Patterico's Pontifications


Full Footage Released of Baby from Video Fiorina Described in Debate

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:49 pm

TIME Magazine:

The video that Carly Fiorina graphically described at the last Republican presidential debate, depicting a moving fetus on a table following an apparent abortion, was released online in its entirety Tuesday morning, according to Gregg Cunningham, the founder of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, who collected the footage.

Cunningham, an anti-abortion activist, declined to identify the date, location or authors of the video in an interview with TIME Monday night, saying his group makes agreements of confidentiality in an effort to acquire images of abortions. He also made no claim that the images shown in the video had anything to do with Planned Parenthood, the organization that Fiorina and others have targeted for federal defunding. “I am neither confirming or denying the affiliation of the clinic who did this abortion,” Cunningham said.


The full source video, which is extremely graphic, lasts about 13 minutes, and shows a fetus being extracted from the mother, placed in a metal bowl, prodded with medical instruments and handled by someone in the room. At times the fetus appears to move, and at other times it appears to have a pulse. There are no images on the full video of any attempt to harvest the brain of the fetus, and there is no sound. Cunningham said the jump cuts in the video are the result of the camera being turned off and on.

Cunningham says he is confident the procedure was an abortion, and not a miscarriage, owing to the lack of medical treatment offered to the fetus. He said he estimated the age of the fetus at about 17 and a half weeks. “It is unimaginably more horrifying than the clip that we licensed for CMP to use and that Carly Fiorina made reference to in the debate,” Cunningham said.

He’s not kidding. It is unbelievably horrifying. If you want to watch it, it is linked at the TIME article. I will not link it or embed it here. The delivery is shown in graphic detail, with the tiny baby emerging slowly at first and then falling out of the woman’s vagina. It is writhing unmistakably as a pair of hands grabs it, the head allowed to flop around, and is taken and tossed in a metal bowl, where is writhes further, and is occasionally poked at by a pair of scissors.

Of the footage used in the Central for Medical Progress video, Amanda Marcotte told us there were “a few seconds of footage of what appears to be a stillborn fetus. The provenance of the video is unknown, there is no audio on the video, and there is no indication that the fetus was aborted.” If you can stomach it, watch the video. The baby was most certainly not stillborn.

But I truly recommend that you pass on watching it. Take it from me.

48 Responses to “Full Footage Released of Baby from Video Fiorina Described in Debate”

  1. Thank you for not embedding it. I can take no more.

    felipe (56556d)

  2. Thank you, Patterico and Dana, for all your good work on this.

    nk (dbc370)

  3. Actually, I think anyone who supports abortion or is pro-choice should watch the video. As Cunningham observes about CMP’s David Daleiden and the PP videos: What he has managed to accomplish is to shift the terms of the debate away from choice to a visualization of what is being chosen.”

    If you’re going to choose to support something, it’s good to know precisely what it is that you are supporting.

    Dana (86e864)

  4. But they will rationalize this quite readily. “Oh, it’s just a bunch of cell.” Otherwise they have to face up to the horror that they condone. You end up soulless, like happyfascist, who has to take sleeping pills to quiet the demons in his addled brain.

    Gazzer (124d91)

  5. Terrifying footage, but as you quoted, the full footage discredits Carly.

    j (277742)

  6. The LA Times refers to newborns as fetal tissue. Nothing to see in an “embarrassing undercover video surfaced this summer that showed executives nonchalantly discussing the donation of fetal tissue to researchers.”

    Yes, this donation is for science.

