1 / 30

The Case for our Lives: Reversing Roe Really?

The Case for our Lives: Reversing Roe Really?. Samuel B. Casey, Managing Director & General Counsel , Jubilee Campaign , Law of Life Project. The Case for our Lives: Roe’s Factual ‘ Assumicide ’!. • We can’t know what a ‘human being’ is and when its life begins.

dolf
Download Presentation

The Case for our Lives: Reversing Roe Really?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Case for our Lives:ReversingRoeReally? Samuel B. Casey, Managing Director & General Counsel, Jubilee Campaign, Law of Life Project

  2. The Case for our Lives:Roe’sFactual ‘Assumicide’! • We can’t know what a ‘human being’ is and when its life begins. • Abortion is ‘health care’ involving a normal ‘responsible’ doctor-patient relationship. • Motherhood and child-rearing force upon the woman ‘a distressful life and future". • An abortion decision is truly voluntary and fully informed. • The risk to the women's health and life was ‘far greater in carrying the child to full term’ than in having an abortion. • A woman faces significant difficulties as a result of a cultural stigma of unwed motherhood.

  3. The Case for our Lives:South Dakota Task Force Report on Abortion (2005) “As a result of the advances in modern science and medicine, and particularly because of information derived from the practice of abortion since its legalization, the Task Force finds that each of these [factual] assumptions [in Roe] has been entirely or largely disproved. The new understanding about these facts, and the new information not previously known concerning them, are important in understanding how abortion affects the lives, rights, interests, and health of women.

  4. The Case for our Lives:Roe’s Factual Assumicide • McCorvey v. Hill, 385 F.3d 846 (5th Cir. 2004),cert den. 543 U.S.1154(2005) • Cano v. Baker, 435 F.3d 1337 (11th Cir. 2006), cert den. _U.S._(2007)

  5. The Case for our Lives:We Can’t Know What a Human Being Is? "When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer." Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. at 159)

  6. The Case for our Lives:We Can’t Know What a Human Being Is? "If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case [i.e. "Roe" who sought the abortion], of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment." Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. at 156-157)

  7. The Case for our Lives:We Can’t Know What a Human Being Is? United States District Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit en banc in Planned Parenthood v. Roundsagrees that the life of a human being begins at fertilization and it is not untrue or misleading to require an abortion doctor to inform a mother prior to the abortion of her pregnancy ‘[t]hat the abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being.” Planned Parenthood v. Rounds, 530 F.3d 724, 735-36 (8th Cir 2008).

  8. The Case for our Lives:We Can’t Know What a Human Being Is? United States District Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit en banc in Planned Parenthood v. Roundsagrees that the life of a human being begins at fertilization and it is not untrue or misleading to require an abortion doctor to inform a mother prior to the abortion of her pregnancy ‘[t]hat the abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being.” Planned Parenthood v. Rounds, 530 F.3d 724, 735-36 (8th Cir 2008).

  9. The Case for our Lives:We Can’t Know What a Human Being Is? Resolving the question of when human life begins is critical for advancing a reasoned public policy debate over abortion and human embryo research. This article considers the current scientific evidence in human embryology and addresses two central questions concerning the beginning of life: 1) in the course of sperm-egg interaction, when is a new cell formed that is distinct from either sperm or egg? and 2) is this new cell a new human organism—i.e., a new human being? Based on universally accepted scientific criteria, a new cell, the human zygote, comes into existence at the moment of sperm-egg fusion, an event that occurs in less than a second. Upon formation, the zygote immediately initiates a complex sequence of events that establish the molecular conditions required for continued embryonic development. The behavior of the zygote is radically unlike that of either sperm or egg separately and is characteristic of a human organism. Thus, the scientific evidence supports the conclusion that a zygote is a human organism and that the life of a new human being commences at a scientifically well defined “moment of conception.” This conclusion is objective, consistent with the factual evidence, and independent of any specific ethical, moral, political, or religious view of human life or of human embryos. Maureen L. Condic, Ph.D., When Does Human Life Begin? A Scientific Perspective, WESTCHESTER INSTITUTE WHITE PAPER (October 2008),http://www.westchesterinstitute.net/images/wi_whitepaper_life_print.pdf).

  10. The Case for our Lives:Reversing Roe Really? “A person's a person, no matter how small.” -Dr. Seuss, Horton Hears a Who!-

  11. The Case for our Lives:Abortion is ‘health care’ involving a normal ‘responsible’ doctor-patient relationship. The Roe Court assumed that there would be a normal healthy physician-patient relationship in which the doctor would impart pertinent Information, and that decisions would be made through consultation between the physician and patient. "All these are factors the woman and her responsible physician necessarily will consider in consultation." Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. at 153

