Monday, June 10, 2013

Big Abortion Omits Crucial Fact: Beatriz Went Into Spontaneous Labor!

I'd already blogged about the deceitfulness of the international abortion lobby referring to Beatriz's life-saving baby-sparing c-section as an "abortion."

Their argument was that since Beatriz's baby was "not viable" due to anencephaly, the c-section was actually a hysterotomy abortion, performed to deliver a  baby and then just let it die of prematurity.

Thanks to Melissa for providing links to this Spanish-language article, and this one, which certainly add an interesting big of information: Beatriz had already gone into labor when doctors elected to switch from a vaginal delivery to a c-section to preserve her health.  (Read the first one and the second one through Google Translate.)

Beatriz's pregnancy terminated -- the way pregnancies typically do -- when she went into labor. Doctors then chose the means of delivery -- vaginal or c-section -- most appropriate for the patient.

There not only was no abortion, there was no "pregnancy termination" that could be fatuously construed into an abortion.

What's the Spanish equivalent of "Liar, liar, pants on fire!"?
  1. The court specifically said that the baby's life was to be spared, and that the living baby was to be delivered at the moment that was best for both mother and child.
  2. The entire point of a hysterotomy is a dead baby. That is what distinguishes it from a c-section.
  3. Both scheduled and emergency c-sections have been routine means of delivering babies whose mothers health or life is at risk for nearly a century, and that includes delivering babies with fatal conditions.
  4. Even if the baby dies, be it from complications prematurity or from a terminal condition, that doesn't change the fact that a c-section performed for the mother's physical health is still a c-section performed for the mother's physical health. 
  5. When a woman spontaneously goes into labor after 24 weeks, as Beatriz did, there's no way you can construe it as an abortion, even were the baby to be stillborn. 
I've also learned that  Beatriz and her mother did go to the nursery and see the baby. I hope that they held her and gave her some love to make up for how long and how hard people were fighting to kill her.

Beatriz now can go on with her life knowing that in spite of all the ugliness, her daughter was treated with respect and dignity, and nobody put that child's life to a violent end.


Melissa said...

I suppose the contractions could have been Braxton-Hicks, but, even so, when you have a woman who has had a prior C-section, and she starts contracting, it makes sense to perform another C-section so that further complications don't develop. The lies that the abortion advocates are willing to tell on this story (and on the story of Savita) have made me start to triple-check anything that comes out of an abortion advocate's mouth. Thank you for the work you do here. You are one of the few sources in the abortion debate that I regard as very trustworthy.

Christina Dunigan said...

They make pretty fast and loose with facts. They'll omit crucial facts and/or invent "facts" that suit their narrative.

The Beatriz case totally screwed up their narrative, and instead of skulking away with their tails between their legs they stay at it like a dog with a dead squirrel.

Kris said...

Hi Christina,

I messaged you on FB, but I'm an assistant editor with Live Action News & Opinion. Can we get permission to reprint this article, with proper credit and link back? And in the future, what's the best way to contact you? Thanks! Kristi Burton Brown

Christina Dunigan said...

Hi, Kris!

You may reprint anything, anytime, just let me know what and when, and provide a linkback and byline.

If you just want to tell me you're doing a reprint, postinig a response on the article is the easiest way to let me know. If you want to contact me for another reason you can use my email, cdunigan at hotmail dot com.