    AZ Bob (34bb80)

  7. Obama blocked a BORN ALIVE BILL in the ILLINOIS SENATE, that required MEDICAL ASSISTANCE to any CHILD BORN whom had SURVIVED an attempted ABORTION. QUITE SIMPLE NOT ROCKET SCIENCE. The CHILD HAS BEEN BORN. The BABY is ALIVE and despite any REASON for it’s survival and despite the WISHES of Mommy, Daddy or Barry Obama, the CHILD has beaten the wished and attempts of THE ABORTIONIST.
    Because Obama is a sick freak and an immoral bastard Marxist.
    If one of Obama’s beautiful daughters was to be hit by a car whilst riding her bike, with a helmet on…….SHOULD MEDICAL ASSISTANCE by anyone THERE, be REQUIRED as law and morality????
    Obama willfully and willingly BLOCKED a law that REQUIRED THE DOCTOR to render aid to a LIVE BABY.
    Jill Stanek, CHRIST HOSPITAL…CHICAGO Illinois, testified as to OBAMA’S MENTAL ILLNESS before CONGRESS.

    Gus (7cc192)

  8. P.S. Obama acted in his capacity as an Illinois Senator, out of the most TWISTED and BASE instincts. HIS BIZARRE EMOTIONALL DISTURBED POLITICAL IDEOLOGY and, FOR POLITICAL SUPPORT from freakish GUBMINT dependent GROUPS.

    Gus (7cc192)



    Gus (7cc192)

  10. I didn’t have the stomach to watch the whole thing, but I checked a few minutes to see if it was clear that the voices on the video were speaking with American accents. Unfortunately, there doesn’t appear to be any audio on the video. I do note in passing that the mother of the child is apparently black and her abortionist appears to be white. Fancy that, huh?

    I’m sure Planned Parenthood’s next step will be to insist that this video comes from somewhere outside of the U.S. As if it hasn’t been apparent the last couple of months that PP’s staff treat babies every bit as callously as the abortionists in this video.

    JVW (ba78f9)

  11. 10. …Unfortunately, there doesn’t appear to be any audio on the video.

    JVW (ba78f9) — 9/29/2015 @ 11:44 pm

    A spokesman for the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform said they sign confidentiality agreements with their sources that require them to strip away anything that might identify the abortion clinic. That includes any audio files. All the spokesman would confirm is that this is an aborted 17.5 week old infant. That his organization allowed the CMP to use it to show what a fetus/infant at that gestational age looks like. The only condition they put on the use of the video was that the CMP clearly mark the video so that people would know the source so they wouldn’t conflate it with the infant with the beating heart that Holly O’Donnell was describing. The spokesman said he is satisfied that the CMP fully met that requirement.

    Which blows the allegation that the CMP deceptively edited these videos
    completely out of the water. The LHMFM splices stock footage into their
    reports all the time and never identifies it as such.

    The Washington Examiner notes that now the complete video has been released, Carly Fiorina is entirely vindicated.

    Here are the facts about the Planned Parenthood videos and Carly Fiorina’s remarks

    …Fiorina, in the second debate, gave powerful remarks about Planned Parenthood’s barbarism. I’ve flagged three elements of her statement

    I dare Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama to watch these tapes, watch [A] a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking, while someone says [B] we have to keep it alive [C] to harvest its brain. This is about the character of our nation. And if we will not stand up and force President Obama to veto this bill, shame on us.

    …But contrary to the tone of many “fact checks” on her remarks, everything she was describing was in this Planned Parenthood video. There was a baby dying on a plate in an abortion clinic. There were abortion-industry employees talking about the organ-preserving benefits of not using feticide. There was an account of a baby, whose heart was beating, being cut up for his brain.

    Steve57 (59a8e4)

  12. Terrifying footage, but as you quoted, the full footage discredits Carly.

    j (277742) — 9/29/2015 @ 8:34 pm

    I want them to run with that. Carly is discredited because the whole truth is much worse.
    Knock yourself out.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  13. Abort the republican senate.

    mg (31009b)

  14. lifeydoodles really love these sick graphic images even if they have nothing to do with planned parenthood they love love love splicing them in

    it’s so creepy

    they got away from it fir awhile but these sick images are like crack for them

    happyfeet (831175)

  15. *for* awhile I mean

    happyfeet (831175)

  16. So rubio skips the PP vote. What a classless moron. He should get zero votes from conservatives. What a party. fricking disgusting group of chamber of commerce inbred pigs.

