by Tom Kando
My wife and I were in Rome on September 16, when the second Republican debate took place. We were able to watch some of it, but with the time difference, it got too late for us to watch the entire thing.
Oh well, it wasn’t the most edifying show anyway. We saw enough, including the ganging up on front-runner Trump by the other contestants, and the exchanges between Trump and Fiorina.
One thing that struck me was when “ Fiorina described a video from an anti-abortion group ...that showed “a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking, while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain.” (Fiorina’s Abortion Comments).
Fiorina’s claim has been widely challenged, for example by Chuck Todd when he interviewed her on Meet the Press.
The battle has raged ever since. The key question is about the veracity of the footage to which Fiorina alludes. She claims that Planned Parenthood aborts and then vivisects live fetuses, i.e. pre-natal human beings that are more than eight weeks old. Aborting embryos, i.e. eggs that were fertilized less than eight weeks ago is less controversial than aborting fetuses. It is late term abortion which elicits revulsion in many people. Additionally, anti-abortionists claim that “harvesting” usable, healthy and well-preserved organs requires that the aborted fetuses be kept alive, even ex utero.
Such a charge is very upsetting. I must admit, the terminology itself (words like “harvesting”) is rather offsetting.
Planned Parenthood and other pro-choice people have argued vehemently that the alleged videos to which Fiorina alludes either do not exist, or that they are cleverly doctored “photo-montages.” As Eugene Robinson writes in the Washington Post on September 28: “No such video exists. To be precise, I should say that no one has been able to find such footage.”
On the other side, pro-lifers are screaming “cover up!”, claiming that there are court orders which forbid displaying some of the relevant footage on the Internet.
I went on an extensive Google search. I did come across some footage - not only of the interviews with the lab employees describing the human vivisections which they are said to have performed or witnessed, but also of some graphic, stomach-churning flesh-and-blood footage. (See for example: Planned Parenthood Video). I have to say, some of this footage reminded me of animal slaughterhouses and documentaries of Auschwitz.
However, the videos showed evidence of tinkering, with inserted footage of bloody fetuses. I couldn’t find any footage showing a demonstrably living fetus being vivisected.
Here is how Casey Quinlan at ThinkProgress summarizes the situation: “The video Fiorina refers to is of a tissue procurement technician describing an experience where she... saw a fetus with its heart still beating. (She) said (that) the brain was going to be procured from the fetus. However, the footage used alongside her commentary was stock footage of a fetus with its legs moving, not actual footage of what she witnessed, leading critics to point out that Fiorina mischaracterized the footage... shown. The supervisor the woman mentions in the tape also did not say the fetus was kept alive to harvest its brain.”(Fiorina Defends Abortion Comments).
In sum, most fact-checkers in the mainstream media have concluded that Fiorina’s claim is largely false.
Now, let me emphasize that I am not writing this piece as an equivocation about, or a revision of my position on abortion, on Planned Parenthood and on women’s rights. I have been and remain a staunch pro-choicer. I strongly support women’s painfully acquired right to control their bodies. I see the current effort to defund Planned Parenthood as a tragedy. It would greatly aggravate the suffering and all medical issues associated with unwanted pregnancies.
However, it is in my nature to be inquisitive, especially in the midst of swirling controversies. After listening to Fiorina, I asked myself, “what on earth is she talking about?” My Google search resulted in some gory abortion footage. But then, perhaps no more so than routine surgery. Medicine is a bloody profession, something which the public doesn’t realize.
Some might say that by searching for the videos which allegedly show human vivisection for profit, I have fallen victim to the hype and deviousness of the anti-abortion campaign. Who knows? But I’ll say this on my behalf: In this blog, I simply try to examine information - or misinformation.
The moral questions raised around abortion have been debated for many decades: Are some reasons for abortion more justifiable than others? For example, is the abortion done to save the mother’s life, or is it for sex selection? (which boils down to female infanticide in the vast majority of cultures).
Or is it about pre-natal deformity or disorder (which is tantamount to a form of eugenics)? What about rape and incest? Etc. Surely most reasonable people would agree that there are different degrees of justification for abortion.
But this article is not about that. Here, I merely ask whether or not there is evidence of human vivisection performed on fetuses for profit, as alleged by Fiorina and other pro-lifers, and used as the basis for the attack on Planned Parenthood. I did not find any.
© Tom Kando 2015
leave comment here
13 comments:
Fiorina’s claim has been widely challenged, and rated to be false by PolitiFact.com, a fact-checking organization. The video in question, produced by the anti-abortion Center for Medical Progress, is a combination of footage procured from the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, pasted onto an interview with former StemExpress procurement technician Holly O'Donnell. There is no indication where the video was taken or for what purpose. No proof that it was even filmed at Planned Parenthood.
In my opinion, the entire controversy is not really about abortion. Trying to defund Planned Parenthood is about control and power. Fiorina claims that “taxpayers are paying for the alleged butchery", which is not true because the use of federal funds to pay for abortion has been banned for nearly four decades.
