ChristiansUnite Forums

Woman must be informed of unborn child's pain? 
House to vote on bill that requires giving facts before allowing abortion

The Christian Medical Association is urging passage of a federal bill to inform women considering an abortion of potential pain their babies can experience after 20 weeks of development.

"One thing both sides of this issue should be able to agree upon is that women should be fully informed about the medical science concerning their developing babies," said Dr. David Stevens, CEO of the 17,000-member association.

The House is expected to vote on the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act, H.R. 6099, next week.

Stevens said the scientific findings in the measure are "clear and compelling."

"Women deserve to know exactly what an abortion involves for their baby," he said. "Imagine the heartbreak a woman would experience after being led to believe that her 22-week developing baby is simply a 'blob of tissue' only to learn after an abortion that her baby likely experienced excruciating pain. This bill sets the record straight and makes sure women are provided with the facts."

The bill's findings – reflecting testimony by scientific experts, including Drs. Kanwdfbet S. Anand and Jeanne Wright – note that at least by 20 weeks after fertilization, an unborn child has the physical structures necessary to experience pain.

"There is substantial evidence that by 20 weeks after fertilization, unborn children draw away from certain stimuli in a manner which in an infant or an adult would be interpreted as a response to pain," a draft of the bill states.

Anesthesia, the experts point out, routinely is administered to unborn children who have developed 20 weeks or more after fertilization and undergo prenatal surgery.

"There is substantial evidence that the abortion methods most commonly used 20 weeks or more after fertilization cause substantial pain to an unborn child, whether by dismemberment, poisoning, penetrating or crushing the skull, or other methods," the bill states.

Dr. Gene Rudd, an obstetrician with the CMA, noted the bill cites laws protecting animals from inhumane treatment, while a developing human has no such protections.

"What does this say about our blindness to the humanity of our developing babies?" he asked.

Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., issued a statement yesterday in support of the bill, saying he intends to "seek unanimous consent that the Senate take up and pass this critical piece of legislation."

Brownback is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and chairman of the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights.

No matter what the FACTS will show/prove.... there will be selfish people who won't care about anyone but themselves and still want to have the abortion.

That is very true, sister. I hope that this bill does get through though. If it saves the life of just one baby it will be well worth it.

I agree with both of you.  If they are considering an abortion they are thinking selfishly anyways....but if one can be saved then there is one less in the biohazard bag.

Let's take this a step further. Since baby murder is still (unfortunately) legal, let's make all selfish, baby-killing mothers (I use the term mother loosely here) watch videos of aborted fetuses, dead babies, what happens to dead babies, and partial-birth abortions. Let's force them to feel like utter crap before, during, and after. Perhaps we could appeal to the people carrying these little souls that they are making a grave (pun intended) mistake through visually seeing what they are about to do -- commit murder.

When will people realize that abortion is possibly the sickest act a woman can commit. Fathers of these babies should be forced to watch the videos as well, unless the father is a dead beat and cannot be found.

I am 100% opposed to abortion even in the case of rape, because the innocent little soul in that mother's womb should not be killed to pay for the sins of the father/rapist. Full stop.

Unborn Child Pain Bill Fails in House

The Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act, a bill which would require that women who have passed the twenty-week mark of their pregnancy to be told that their child could experience pain during an abortion, failed to garner the necessary two-thirds vote needed for approval in the House.

Support for the bill was solid -- the vote ended up 250-162, however, fell short of the two-thirds vote required for approval under the parliamentary procedure employed.

Family Research Council's Tony Perkins, though encouraged that House leadership brought the bill up for a vote, was clearly disappointed at the result saying, "It is unconscionable that Members chose to keep women in the dark about the pain their unborn child could experience during an abortion. If unborn children are routinely given anesthesia for surgery, surely mothers considering abortion should be given information that their unborn child can experience pain during an abortion."

In suggesting the dire need for passage of this legislation, Dr. David Stevens of the Christian Medical Association (CMA) had asked for lawmakers and those against the legislation to, “... Imagine the heartbreak a woman would experience after being led to believe that her 22-week developing baby is simply a ‘blob of tissue only to learn after an abortion that her baby likely experienced excruciating pain.”

According to LifeNews, NARAL issued a statement prior to yesterday's vote in which it said that it did not plan to oppose the bill because "women deserve access to all the information relevant to their reproductive health decisions."

Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas has given the bill his endorsement, urging his colleagues in the House last week to “pass the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act next week,” and going further by saying “if they do, I intend to seek unanimous consent that the Senate take up and pass this critical piece of legislation.”

Whether or not the bill comes up in the Senate now is unclear following the outcome in the House.

It was probably argued that it would be "cruel and unusual punishment" upon the mother for her to learn the truth.

Yep, wouldn't want to cause her undo stress that might make her change her mind against abortions.