23, 1998
Once again, our nation's lawmakers are debating whether to allow partial-birth abortion: a brutal procedure in which a living infant is mostly delivered into the birth canal before being killed by the puncturing of her skull and the removal of her brain. This abortion method is used thousands of times annually, on healthy babies of healthy mothers, usually in the fifth and sixth months of the babies' development.
During the weeks ahead, the focus will once again shift to the U.S. Senate. When the Senate first considered this bill in December, 1995, it received 54 votes, but in the most recent vote (in May, 1997) that margin had grown to 64 votes -- only three votes short of the two-thirds vote necessary to override a veto. We call on the other 36 senators to stop defending the indefensible, and to curb the terrible violence that is being done to these premature members of the human family.
A total of 25 states have now enacted bona fide bans on partial-birth abortions. Seven of these laws are currently in effect, while enforcement has been blocked by various court orders in the other states. In one state, Arizona, in which a single federal judge has blocked enforcement of a state ban, a horrific episode recently occurred that again underscores what is at stake as the Senate votes on this veto. For the first time, to our knowledge, an infant girl survived an attempted partial- birth abortion, although with serious injuries.
According to the press reports, personnel at the A-Z Women's Center in Phoenix told a 17-year-old mother that her unborn baby was between 23 and 24 weeks gestational age (i.e., between 5 and 5½ months) -- a typical "candidate" for a partial-birth abortion. Reportedly, after beginning the partial-birth abortion procedure on June 30, abortionist Dr. John Biskind found himself dealing with a 6- pound, 2 oz. baby girl of about 37 weeks (near full term), and he delivered her alive.
"Baby Phoenix" remains hospitalized with a fractured skull and "two deep lacerations" on her face, but no brain damage, according to press reports. A pretty rough start in life for this little girl -- but she is the lucky one. Partial-birth abortion, when carried through to completion, is a 100% lethal procedure.
Opponents of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act would like to focus on the abortionist's miscalculation of Baby Phoenix's age. This evades the real issue, which is not the technical competence of this particular abortionist, but rather the public policy that permits the violence of the partial-birth abortion that he originally intended to perform, and presumably has routinely performed. A baby delivered prematurely between 23 and 24 weeks -- the original calculated age of Baby Phoenix -- would have a one-in-three chance of survival in a neonatal unit if delivered normally, and certainly would feel excruciating pain during the partial- birth abortion.
President Clinton and some lawmakers endorsed a competing proposal, sponsored by Congressmen Hoyer and Greenwood, which they claim would appropriately restrict "late-term" abortions. But in fact, the Hoyer-Greenwood bill would leave partial-birth abortions completely unrestricted at least until an individual baby can be proven to be "viable" -- that is, definitely able to survive if born prematurely. Such a law would permit the vast majority of partial-birth abortions to continue without restriction, since partial-birth abortions are usually performed in the fifth and sixth months of pregnancy, when the baby's lung development is not quite sufficient or barely sufficient to allow independent survival.
Moreover, the Hoyer-Greenwood bill would allow abortions even during the final three months of pregnancy-- by the partial-birth method or any other method -- whenever an abortionist cites "health" concerns -- which Congressman Hoyer has candidly acknowledged would include, in his words, "mental health" and "psychological trauma." [Documentation on request.] In short, the Hoyer- Greenwood bill is merely a political fig leaf for lawmakers who wish to maintain a verbal posture of opposing "late-term" abortions, while voting in accord with the demands of the abortion lobby against any meaningful limitations on abortion.