    mg (31009b)

  17. i’m not sure that’s fair Mr. mg he really is a big big lifeydoodle

    there’s video at the link and he speaks in his super-emotive high school forensics cadence so you know he’s at least trying to sound sincere

    happyfeet (831175)

  18. HF can’t help but spew his hate and lies. That’s all he has. Put him in the moderation gulag.

    John Hitchcock (aba2bb)

  19. you’re such a grumpy grump

    the lifeydoodles learned, we thought, that shoving sick images into people’s faces wasn’t effective so they changed their messaging

    now carlycakes is actively co-branding with this resurgence of the crude argument-by-sick-disgusting-images tactic, which is a lil problematic I think cause by doing so in the context of a presidential campaign, she’s also yoking the Republican Party and its brand to this obscene tactic of using disgusting imagery in lieu of actual evidence and logic

    this is no bueno for many reasons

    the number one reason is cause of failmerica’s problems are so so so big and terence this is stupid stuff

    we’re talking about whether or not a woman who chooses to have an abortion should be free to donate the fetus to science for so they can do research

    duh hello of course she should be able to do that

    the alternative is just to dispose of the remains in a bag and shove it into an incinerator

    the number two reason is cause the Team R agenda is being driven by a juvenile propaganda campaign

    it’s embarrassing to watch

    happyfeet (831175)

  20. Nah, i’ll take your word in lieu of garish certainty.

    Judgement will fall indiscriminantly and without delay.

    DNF (51a50d)

  21. 16. The is no reform of government on the way or being sketched on drawing boards, our only hope is renewal by fire.

    DNF (51a50d)

  22. At least half the adults I see everyday are worth a lot less than an infant on a table struggling for air.

    I’ll lose no sleep over the goners.

    DNF (51a50d)

  23. Time magazine. Democrat media looking to improve Planned Parenthood’s position, but got a scoopful of dirt on them inspite of themselves?

    Is the media dam busted? Fiorina busted it open as a national story, but that doesn’t mean the press would watch the video, much less show it.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  24. 250-odd Trillion dollars in notional wealth in the world an 13 of those Trillions vanished in September.

    Reap the whirlwind, losers.

    DNF (51a50d)

  25. I have two daughters. Both are professional women, and delayed having children. One simply waited too long and it’s not going to happen. The other younger one had to through IVF but finally managed to carry a baby to full term–our first grandchild.

    Being a thoroughly modern woman, she naturally availed herself of the “sonogram show” clinics now available. When she visited home during her pregnancy (we live in Southern California–she’s lived in Europe for the last 15 years) she scheduled sessions at the local sonogram clinic. We saw the fetus at age 3 months and again at 6 or 7 months. Being an old school sort of guy, I probably would have preferred to skip the show. But as the child grew and moved and struggled, it was clear that that was little human in there—and this was well before the child was delivered.

    We shouldn’t kid ourselves about what’s involved in late term abortions. Sometimes they are medically necessary. Choices have consequences as the fellow in the Oval Office enjoys reminding us.

    Comanche Voter (1d5c8b)

  26. Carly has baited the left and they are responding as expected. Every time they deny the truth of what she says, they get an even worse video.

    Late term abortions are almost never necessary and if they are, they are called “C sections.” The most frequent indications I’ve seen are young women with undiagnosed mitral stenosis who go into heart failure in the third trimester as blood flow to the placenta exceeds the mitral valve capacity. Mitral stenosis is so rare nowadays that I have not seen a case in many years. If any show up now, as the last couple I saw years ago, they are Mexican immigrants who had no prenatal care.

    The second group are women with hormone sensitive cancer. This is almost always first trimester. I have a couple of examples in my book. One woman refused abortion and carried her baby until we did a C section on her to end the pregnancy, The baby was viable and she had melanoma. She was alive and disease free 25 years later. That’s another story.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  27. You’d think these clowns would have learned from O’Keefe and
    Breitbart. They release what amounts to a “trailer”, shorter than
    the entire thing because that’s the point. In order to be shorter
    than the entire thing, it is, necessarily, edited. So the clowns
    hang themselves claiming the thing was misleading. And then,
    without fail, the entire thing comes out and demonstrates it’s
    actually entirely true.

