May 10, 2000
volume 11, no. 90

Dr. Frank Joseph's Pro-Life Prescriptions: LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL!        


    We've enlisted Frank Joseph, MD, a committed retired Catholic physician from Southern California to write a special pro-life column for the DailyCATHOLIC which will appear each Wednesday exulting the Catholic beliefs on creation and procreation in upholding the Sanctity of Life.

    For past columns by Frank Joseph, MD, click on Pro-Life Prescriptions: LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL! Archives
If you want to send him ideas or feedback, you can reach him at

Planned Parenthood definitely has a plan and it's not to promote parenthood!

        All along, I have been telling you that the pro-aborts, or as they like to be called by a more palatable name, pro-choicers, will do anything to keep the killing camps flourishing. If they can plan and kill babies, even while they're being born, then lying is no problem for them. As you may know the Supreme Court is currently hearing a case concerning the late term barbaric partial-birth abortion ban.

        The following is an article written by Mark Salo, the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood in San Diego and Riverside Counties, in California. It appeared in the San Diego Union-Tribune, the morning of 4-25-00 Practically every sentence is a lie from this man who earns a living from the killing of unborn and 3/4 born babies.

        It will be word for word indented in italics, with my comments after each lie, in non-italics

      This abortion battle is not about substance.

      By Mark Salo       April 25, 2000

          Today the Supreme Court will hear its first case on abortion rights in nearly a decade. The decision in this case, Stenberg vs. Carhart, could determine the fate of Roe vs.Wade. Stenberg vs. Carhart deals with bans on late-term or so-called partial birth abortion. Bans which could criminalize virtually every abortion procedure used, including those used in the earliest weeks of the first trimester.

        A lie -- it has nothing to do with Roe Vs Wade, it is only about the late term barbaric partial-birth abortion, where, after the cervix has been dilated for 2-3 days, the mother's membranes are ruptured, then, with the guidance of ultrasound, forceps are inserted into the uterus, a lower extremity is grabbed, and pulled into the vagina. With fingers, the other lower extremity, the torso, shoulders, and the upper extremities are delivered. The skull, which is too big to be delivered, lodges in the internal cervical os. Fingers are used to push the anterior cervical lip out of the way, then a pair of scissors are forced into the base of the skull, they are spread to enlarge the opening, the scissors are removed and a powerful suction catheter is inserted in the opening and the brains are sucked out. With the head decompressed, the baby is then completely removed from the mother.

        The fact that reliable studies reveal babies feel excruciating pain, when they are killed at 20 weeks gestation and after, doesn't bother the pro-aborts.. Animal activists would be outraged if this were done to animals. As a matter of fact many animals are given an anesthetic when aborted in late term. Humans nothing, because it would be an admission by the abortion advocates that these babies are human beings and do have feelings.

      In Illinois and Wisconsin, statutory bans of partial-birth abortion have been upheld by circuit courts. In Nebraska, Arkansas and Iowa the same bans have been struck down. And in several states, ballot initiatives have been introduced for voter approval (as it turns out voters in each of these states have rejected the bans). The U.S. Supreme Court is now deciding whether or not these bans are constitutional.

          Ironically, despite the heightened political debate, the term "partial birth abortion" is nowhere to be found in medical textbooks. Technically this procedure does not exist, at least not if you trust medical schools and medical textbooks to define medical procedures.

        Naturally it's not found in medical text books, it is a relatively new procedure. Also, amidst controversy over proposed bans on partial-birth abortions, because of its torturous and gruesome killing of viable babies, the medical books took a holiday.

        The procedure appears to have been introduced by Dr. Martin Haskell in a paper presented at a 1992 National Abortion Federation Conference. Haskell coined the name of his procedure, Dilatation and Extraction, or D&X, to distinguish it from dismemberment-type D&E's. The term partial-birth abortion, is just a more adequate description. To just say D&X, the lay person wouldn't know what you were talking about. Dr. Haskell employed his new method for pregnancies that had progressed to twenty weeks or beyond. Dr. Haskell's 1992 paper explained that classic D&E dismemberment became difficult beginning at twenty weeks due to "the toughness of fetal tissues at this stage of development."