  12. The Case for our Lives:Abortion is ‘health care’ involving a normal ‘responsible’ doctor-patient relationship. • The Task Force concludes that there is no traditional or healthy physician-patient relationship between an abortion doctor at Planned Parenthood in South Dakota and the pregnant mother. The only time the abortion doctor sees the patient is in the room where the procedure is to be performed, after the woman has already committed to submitting to the abortion by signing the consent form. • Exposing Substandard Abortion Facilities: The Pervasiveness of True ‘Back Alley Practices in Abortion Clinics Today • The Rise of Off-Label Use of Chemical Abortion and “Telemed” Practice • Legislative De-Funding of Abortion Providers: States Respond to Widespread Abortion Industry Abuses: Medical Malpractice; Failure to Comply with Mandatory Child Abuse Reporting Laws • Abortion Facilities Regulations

  13. The Case for our Lives:Motherhood and child-rearing force upon the woman ‘a distressful life and future"? The Roe Court assumed that motherhood and child-rearing forced "upon the woman a stressful life and future" and that child-rearing could cause "mental and physical" health problems and "distress" of such a nature that abortion had to be available, and that the absence of legalized abortion was a detriment imposed upon the women by the state. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. at 153.

  14. The Case for our Lives:Motherhood and child-rearing force upon the woman ‘a distressful life and future"? Nowhere in the Roe decision did the Court mention the distress due to the pregnant mother losing her child to abortion. In fact, there is no mention of the great benefit and joys that the mother-child relationship brings to the mother, or the devastating loss and distress incurred by the mother who loses her child to abortion. The absence of mention of the nature of this loss and this profound distress is, in all likelihood, attributable to the fact that in 1973 there had not yet been adequate experience with the after-effects of abortion.

  15. The Case for our Lives:Motherhood and child-rearing force upon the woman ‘a distressful life and future"? Nowhere in the Roe decision did the Court mention the distress due to the pregnant mother losing her child to abortion. In fact, there is no mention of the great benefit and joys that the mother-child relationship brings to the mother, or the devastating loss and distress incurred by the mother who loses her child to abortion. The absence of mention of the nature of this loss and this profound distress is, in all likelihood, attributable to the fact that in 1973 there had not yet been adequate experience with the after-effects of abortion.

  16. The Case for our Lives:Motherhood and child-rearing force upon the woman ‘a distressful life and future"? “Large cohort studies linking abortion to the ‘hard’ outcomes of either suicide, psychiatric admission, or deliberate self-harm exist and are concerning.” * • See M. Gissler, E. Hemminki, J. Lonnqvist, Suicides After Pregnancy in Finland, 1987-94: Register Linkage Study, 313 BRIT.MED. J. 1431–34 (1996); C. Morgan, M. Evans, J. Peters, C. Currie, Suicides After Pregnancy, (Letter) 314 BRIT. MED. J., 902 (1997); A. Gilchrist, P. Hannaford, P. Frank, C. Kay, Termination of Pregnancy and Psychiatric Morbidity, 167 BRIT. J. PSYCHIATRY 243–48 (1995). See also SOUTH DAKOTA TASK FORCE TO STUDY ABORTION, REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE GOVERNOR AND STATE LEGISLATURE (December 2005), available at http://www.dakotavoice.com/Docs/South%20Dakota%20Abortion%20Task%20Force%20Report.pdf, concluding: The results of the four largest record based studies in the world have consistently revealed that women with a known history of abortion experience higher rates of mental health problems of various forms when compared to women without a known abortion history. Id. at 43.

  17. The Case for our Lives:An abortion decision is truly voluntary and fully informed? • Informed Consent • Fetal pain • Ultrasound – Nova Health v. Pruitt • Pre-term Birth • Adverse Mental & Physical Consequences • Breast Cancer Link • Coercion • Adoption • Baby Moses laws • Hospice Care

  18. The Case for our Lives:An abortion decision is truly voluntary and fully informed? a. Caseyheld that laws requiring physicians to disclosure truthful, non-misleading information to women seek-ing abortions do not pose a substantial obstacle to a woman’s decision to terminate her pregnancy. Casey, 505 U.S. at 882 (plurality opinion). (i) “A requirement that a doctor give a woman certain information as part of obtaining her consent to an abortion is, for constitutional purposes, no dif-ferent from a requirement that a doctor give certain specific information about any medical procedure.” Id. at 884; see also Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124, 157 (2007) (recognizing the State’s valid inter-est in regulating the “integrity and ethics of the medical profession”). (ii) Informed consent requirements that “facili-tate[] the wise exercise of [the right recognized in Roe] cannot be classified as an interference” with it. Casey, 505 U.S. at 887 (plurality opinion). b. Caseyupheld provisions of an informed consent law substantially similar to that at issue here: requiring a physician to inform a woman at least 24 hours prior to an abortion of, inter alia, the “probable gestational age of the unborn child” and availability of printed materials “describing the fetus.” Id. at 881. c. Non-substantial incidental effects of an informed consent law are not enough to constitute an undue burden on the right recognized in Roe. (i) Permissible incidental effects include making an abortion more inconvenient or expensive to obtain. Id. at 874 (“The fact that a law which serves a valid purpose, one not designed to strike at the right itself, has the incidental effect of making it more difficult or more expensive to procure an abortion cannot be enough to invalidate it.”)