    Richard Aubrey (27bcd2)

  28. #16, mg’s denunciation of Marco Rubio is accurate, but this Rubio isn’t the same Rubio I supported in the Florida legislature, and in his run for the US Senate. This Marco Rubio went to Washington turned his coat and was absorbed into the GOPe’s Collective.

    Mitch McConnell and John McCain quickly apprenticed Rubio to the dark side and first used his bright fresh-scrubbed face to front for the Dreamer Amnesty scam. Next Rubio was selected to again betray his constituency and supply the deciding 60th vote to approve ObamaTrade.

    Now, he’s the GOP establishment’s pet minority poodle snapping and snarling at Donald Trump. Rubio’s loyalty is to Mitch McConnell and to the cabal of old GOP establishment dragons who’ve maintained their high positions and taxpayer paid privileges by promising conservative reforms while campaigning and then once safely in office stabbing Conservative voters in the back with unrelieved regularity.

    These old vampires wear Ronald Reagan masks on TV but when no one is looking they lurk in the shadows making common cause with dirty bastards like Obama, Holder, and Clinton, deathly afraid of being exposed to the light of day.

    ropelight (5a1614)

  29. I am in favor of abortion being legal, though I also think that’s a decision to be made at the State level. I have scant patience for most of “my side” and the way they have been dealing with these tapes and the public and political reaction to them is a prime example of why.

    The way they reacted to the Kermit Gosnell abattoir, and the political cost that that reaction bore, should have taught them something, but apparently didn’t. They did manage to keep Gosnell’s ghoulish practice and trial from being the major coast-to-coast headline-for-weeks it could have been, but I’m not at all sure how much good it did them. And because they fought the subsequent efforts to “regulate” abortion clinics instead of viewing them as inevitable after a catastrophic failure like their failure to detect and deal with Gosnell, those regulations were put in place almost entirely by their political opponents, with no input from the pro-choice side. And any effort to repeal those regulations is going to offer the pro-life people a chance to put the horrors of Gosnell’s practice in front of the public, and because the sensation got buried it will be new to a lot of undecided voters.

    I think the pro-choice activists haven’t figured this out, which makes them about as smart as so many mollusks.

    They’re doing kind of the same thing with Planned Parenthood. The videos are shocking, unless (like me) you are firmly convinced that a newborn isn’t human yet (in which case they are still seriously distasteful). By fighting over every interpretation of every nuance, the idiots at Planned Parenthood are going to keep those videos in from of the public’s eyes for a lot longer than they would other wise be. They need to accept that they screwed up, take their lumps, and let the outrage die down.

    I think we are going to see abortion made broadly illegal in most States during my lifetime. I think that’s objectively wrong, but not horrible, but I’m a male, my wife is post-menapausal, and I don’t stray. It doesn’t affect me directly. I think that the people it does affect will be able to work their way around the restrictions, if they really need to. I expect that abortion will remain legal in a few very Liberal States and possibly Nevada, and if the pro-choice side has any smarts (which, I’m sorry to say, they may not) they will spend some money buying bus tickets instead of fighting battles they have already lost.

    But, make no mistake, if abortion is broadly outlawed it will be at least as much the doing of arrogant, shrill, and stupid pro-choice advocates as it was anything that the pro-life side did.

    C. S. P. Schofield (ab2cdc)

  30. …if abortion is broadly outlawed it will be…the doing of arrogant, shrill, and stupid…advocates… on both sides.


    ropelight (5a1614)

  31. This Marco Rubio went to Washington turned his coat and was absorbed into the GOPe’s Collective.

    I have watched this over and over in local, state and national politics. It is why I am comfortable with the three non-politicians who are leading the GOP primary race. Tom Coburn is a good example of a citizen political who should have stayed around longer but I don’t know the status of his prostate cancer.