        However, another physician employing the method, Dr. James T. McMahon, chose the slightly different name "intact dilation and evacuation (intact D&E)." Subsequently the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists ("ACOG") issued a January 1997 statement adopting a hybrid term "intact dilation and extraction" or "intact D&X," combining the Haskell/McMahon definitions. The American Medical Association relied upon this report in issuing its own policy declarations. Therefore, the term "intact dilation and extraction" or "intact D&X" -- which is sometimes shortened simply to "D&X" -- appears to have become the most common appellations for the procedure in question. ACOG states that intact D&X has been described as including the following four elements:

  • (1) the deliberate dilation of the cervix, usually over a sequence of days;
  • (2) instrumental conversion of the fetus to a footling breech;
  • (3) breech extraction of the body, excepting the head; and
  • (4) partial evacuation of the intracranial contents of a living fetus to effect vaginal delivery of a dead but otherwise intact fetus.

        The ACOG acceptance of this description indicates once again that D&X is medically understood as a distinctive technique, different from classic D&E abortion.

      So called partial birth; abortion is a political term and the court is presiding over a political battle. A political battle artfully crafted for today's media -- the term "partial birth abortion" immediately conjures up a horrific image: an image that disturbs the casual observer as well as the pro-choice activist.

        If it conjures up a horrific image, it is because it IS horrific. And that's the point of banning it. It is gruesome and is never needed to save the life of the mother, nor to ensure her health. Other methods are better and faster. As you can see it's not an emergency procedure. The cervix has to be dilated 2-3 days in advance. It doesn't take an Einstein to figure out that if a mother's health or life is at risk, then this procedure should NOT be used, unless the doctor wants to be sued for malpractice.

      In this kind of battle, substance doesn't count. First and foremost, if this battle was about substance, you would know that the language in the bans is written in such a way that it can be interpreted to ban virtually all surgical abortions including those performed in the earliest weeks of the first trimester.

        This is nonsense, as well as being another lie. The description above, is as plain as plain can be. How in the world, in the earliest weeks, can you grab the baby's lower extremity to pull it down, when it hasn't even been developed. It is just pitiful. These pro-aborts will stop at nothing to con the public

      "The broad sweep of the language involved could allow broad enforcement against most, or all, abortion procedures depending on the choice of the prosecuting authority."If the battle were about substance, you would also know that the medical community does not recognize this term. You would know that nowhere in the language of most of these bans on what is reportedly a medical procedure is medical terminology used. You would know that the language in these bans is written so that doctors don't know which procedures would be legal and which procedures would be illegal.

        Then, run as fast as you can from these doctors. If they can't understand simple procedures, you're in trouble. (remember their medical textbooks don't discuss partial birth abortion and the accepted medical terms for abortion procedures are not used in the language of the bans).

      You would know that the bans are written in such a way that at first glance the average person, including those who support Roe vs. Wade, responds with an "of course" . . ."of course that should be banned."

        The above is a litany of lies. The ban was specifically spelled out and for anyone to confuse PBA with other abortions, would have to have the IQ of a turnip.

      But of course it's not about substance. Like other political battles ofour time, this one is scripted by political consultants. Political consultants who know that nearly two-thirds of American voters support Roe vs. Wade.

        Again, he's trying to confuse the issue. We're not talking about Roe Vs.Wade -- we're talking about a specific late term abortion that a ten year old could understand. The pro-aborts are so worried that all their killings in all trimesters will end, because of losing this one decision that they will kill to prevent it. And that's exactly what they're doing. Killing thousands of viable babies every year and don't even care about the excruciating pain that these babies suffer.

      ...the Supreme Court ruling which legalized abortion throughout the country. Political consultants who also know that voters are not so supportive of later-term abortions. And, they know most voters are not aware that Roe vs. Wade already bans later-term abortions except to save the life or health of the mother.

        More nonsense. Third trimester abortions can be done for health reasons. All the mother has to say is, "Dr., mentally, I just can't handle a delivery right now." The pro-aborts must think pro-lifers just fell of a turnip truck.

