The House Judiciary Committee passed the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. http://www.nationalrighttolifenews.org/news/2013/06/u-s-house-judiciary-committee-approves-nationwide-protection-for-pain-capable-unborn-children-20-to-12/
The Act would provide protection for unborn children capable of feeling pain, beginning at 20 weeks after fertilization. The full House is expected to take up the bill next week.
Richard M.
A study by Elard Koch, et. al. maternal death rate in Chile over the past few decades shows that the downward trend in maternal mortality rate was not slowed by the prohibition of abortion in 1989, contrary to assertions that maternal mortality rates will increase where abortion is made illegal. The study, called “Women’s Education Level, Maternal Health Facilities, Abortion Legislation and Maternal Deaths: A Natural Experiment in Chile from 1957 to 2007,” is available on the PLOS One website, an open access journal. According to an article on LifeNews.com, the study has been criticized on methodological grounds by the Guttmacher Institute. The authors have replied to the Guttmacher criticism.
It should be noted that the study does not assert that the change in abortions laws decreased maternal morality rate. It only asserts that the change in law did not slow down an already occurring annual reduction in maternal morality.
In What Happens to Women Who Are Denied Abortions, the New York Times writes about a study finding women who are denied abortions have no more emotional and mental health problems after the birth of the child than women who have abortions. The women also regularly bond with their child. The study finds, however, that the women and their children are likely to experience adverse economic consequences from the unwanted pregnancy – at least if they choose not to place the child with another family through adoption. So why isn’t the right answer to encourage adoption instead of abortion? The results of the study do not appear to be published since it is ongoing at this time.
Over on the Human Life Review blog, John M. Grondelski, former associate dean of the School of Theology, at Seton Hall University poses the question Is Ruth Bader Ginsburg Getting Mellow in Her Old Age? His comments accord with those of UFL member Sam Calhoun in his presentation critiquing the Siegel-Greenhouse book, Before Roe v. Wade.
For updates about the relationship between governmental policy and bioethics (with a Catholic focus), the National Catholic Bioethics Center published the Washington Insider. It is produced quarterly by Richard Doerflinger, Associate Director of the USCCB Secretariat of Pro-life Activities, and William Saunders, Senior Vice President and Senior Counsel of Americans United for Life.
Much of the information about policy and research is useful for non-Catholics.For instance, in the recent issue Saunders refers to the the following review article:
Thorp, John M. Jr. ”Public Health Impact of Legal Termination of Pregnancy in the US: 40 Years Later.” Scientifica. Volume 2012 (2012), Article ID 980812, 16 pages. http://dx.doi.org/10.6064/2012/980812/. Thorp is from the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
Here is the most Summer 2013 issue of Washington Insider.