    I don’t like Trump’s blustering manner and favor Carly or even, to my surprise, Carson. We could do a lot worse than one of those three. This is not just Washington. I was part of a reform group in my local city of Mission Viejo and we managed to boot out the mildly corrupt city council and replaced them with citizen legislators who promptly made new friends and the reform movement collapsed. It was quite an education and I had been involved in medical society lobbying in the state and federal area for years.

    Like power, politics corrupts. Term limits should be in the Constitution. The problem is that this puts the staffs in even more power than they are now. The only solution is to downsize government. It may take a revolution to do that.

    I’m reading Charles Murray’s new book and highly recommend it.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  32. 28. The best friend of one of my sisters was found to have esophageal melanoma at the end of the first trimester. This being thirty years ago she chose against chemo.

    At the end she had no desire to hold her baby, only wishing “to see God”. A thoroughly beautiful young woman.

    DNF (51a50d)

  33. Ropelight;

    Please don’t miss my point. Abortion rights are being LOST because of stupid tactics and shrill posturing by abortion rights advocates. Pro-Life advocacy would not be nearly as strong if pro-choice partisans had not been making basic tactical mistakes for a long time.

    C. S. P. Schofield (a25953)

  34. 28. …Late term abortions are almost never necessary and if they are, they are called “C sections.” The most frequent indications I’ve seen are young women with undiagnosed mitral stenosis who go into heart failure in the third trimester as blood flow to the placenta exceeds the mitral valve capacity. Mitral stenosis is so rare nowadays that I have not seen a case in many years. If any show up now, as the last couple I saw years ago, they are Mexican immigrants who had no prenatal care.

    The second group are women with hormone sensitive cancer. This is almost always first trimester. I have a couple of examples in my book. One woman refused abortion and carried her baby until we did a C section on her to end the pregnancy, The baby was viable and she had melanoma. She was alive and disease free 25 years later. That’s another story.

    Mike K (90dfdc) — 9/30/2015 @ 6:45 am

    I’ve been following the issue with intense interest for twenty years, for reasons I will keep to myself. I’ve talked to a lot of Catholic doctors with years of experience who say they’ve never seen a case where any abortion was necessary to save the life of the mother.

    For instance, in 2009 a nun at a Catholic hospital in Phoenix excommunicated herself (latae sententiae) by approving an abortion. The local press made it as if she had no choice in the matter, and that the Catholic Church was persecuting her for saving the woman’s life. But a leading Catholic neonatologist and bioethicist weighed in and said not so.

    …Catholic Healthcare West, which oversees St. Joseph’s hospital, sent a letter to Olmsted Monday defending McBride’s and the hospital’s actions.

    “If there had been a way to save the pregnancy and still prevent the death of the mother, we would have done it,” the letter says. “We are convinced there was not.”

    However, Dr. Paul A. Byrne, Director of Neonatology and Pediatrics at St. Charles Mercy Hospital in Toledo, Ohio, disputes the claim that an abortion is ever a procedure necessary to save the life of the mother, or carries less risk than birth.

    In an interview with LifeSiteNews, Dr. Byrne said, “I don’t know of any [situation where abortion is necessary to save the life of the mother].

    “I know that a lot of people talk about these things, but I don’t know of any. The principle always is preserve and protect the life of the mother and the baby.”

    Byrne has the distinction of being a pioneer in the field of neonatology, beginning his work in the field in 1963 and becoming a board-certified neonatologist in 1975. He invented one of the first oxygen masks for babies, an incubator monitor, and a blood-pressure tester for premature babies, which he and a colleague adapted from the finger blood pressure checkers used for astronauts.

    Byrne emphasized that he was not commentating on what the woman’s particular treatment should have been under the circumstances, given that she is not his patient.

    “But given just pulmonary hypertension, the answer is no” to abortion, said Byrne.

