DC may catch up to rest of world in banning partial-birth abortions

Washington, D.C., also known as the District of Columbia, our nation's capitol, is known for many things, but primarily it is known for its strong, national, legislative leadership. However, where human rights issues are concerned, specifically abortion, the District of Columbia lags behind thirty nine (39) other states that already prohibit elective, late-term abortions.

Some five (5) months ago, Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) first proposed a human rights bill to ban late-term abortions in the District of Columbia. However, this week, there is renewed interest in this humanitarian bill, designed to prevent, and ultimately end, the procurement of late-term abortions after 20 weeks gestation in Washington, D.C., something that both Pro-Choice and Pro-Life advocates have been working towards for decades, since well before the 70's and Roe vs. Wade.

The bill, called the "District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act," specifically focuses on recent medical research surrounding fetal pain, as it is reportedly  experienced from 20 weeks gestation on. Similar to advocates working to abolish the death penalty, many abortion opponents fundamentally believe that murder is biblically wrong, regardless of circumstances, and should be illegal, particularly in Washington, D.C.

According to available statistics for 2007 from the Center for Disease Control, the CDC, there were 623,000 abortions performed that year in the US, with 1.3 percent of them being late-term abortions. Epidemiologically, it would be statistically quite helpful if there were a larger, more up-to-date body of medical research on the topic of abortion, late-term and otherwise. Often, late-term abortions are considered and performed after sixteen weeks(four months) when the pregnancy is not recognized early, or when emotional, financial or abortion planning delays occur. This particular legislation contains a caveat for women whose lives are threatened by continuing the pregnancy, but not in the event that adverse health effects of the mother may occur.

At the heart of this polarizing issue are two (2) very different perspectives. While many abortion advocates, men and women, look at the myriad of social issues surrounding an unwanted pregnancy, and there are often many, others are more concerned about human rights violations associated with late-term abortion. In fact, many faith-based pro-life advocates believe that human life is a precious gift from God. That inflicting pain on a human being is morally wrong; and that ending the life of anyone prematurely-especially the preborn is-nothing short of murder.

One man I interviewed for this article cited serious birth defects such as Down's Syndrome, as an important reason to perform an abortion. Many others I interviewed indicated that one should be prepared enough for parenthood that they are able to feed and clothe the children that they bring into this world.

However, one woman I interviewed, who personally witnessed a late-term abortion some years ago while working as an RN. She reported the following emotional and moving account of what she observed at a free-standing abortion clinic: "Labor was medically induced via IV in the abortion clinic office, and upon the baby's arrival, a large-bore needle was thrust into the brainstem as the baby cried. The mother screamed as she heard her live baby cry, as it was swiftly whisked away from her, and immediately placed into a trash can labeled, "Hazardous Waste" to die. The bag was tied tightly, and the baby was removed from the room never to be seen again." Since that day, she adds, she has been strongly Pro-life ever since.

This week, during senate hearings, this complex, far-reaching issue was complicated by Rep. Frank's controversial move to prevent pro-abortion advocate Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, the Districts non-voting representative in Congress, from being allowed to speak at the hearing. This refusal provoked the anger of both the Democrats and Republicans alike, in Washington, and from coast to coast.

It is not hard to see why the perspectives and debate over this issue is strong and diverse. Clearly, on both sides, this is a very personal, gut-wrenching, battlefield issue that is testing the D.C District on freedom of speech, as well. With all eyes on the Washington D.C. District watching the movement of this bill and the plight of Rep. Norton, with civil rights intertwined with human rights, it will be interesting to see what happens next in the areas of both late-term abortion and free speech.

Adele M. Gill

Beautifully Designed Prayer Cards Now 15% Off

---

'Help Give every Student and Teacher FREE resources for a world-class Moral Catholic Education'