There are 3 issues that anti-abortion proponents purposely confuse:
1. Abortions
2. Profiting from the sale fetal tissue etc.
3. Defunding Planned Parenthood
• Abortions: We all agree that late term abortions are worse than early abortions. After 24 months it's illegal, but most women would not abort even a lot earlier than that.
• The sale of fetal tissue and body parts: Many research labs depend on these to do their research to fight diseases. Here, I am a bit confused because I didn't think a fetus can survive outside the womb before it is at least 22 weeks old. Doesn't the law say you cannot abort beyond that point? Planned Parenthood does not sell body parts for profit, just to recoup its cost.
• Since Planned Parenthood doesn't get funding to perform abortions, the result of defunding Planned Parenthood will affect women's health in general. It will prevent cancer screening, access to birth control, pep-smears, medical checkups and many other services. As usual, it will impact the poor the most.
You say: 'Some reasons for abortion deserve our support more than others: If delivery threatens the mother’s survival, that’s one thing, but sex selection? Pre-natal deformity or disorder? And what about rape and incest?'
I am not sure what you are saying here: Aside from sex selection, shouldn't that be left up to the woman in the case of rape and incest and to the couple in the case of deformity and disorder?
If men were the ones to get pregnant, there wouldn't be such a vicious attack on women's right to choose. It's all about power and a desperate need to control the one thing that women's bodies have given them control over.
Cecile Richards was forced to admit under questioning from Rep. Cynthia Lummins (R, WY) that although abortions only account for 3% of Planned Parenthood’s total procedures, abortions account for 86% of Planned Parenthood’s revenues
Thanks for this Tom. The more folks who read this accusation is a lie the better.
I appreciate Madeleine's instructive comment, and I agree with what she writes. As I said in my piece, I Googled the alleged video and wrote the piece because I was disturbed by what Fiorina said. I hope that readers will see my piece the way Lorraine sees it, namely as a refutation of Fiorina's allegation. I have no idea what Anonymous is saying, whether her percentages include or exclude the roughly half billion dollars annual government subsidy to Planned Parenthood, or what, so I can't talk about this meaningfully.
spoiler alert: The answer is 'No'
"The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it's the seriousness of the charge that matters." Liberalism hoisted with its own petard.
Thank you, Carol Anita.
Anonymous: what do you mean?
The simple question is does Planned Parenthood support late term abortions? The answer unequivocally is yes. A second question is does Planned Parenthood sell the aborted remains of their work at some point in the cycle (leaving aside from whether that is at a late term or early)? Again the answer is yes. Finally, is there evidence, regardless of the video, that Planned Parenthood has engaged in haggling about the disposition of human remains for financial gain for the organization? Again the answer is yes. All the rest - about whether the video(s) were doctored (not sure how you can unequivocally say they were doctored) is just background noise. If you believe in the absolute right of abortion then all that noise is just that. If you do not believe in that absolute right and believe that at some point in the development of a fetus that abortion is wrong - then the evidence is dispositive.
As always, Jonathan puts his position well.
Nevertheless: millions of us (probably a majority of Americans) support abortion while agreeing that “at some point in the development of a fetus abortion is wrong.” And the law expresses that. I know of no jurisdiction where abortion is legal, say in the 8th month of pregnancy (barring perhaps rare exceptions, such as the survival of the mother).
In any event, my post basically asks only one question: is there evidence to support Fiorina’s shocking allegation? The answer so far is no. That’s all.
I do not address the other issue(s) raised by Jonathan - although Madeleine does, in her comments, where she raises the issues of power, women’s rights and many of the other usual aspects of the controversy.
It is sad that Jonathan only sees what he wants to see. Twisting the truth is worse than telling lies. PP sells fetal tissue, as many others do, because it is necessary for research.It does not so for profit. 'All the rest' It is NOT background noise, it is a fabricated hammer to bash in the skull of PP. Absolute right of abortion? What does that mean?! Abortion is not a person and can not have absolute rights. PP will be the first to agree with Jonathan.
I don't know the veracity of Fiorina's claims, but I expect both sides exaggerate for political reasons. However, I think some of Planned Parenthood's recent problems stem from what seems make it look like a quasi-underground operation. Here in Minnesota there was a bill submitted to the Legislature that would require state licensure and inspection of abortion facilities that perform more than ten abortions per month. They would be held accountable in a manner similar to nursing homes or outpatient surgery centers. The bill failed because of lobbying on behalf of these facilities that keeps them funded without being held to normal standards of accountability of other healthcare providers. Obamacare seems to turn a blind eye toward planned parenthood. So in addition to the standard abortion controversy, there is an element of cronyism that also rubs people the wrong way and makes these clinics look suspicious.
Well done- thank you for your research.
I thank Bruce and Gordon.
I agree with Gordon that Planned Parenthood is a healthcare provider. I am not familiar with what specific states do, nor have I read up on how Obamacare handles abortion.
Post a Comment
Please limit your comment to 300 words at the most!