    Byrne emphasized that the unborn child at 11 weeks gestation would have a negligible impact on the woman’s cardiovascular system. He said that pregnancy in the first and second trimesters would not expose a woman with even severe pulmonary hypertension – which puts stress on the heart and the longs – to any serious danger.

    A pregnant mother’s cardiovascular system does have “major increases,” but they only happen “in the last three months of pregnancy,” Byrne explained.

    The point of fetal viability is estimated at anywhere between 21 – 24 weeks, he indicated, at which point a baby can artificially be delivered and have a good shot at surviving. In the meantime the mother’s pulmonary hypertension could be treated, even by such simple things as eliminating salt from her diet, exercising, or losing weight.

    “It’s not going to be any extra stress on the mother that she can’t stand,” said Byrne. “Eventually you get to where the baby gets big enough that the baby can live outside the uterus and you don’t have to do an abortion.”

    “I am only aware of good things happening by doing that. I am not aware of anything bad happening to the mother because the baby was allowed to live.”

    This is an important point, and one I always wondered about when people argue for late term abortions because of some theoretical medical necessity. What woman’s health issue can only be treated if the mother knows the baby is dead, dead, deader than dead? Because Catholic hospitals will terminate a pregnancy when medically necessary. They just won’t terminate the life of the baby. They’ll monitor the situation, wait until the baby is viable, then artificially deliver the baby and care for it just as for any other premature baby.

    “The only reason to kill the baby at 11 weeks is because it is smaller,” which makes the abortion easier to perform, he said, not because the mother’s life is in immediate danger.

    “I’ve done this work just about as long as neonatology has existed,” said Byrne. “The key is we must protect and preserve life, and we have to do that from conception to the natural end.”

    I understand it’s more convenient to perform abortions. But convenience and necessity are worlds apart.

    It seems to me that if the abortion enthusiasts had a point, then Catholic hospitals would have worse medical outcomes than other hospitals. As far as I know they don’t, which if my impression is correct should end the debate.

    I expressed my disappointment in the House GOP on the Cecille Richards heavily edited truth thread. If I made my living as a congresscritter I would have had those figures at my finger tips at the hearing yesterday when she claimed abortion is health care. Which is about as believable as her prior claim that PP does mammograms. But then those losers were just going through the motions on their way to losing again on an issue they think they can just pretend to care about to appease the base.

    Steve57 (59a8e4)

  35. I should add that Catholic doctors and hospitals will perform procedures and treat underlying conditions with the intent of saving the life of the mother per the principle or doctrine of double effect (abbreviated as PDE or DDE) which may have the unintended effect of terminating the life of the unborn.

    In fact, that result may be entirely foreseeable.

    Applying double-effect principle in ectopic pregnancy

    …Again, the intent is to remove the cells which are attacking the health of the mother, not attack directly the fetal/embryonic person. The moral object/purpose of this intervention is to address damaged tissue and start the healing process. It is not to kill the embryonic person.

    In both situations, as well as in the surgical intervention the columnist accepts, other measures to allow the continuation of the pregnancy do not exist. These emergency circumstances then allow for the use of the moral reasoning known as the principle of double effect (or multiple outcomes) to address this type of tragedy. In all three measures, it is always affirmed there are two lives present. No one advances that an abortion is acceptable. These measures do not constitute an abortion.

    The church’s wisdom notes the tragedy and sadness the unintended, though foreseen, loss under these limited circumstances presents. It uses its wealth of reflection to reason how the matter can be addressed morally and both lives respected — the mother’s as well as the young fetus/embryo….

    The DDE also applies to the use of lethal force. Which is why Catholics aren’t pacifists. As long as the intent isn’t to directly kill it is morally acceptable to use deadly force. For instance it’s necessary to sink ships in war, but gunning down the survivors isn’t. Or in self defense it’s moral to use deadly force to save an innocent life. It’s entirely foreseeable and acceptable the attacker may almost certainly die.

