Archive for the Fetal Homicide Category

1970’s Commission looks into fetal experimentation and research

Posted in Abortion History, Fetal Development, fetal heartbeat, Fetal Homicide, Fetal Organs, Fetal Pain, fetal Remains, fetal research, Fetal Stem Cell, Fetal Surgery, Fetal Tissue, The Ryan Program with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 27, 2018 by saynsumthn

Some abortion survivors were kept alive almost a day for experimentation

Image: 10 week old Fetus kept alive via artificial womb (Image credit: Life Magazine Sep 10, 1965)

In part one of this series on fetal research, Live Action News detailed a number of experiments conducted on living abortion survivors. Due to the outrage over such experiments reported in the media in the 1970s, the National Research Act established the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The commission was chaired by Kenneth John Ryan, MD, an abortionist who also taught others how to do abortions.

IMage: Dr. Kenneth Ryan chaired commission on fetal research (Image credit: Harvard Gazette)

Dr. Kenneth Ryan chaired commission on fetal research (Image credit: Harvard Gazette)

A report published by the Harvard Gazette at the time of Ryan’s death states:

 President Jimmy Carter appointed Ken to chair the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research.

…When he became the Chief of Staff at the Boston Hospital for Women in 1973, one year after the Roe vs Wade decision, he established the first abortion service in a university hospital and included training in the necessary skills as a routine part of residency education. In 1975 Ken credentialed and granted admitting privileges to Dr. Kenneth Edelin, an African-American, even as he was under indictment for manslaughter in a politically motivated prosecution for performing a legal abortion at Boston City Hospital.

The Ryan Program, which bears the doctor’s name and partners with Planned Parenthood, was established in 1999 to train OB-GYN residents in abortion.

Dr. Paul Ramsey, a Professor of Religion at Princeton University, also served on the commission. He wrote a lengthy opinion in the section entitled, “Moral Issues in Fetal Research,” criticizing NIH definitions of life and death regarding the preborn child, with good reason:

The answer seems clear enough: the difference between the life and death of a human fetus/abortus should be determined substantially in the same way physicians use in making other pronouncements of death… the 1973 NIH proposed guidelines studiously refuses to speak of the previable fetus as “living” or having “life.” By studiously refusing to speak of a previable fetus/abortus who may still be medically “alive” and by leaving the determination of viability entirely to the discretion of physician researchers (not even excluding abortuses with respiration from being deemed previable and entered into experimentation), the American guidelines can be faulted for lack of definitional clarity. Indeed, if and only if the previable fetus is human, unique for certain purposes, and alive in significant medical respects–i.e., if it is not dead–could claims be made that researchers need the knowledge uniquely to be gained by using the fetus/abortus while it is still living, growing and reacting as a tiny, whole fetal human being or entity.

This national commission was tasked to investigate and study research involving abortion survivors, and to recommend whether and under what circumstances such research should be conducted or supported by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW). Up to this time, the July 1974 “National Research Act” had ruled that the “Secretary may not conduct or support research in the United States or abroad on a living human fetus, before or after the induced abortion of such fetus, unless such research is done for the purpose of assuring the survival of such fetus.”

Report Research on the Fetus

At the time the commission began, a New York Times article detailed how members of the commission had reviewed existing research of human fetuses. Members told the paper that the amount of research already conducted using aborted fetuses was “so substantial as to seem surprising.”

Image: article Hundreds of aborted fetuses delivered outside womb, NYT 1975

Hundreds of aborted fetuses delivered outside womb, NYT 1975

The most controversial form of research the commission found was on the “fetus outside the womb,” involving “fetuses delivered by abortion.” The commission claimed hundreds of reports of such cases had been conducted. Experiments were also conducted on already expired fetuses from spontaneous or induced abortions. Below is a small sample of what the commission found:

  • Physiologic and Metabolic Studies: Fetal hearts, removed just after death of a fetus following hysterotomy abortion, have been studied to establish physiologic response data.
  • Studies of the Pregnant Mother: Women undergoing elective midtrimester abortion have been starved for 87 hours before abortion in an attempt to learn the effects of caloric deprivation on pregnancy and to gain some information as to whether the fetus could adapt to fuels other than glucose.
  • Research With the Previable Fetus Outside the Uterus: To learn whether the human fetal brain could metabolize ketone bodies, brain metabolism was isolated in 8 human fetuses (12-17 weeks’ gestation) after hysterotomy abortion by perfusing the isolated head (the head was separated from the rest of the body). The study demonstrated that, similar to other species, brain metabolism could be supported by ketone bodies during fetal life suggesting avenues of therapy in some fetal disease states.
  • Another technique for studying the ability of the midtrimester fetus to carry out endocrine reactions used 4 fetuses (16-20 weeks’ gestation) immediately after hysterotomy abortion. The fetuses were perfused through their umbilical veins while being housed in a perfusion tank. Fetal tissues were examined at the end of the study.
  • After studies with newborn and fetal mice, cutaneous respiration (breathing through the skin) was studied in 15 fetuses (9-24 weeks’ gestation) from induced abortions. The fetuses were immersed in a salt solution with oxygen at high pressure. The fetuses were judged to be aliveby a pulsating cord or visible heart beat; if necessary the chest was opened to observe the heart. Four fetuses were supported for 22 hours in this attempt at developing a fetal incubator.
  • Seven previable fetuses (200-375 grams) from spontaneous or induced abortions were immersed in a perfusion tank and perfused with oxygenated blood through their umbilical vessels. The fetuses survived and moved for 5-12 hours.