      So if you are a political consultant armed with the above statistics and told your task is to make legal abortion go away in the United States what do you do? If you are good at your job you try to make the public believe that later-term abortions are the rule not the exception. You change the name of the debate so that it's not about abortion anymore it's about one particular procedure which you create, name and describe. And you do all of this in such a way that your language and images are easily captured by the mass media and in turn the public imagination.

        Wrong again, all you have to do is tell the truth -- something the pro-aborts know nothing about.

      Although your opponents come armed with facts and the medical expertise to disprove your claims, you know it won't matter. I disagree with the political consultants. Facts and medical expertise do matter.

        At last we do agree -- facts do matter and if the justices on the Supreme Court discard politics and weigh just the facts, partial-birth abortions will become history and Roe Vs Wade will still be intact. If the justices of the Supreme Court do not see evil in this barbaric procedure and say it should not be banned, then our country's morals will not be skirting the outer limits of hell. They will be in hell and satan will have had his way.

      My hope is that the Supreme Court will uphold Roe vs. Wade and return the discussions of abortion and abortion rights to the doctors and families that ultimately make the decisions about each and every abortion performed in this country. The very people that history tells us make these very private and personal decisions regardless of heated politicalbattles.

        This is too much. It's not always the family physician, who makes these decisions, it's the doctors who make a living killing the babies, who tell mothers that what they're removing is just a blob of tissue.

        They won't tell them, that their baby is a highly complex, sentient, functioning individual. This is an established scientific fact. The human unborn does respond to stimuli -- this is established beyond any reasonable doubt.

        They won't tell women that induced abortions increases their risk of getting breast cancer. Their attitude seems to be -- better for women to die of breast cancer, than take a chance on the public's reaction to the truth. Thousands of women die every year, because they were not told of this risk. It IS America's best kept secret.

        It's only a matter of time before our courts are flooded with law suits against the abortion mills for not informing women of this vital information before they have their baby killed. The truth will all come out. The evidence is overwhelming.

        They won't tell women of other physical complications of abortions, such as a punctured uterus, hemorrhage, infection, sterility, cervical cancer, subsequent spontaneous abortions and ectopic pregnancies, subsequent premature deliveries, resulting in neurological disorders in the baby and many other physical complications.

        They won't tell women of the many emotional and mental factors. Clearly, once a young woman is pregnant, it is no longer a choice between having a baby or not having a baby. It is a choice between having a baby or having a traumatic experience.

        Since Roe Vs Wade, there are more women dying every year of abortion complications, than before the abominable decision. Lying comes easy to Planned Parenthood. What's a lie compared to the wholesale killing of unborn, and 3/4 born babies -- 1.4 million a year.

        Planned Parenthood Federation of America - sounds good, doesn't it? Why, they exist to actually help people to plan a family -- very commendable. The very name oozes benevolence. I'm surprised they didn't put the name of a Saint in front of it.

        But, their name is a misnomer -- it is a lie. They do NOT plan parenting. To plan parenting -- the prime requisites are parents and children. When babies are killed, you have neither parents nor children. And why are unborn babies killed? They are killed BECAUSE OF Planned Parenthood.

        One has to ask -- who are these people, that they would flagrantly misrepresent their killing agenda with sugar-coated words like Planned Parenthood? But sugar coating their killing agenda is nothing new for them. They don't even have the "guts" to use the word abortion anymore, because everyone knows, it means to kill an unborn baby. Now, their sugar coating of death has resulted in the euphemism, "the right to choose."

        One of the great mysteries of our time is -- how in the world did we let them get as far as they did? Lies and euphemisms are the hallmark of Planned Parenthood. They exist for one reason only and that is to get as many women to have their unborn babies killed, as they possibly can. There is NO planning -- it is CUT AND DRY.

        And now, they have branched out into the trafficking of baby parts.

        Quite a benevolent group, aren't they?

    Dr. Frank

May 10, 2000
volume 11, no. 86
Pro-Life Prescriptions: LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL!

Return to the current English edition

To review past English issues in Archives

Return to the current Russian edition

To review past Russian issues in Archives