    Steve57 (59a8e4)

  36. 35. “Abortion rights lost”

    Not much of mankind’s creation will endure in 2025.

    Humankind will survive but not without a tight scrape.

    DNF (51a50d)

  37. Nice attempt to deflect, “northerner”. That is a lie.

    JD (3b5483)

  38. A laughable one, JD.

    Steve57 (0977fe)

  39. votre remaque est interessante

    maroc (26cce9)

  40. If anybody shuts down the government because the budget does not include funding for Planned Parenthood, it will be the Democrats. But it will be an uphill battle, against a leg-tingling media, for the Republicans to get the message across to the great unwashed.

    nk (dbc370)

  41. JD, I was out and about, but this is why “northerner’s” attempt to claim this wasn’t an abortion is a howler of a lie.

    If you follow the link, the hack says no one would provide care for a 17.5 week old infant.

    …Greg Cunningham, the curator of the illegally obtained video and the founder of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, told Time magazine that it had to be an abortion “owing to the lack of medical treatment offered to the fetus.” The statement underscores the fact that Cunningham has no idea what he is talking about as the fetus is 17-18 weeks and hence pre viable so no one would render care. It is highly atypical to offer neonatal care before 23 weeks. A neonatologist who attempt to resuscitate a 17 week delivery would be considered unethical

    Her target audience is people who don’t know what they’re talking about. No one said a thing about resuscitation. Palliative care, or comfort care, is an ethical obligation.

    That precludes tossing the kid into a steel specimen tray and occasionally poking it with forceps to see if it’s dead yet.

    If this were a premature birth that would be extremely traumatizing for the mother. Dr. Jen Gunter says it would be unethical to attempt to resuscitate the infant at this age? The way they’re treating the infant and the mother is ten times worse. From the National Association of Neonatal Nurses (NANN) website concerning ethics:

    …Fundamental Nursing Principles in Patient Care

    1. The worth, integrity, dignity, uniqueness and human rights of patients, employers, colleagues, students, employees, parents and families of the infant will be respected regardless of ethnicity, gender, social/economic status or physical or mental challenges.
    2. Knowledge and skills will be used for the advancement of human welfare with consideration and respect for individual differences.
    3. The nurse’s primary responsibility is to the patient, whether an individual, group or family. Nurses strive to provide an environment of physical, emotional, social, and spiritual well-being.

    Now, I can’t watch the video. Not Capehart “Oh my delicate humanity!” can’t. YouTube has placed an age restriction on viewing the video. I don’t have a Google account nor am I willing to get a Google account. If anyone knows if it’s available where I can watch it without signing in I’ll watch it. But meanwhile TIME has a lot of people weighing in who also haven’t watched it so my comments are fair.

    …In an interview with TIME on Monday night, Cunningham said the fact that the fetus was not offered any medical treatment following the birth was evidence that the procedure was an abortion. But three leading neonatal doctors and an obstetrician who has studied premature births interviewed by TIME on Tuesday said that medical guidelines do not indicate a need for resuscitating a fetus born so young.

    Paul Holtrop, a neonatologist at Beaumont Health System in Michigan, who has published research on the survival rates for infants who have been resuscitated as early as 22 weeks, agreed that doctors would not attempt to intubate or ventilate a baby born at such an early gestational stage. “Nobody would resuscitate a baby at 17 and a half weeks,” he said. “The future is a certain death.”

    Perlman, who co-chaired a report for the American Academy of Pediatrics on the guidelines for resuscitating infants after birth, also said there would be no expectation of medical care. “The lower edge of viability is approximately 23 weeks,” Perlman explained. “Fetal heart rate is present from very early on. If you deliver and you have a heartbeat that is not inconsistent with a miscarriage.”

    *Jennifer Gunter, an obstetrician who wrote a book, The Preemie Primer, a guide for parents about premature birth, agreed. “If you resuscitate before 22 weeks, it’s because you thought the fetus was older,” she said. “The survival odds are so dismal.”