Interestingly, in addition to general experimentation, the commission noted that if the fetus could “feel pain” then experimenting on abortion survivors would not be permissible. Of course, that debate continues to linger despite evidence that they do feel pain.

Still, members were mixed:

The fetus in utero or in process of being aborted provides a more difficult ethical analysis than does the dead fetus or the living viable infant. There is a presumption of viability at any stage in gestation for the living fetus as long as it remains inside the uterus. Thus experimentation involving that fetus must have acceptably low risk of any harmful effect on viability or on the potential for meaningful, healthy life. If the process of abortion has begun, the life of the fetus will soon end. There is debate about whether different standards apply in that situation and we disagree in our own analysis.

One view holds that no risks can be imposed that would not be acceptable for the fetus which was continuing life. Another view will accept an increase in risks if the information is important and alternate ways of obtaining the information are not practical, if the methods of the experiment are acceptable in themselves (i.e., would be used in other classes of human subjects), and if the process of dying for the fetus were not altered in an unacceptable way.

In any event, expected benefits from the experimentation still must be clear and must require the use of the human fetus to gain the desired information. Ethical considerations as to sensory perception by the fetus also must be addressed. We know of no evidence to suggest or support a contention that the fetus at midgestation or earlier, when abortions are performed, is aware of pain or has a psychologic fear of death.

Image: Ban on experimenting on live aborted fetuses (Image credit NYT, April 1975)

Ban on experimenting on live aborted fetuses (Image credit NYT, April 1975)

The commission ultimately drafted several recommendations, including a restriction on experimenting on living abortion survivors. But their report also recommended that research resulting in “no harm to the fetus” be permitted, so long as that research might benefit other fetuses.

Unfortunately, this did not stop the push for the research nor the push to obtain federal funding. According to a historical timeline of fetal research regulations published in a report by the Institute of Medicine:

After the National Commission issued its report (Report and Recommendations: Research on the Fetus), fetal research following abortion was permitted under subsequent [Department of Health Education and Welfare] DHEW regulations for therapeutic reasons, but otherwise held to the standard of “minimal risk.” Minimal risk means that no more potential harm is tolerated than would be encountered in daily life. In the case of a fetus, almost all interventions exceed minimal risk, and the regulations did not distinguish between fetuses that were carried to term and those intended for abortion. The DHEW regulations, however, contained the possibility of waiver of the minimal risk standard on a project-by-project basis by a complicated procedure to be decided ultimately by an Ethics Advisory Board.

Image: article 1975 Ban funding fetal research (Image credit Corpus Christi Times)

1975 Ban funding fetal research (Image credit Corpus Christi Times)

The first Ethics Advisory Board (EAB) was convened in 1978. The sole waiver issued by this body was to test the efficacy of using fetal blood samples for prenatal diagnosis of sickle cell anemia. The charter for the EAB expired in 1980, and despite publication of a draft charter in 1988, it has not been reactivated.

According to CQ Researcher, in 1988, an NIH commission “voted 18–3 to pronounce fetal tissue transplant research ‘acceptable public policy’—a position then unanimously endorsed by the standing advisory committee to the director of the NIH. That advice, however, was rejected in November 1989 by Louis W. Sullivan, the Bush administration’s secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), NIH’s parent department. Sullivan decided instead to extend, indefinitely, the moratorium on NIH funding of fetal tissue research first ordered by the Reagan administration in March 1988. The moratorium barred NIH funding of clinical transplantation studies using tissue from induced abortions.”

However, “The NIH moratorium did not affect privately funded research in the United States.”

Co-chairman on that 1988 NIH panel was none other than Kenneth Ryan, the same abortionist/trainer who chaired the 1970’s commission. When the push for federally funded research failed, Ryan began calling for private funding to experiment on aborted children.

In part three of this series, Live Action News will detail who eventually lifted the ban on federal funding of fetal tissue research and how much taxpayers spend on this research every year.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

State considers apology for Eugenics then refuses to declare a viable unborn baby “A person” !