  19. The Case for our Lives:An abortion decision is truly voluntary and fully informed? • Texas Abortion Providers v. Lakey, 667 F.3d 570 (5th Cir. 2012) • Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota v. Rounds, 530 F.3d 724 (8th Cir. 2008) (en banc) (Rounds II); and Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota v. Rounds, 686 F.3d 889 (8th Cir. 2008) (en banc) (Rounds IV) • Lakeyand the Rounds cases analyze Casey in the context of an informed consent—and hold Casey did not render informed consent statutes unconstitutional.

  20. The Case for our Lives:The risk to the women's health and life was ‘far greater in carrying the child to full term’ than in having an abortion? Thorp, Scientifica study (2012): “Reardon and Coleman [41] just published an article which looked at maternal mortality for an epoch of 25 years using Danish birth and death records. Their cohort consisted of 463,473 women and they used TOP in the first pregnancy as the exposure of interest, controlling for pregnancy outcomes in subsequent gestations. For women having TOP at <12 weeks, cumulative mortality rates were higher from 180 days to 10 years from the index pregnancy. The association between TOP and cumulative mortality was similar but stronger for TOP >12 weeks gestation. The comparison group was women who delivered after 20 weeks gestation. While far from definitively answering the question, the linkage study does cast doubt on the claim that TOP is safer than pregnancy continuation”

  21. The Case for our Lives:A woman faces significant difficulties as a result of a cultural stigma of unwed motherhood? • PRCs widely available offering free services without stigma • Movies celebrate out-of-wedlock pregnancy • Baby Moses (safe haven) laws available in all 50 states

  22. The Case for our Lives:ROE 2.0: Planned Parenthood v. Casey In Casey, the Court said that Roe should not be overturned merely because its original rationale might have been wrong. Instead, the Court held that more was needed to justify overturning Roe because women had come to “rely” upon abortion as a backup to failed contraception. In other words, Roe must be reaffirmed because of women’s “reliance interest” in abortion. The recognition of the “reliance interest” changed the manner in which the Court maintained control over the abortion issue, as well as how abortion proponents are advancing their pro-abortion cause in the name of democracy and “reproductive health.”

  23. The Case for our Lives:2013: The Way Forward • Affirmatively protect the unborn child within the context of abortion (fetal pain, PBA laws, viability laws, sex selection law) • Affirmatively protect the unborn child outside the context of abortion (Born Alive Acts, Fetal Homocide statutes, bans on ESCR) • Reduce abortions as much as possible • Protect women from dangers and risks of abortion • Limit the scope of the abortion license at law • Educate public re the danger and risks of abortion • Create ‘test cases’ with various objectives, such as improving medical regulations, limiting the sweep of Roe and Doe, demonstrating the contadictions of Roe, and educating the public • State constitutional amendments to educate the public and reverse adverse state court decisions

  24. The Case for our Lives:Reversing Roe Really? cham⋅pi⋅on noun 1. a person who has defeated all opponents in a competition or series of competitions, so as to hold first place: the heavyweight boxing champion. 2. anything that takes first place in competition: the champion of a cattle show. 3. an animal that has won a certain number of points in officially recognized shows: This dog is a champion. 4. a person who fights for or defends any person or cause: a champion of the oppressed. 5. a fighter or warrior. verb (used with object) 6. to act as champion of; defend; support: to champion a cause. 7. Obsolete. to defy. adjective 8. first among all contestants or competitors. 9. Informal. first-rate. Origin: 1175–1225; ME < OF < LL campiōn- (s. of campiō) < WGmc *kampiōn-, equiv. to kamp- battle (< L campus field, battlefield) + -iōn- n. suffix; cf. OE cempa warrior, etc. Related forms:-cham⋅pi⋅on⋅less, adjective -cham⋅pi⋅on⋅like, adjective Synonyms:1. winner, victor. 4. defender, protector. 6. maintain, fight for, advocate. Antonyms:1. loser.

  25. Jubilee Campaign, Law of Life Project:Our Vision for Championing the Right to Life Around the World "Legally defending worldwide in all legal fora the right to life and dignity of the human being from biological conception until natural death in all matters where such a defense is required."

  26. Jubilee Campaign, Law of Life Project: • Establishing through lawful process the juridical existence of the human person from conception to natural death. • Constrain human subject experimentation within universally accepted principles governing experiments on human subjects. • Oppose “forced abortion” in all of its forms. • Progressively regulate and ultimately end legal protection for so-called “elective abortion”, whether performed surgically or chemically. • End direct or indirect governmental funding of abortion. • Defend the rights of biological mothers and children involved in surrogacy arrangements. • Oppose active euthanasia (mercy killing) and physician-assisted suicide • Defend the health care right of conscience. • Defend pregnancy resource centers. • Develop and sustain the “Arm the Advocates for Life” training program

  27. The Case for our Lives:Reversing Roe Really? Samuel B. Casey, General Counsel, Advocates International QUESTIONS & COMMENTS

  28. The Case for our Lives:Reversing Roe Really? Samuel B. Casey, Managing Director & General Counsel, Jubilee Campaign, Law of Life Project

More Related