    John Kattwinkel, a professor emeritus of pediatrics at the University of Virginia, who co-chaired the Academy of Pediatrics report with Perlman, also said there is nothing that can be done for a fetus at 17 weeks, though like Holtrop he said he had not seen the video. “There is nothing that the medical team should do to prolong the baby’s clearly non-viable life,” he wrote in an email. “Fetuses will move and kick and have an audible heartbeat from midway through the first trimester, as any woman who has carried a baby in her uterus knows. And those activities will continue for a time if the fetus is born alive. But no one has ever saved the extrauterine life of a 17 week fetus. We have been able to move the threshold down to 23 weeks in some cases, and some will argue that 22 weeks may rarely be possible. But the chance of survival below that gestation is simply so remote that application of aggressive neonatal resuscitation and intensive care would be not only futile, but cruel.

    No one has mentioned resuscitation or intensive care except the people who are trying to muddy the waters. From the description of the video, is this infant being treated with dignity? Or for that matter the mother, as if the baby was wanted she’d be an emotional wreck. And whoever is poking her baby with medical implements would be making her condition worse. Both the mother and infant, as long as it lives, would be patients. And from Dana’s description neither is being treated as a patient. Is anybody looking out for anybody’s “physical, emotional, social, and spiritual well-being?”

    Not from Dana’s description. In fact, quite the opposite.

    That’s because this is an abortion.

    *I notice the obnoxious broad has toned it down when interviewed by TIME.

    Steve57 (59a8e4)

  42. Northener @ 38,

    Dr. Michael Kennedy begs to disagree:

    The videos are real, notwithstanding the local troll’s comments.

    Long ago, in 1969, I did some abortions. I was a surgery resident and was doing my time on GYN. Abortion in California had just become legal and the GYN residents at County were expected to do them. Since this was early, the method used was saline injection into the amniotic fluid which killed the fetus and caused the woman to go into labor. She would stay on the GYN admitting ward until the baby was expelled.

    I did some to be a part of the team. The GYN residents hated it and the County soon hired some non-resident MDs to do them. Those abortions were around 20 weeks, partly because the new law required a psych consult, etc. I watched expelled fetuses try to breathe and kicked their legs and moved their arms. We all did and hated it.

    The videos are real.

    Further, it’s unsurprising that Dr. Jen Gunter is the go-to for pro-aborts considering how hard she works to dehumanize babies in the womb:

    These are not “baby parts.” Whether a woman has a miscarriage or an abortion, the tissue specimen is called “products of conception.” In utero, i.e. during pregnancy, we use the term “embryo” from fertilization to ten weeks gestation and “fetus” from ten weeks to birth. The term baby is medically incorrect as it doesn’t apply until birth. Calling the tissue “baby parts” is a calculated attempt to anthropomorphize an embryo or fetus. It is a false image—a ten to twelve week fetus looks nothing like a term baby—and is medically incorrect.

    Hearing medical professionals talk casually about products of conception may seem distasteful to some, but not to doctors. Medical procedures are gory by nature. Surgeons routinely cut skin, saw bones, and lift the uterus out of the abdominal cavity and then put it back in. We stick our hands inside people and it is messy. We handle broken limbs, rotting flesh, and cancers that smell. We talk about this calmly because this is what we are trained to do. It doesn’t mean that we are heartless; it means we are professionals and this is our norm for a clinical conversation. There is no reason a conversation about products of conception requires more or less reverence than one about a kidney or a biopsy specimen.

    As Ed Morrisey observes:

    Planned Parenthood and Gunter want to dehumanize the fetus while commodifying the “products” because they are human. If they were not human, they would not provide value to Planned Parenthood in the marketplace.

    Dana (86e864)

  43. I would call Jen Gunter a soulless psychopathic [word of happyfeet], but that would be anthropomorphizing her.

    nk (dbc370)

  44. So is calling her a “her” but some things cannot be helped — the English language has its limitations.

    nk (dbc370)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3876 secs.