Posted in Abortion, Anti-abortion, Black Genocide, Davenport, Eugenics, Fetal Homicide, Forced Sterilization, Maafa21, Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood, Population Control, pro-choice, Pro-Life, Racism, Vermont Eugenics with tags , , , , , , , , , , on February 9, 2010 by saynsumthn

Some Vermont lawmakers say it’s time to apologize for a part of the state’s history.

It’s the so-called eugenics movement, which was carried out in many states in the early 20th century. The selective-breeding program sought to sterilize citizens labeled feeble-minded or criminal.

A University of Vermont professor conducted the so-called “Vermont Eugenics Survey,” which led to the state passing a sterilization law in 1931. The law resulted in the sterilization of several hundred poor, rural Vermonters as well as Abenaki Indians, French-Canadians and others deemed unfit to have children.

The House Human Services Committee takes testimony Tuesday on the measure, a nonbinding resolution expressing the state’s regret about the so-called eugenics movement.

Backers of the resolution say its harms fell disproportionately on Vermonters of Abenaki and French-Canadian heritage, as well as poor Irish and Italian immigrants.

Vermont was one of many states that passed so-called eugenics laws in the 1920s and ’30s to try to prevent citizens labeled feeble-minded from having children.

But while they make this decision- Planned Parenthood whose founder, Margaret Sanger , was a member of the American Eugenics Society – has pressured lawmakers to not passing a bill which would make the killing of a viable fetus a crime.

According to this article in the Bennington Banner: Sears: Fetal homicide bills won’t be heard
Posted: 02/08/2010

Bills addressing fetal homicide won’t be considered by the Vermont Senate this year because neither has strong consensus backing within the chamber, according to Bennington County Sen. Dick Sears, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Proponents of adopting a fetal homicide bill in Vermont say they will, however, seek a path through the Vermont House.

The pronouncement Monday by Sears, a Democrat, follows a months-long push by a Bennington woman who lost twin fetuses in an Aug. 10 crash on Route 7. Her effort provoked lawmakers to introduce three bills — two in the Senate and one in the House — to address Patricia Blair’s concerns.

But the Senate bills will not be heard this year, said Sears, who was afforded the final word by Democratic leaders in the Legislature.

“I spent a lot of time in the past few days thinking about this and how to approach it. Each time I tried to find a way to deal with this bill, or bills, each time I came back with the same problem, and that is that I don’t have consensus,” Sears said. “These types of bills need consensus to move forward. I have not seen that consensus.”

According to police, Patricia Blair’s minivan was struck head-on by Kelly Cook, a 22-year-old Pownal woman. Cook has been charged with felony counts of driving under the influence of drugs and gross negligent vehicle operation resulting in injury. But Cook is not being charged with the deaths of Blair’s 6-month fetuses.

That’s because Vermont does not have a fetal homicide law, unlike 35 other states and the federal government. And legal experts say that under criminal statutes in Vermont, fetuses are not considered people because of precedent set forth in the 1989 Vermont Supreme Court case State vs. Oliver.

After the crash, Blair said she was devastated to learn that Cook would not face charges related to the death of the fetuses. The state forced her to fill out paperwork when the fetuses died, but does not consider them to be people. “The very first question they ask you is the baby’s first, middle and last name,” she said. “And yet, they’re not considered children in Vermont.”

Sears sponsored one of the Senate bills. His legislation would have boosted penalties for three existing crimes — aggravated assault, gross negligent vehicle operation and operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol or drugs — when they are committed against a pregnant woman.

Senate Judiciary Committee member Sen. Kevin Mullin, R-Rutland, co-sponsored Sears’ bill. He expressed disappointment in Sears’ decision, but acknowledged the bills had little chance of passing.

Blair quickly rejected Sears’ approach because it would not have recognized that her unborn babies were killed during a criminal act.

On Monday, Sears acknowledged that he underestimated the passion on both sides of the fetal homicide issue, and it’s relationship with abortion rights. “I was maybe a little naive to think that we could do this without touching abortion. There’s a real sincere fear from many pro-choice advocates that anything we do, including my bill, would result in a slippery slope that could impact people’s right to choose,” Sears said.

He also acknowledged that his critics would blame Planned Parenthood and the Vermont-ACLU groups for the decision he reached. “I was urged by ACLU and Planned Parenthood not to do anything and I’ll be accused of caving to them. That’s a little frustrating to me,” Sears said. “Quite frankly, there is very little support for the Illuzzi approach. There is some for mine, but not a lot. Anything I say is going to be seen as an excuse by some.

Full Article Here

________________________________________________________________________________

Does it surprise anyone that the organization founded with Eugenics members like: Margaret Sanger ( Founder) and Planned Parenthood Prez , Alan Guttmacher ( Former Eugenics Society Vice President) among many others would try and stop this legislation? The truth about Planned Parenthood and Eugenics can be found in an extraordinary documentary based and researched from the files and papers of Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood called: Maafa21.

View a clip of Maafa21 below: