We Will Not Comply

In an excellent article in the June 28, 2024 Christian Post Reporter titled “‘Despair over hope’: Pro-life nurses group ‘will not comply’ with Delaware’s assisted suicide bill”,

As reporter Samantha Kamman reported:

“A national coalition of pro-life nurses (NAPN, the National Association of Prolife Nurses) says they “will not comply” with Delaware’s assisted suicide bill that passed in the Senate Tuesday as the state’s lone Catholic diocese is calling on people of faith to urge Democratic Gov. John Carney to veto the legislation. “

Ms Kamman explains that:

“H.B. 140 passed in the Senate with an 11-10 vote and will become law unless Carney vetoes it. Under the proposed law, adult patients who are “terminally ill” or have received the prognosis that they have six months or less to live can request or self-administer drugs to hasten their deaths.

Both the individual’s attending physician or attending advanced practice registered nurse (APRN) and a consulting physician or APRN must agree on the patient’s condition and decision-making capacity. Two waiting periods must pass before the patient can receive the drugs to end their life, and medical professionals who prescribe the medication must provide the patient the opportunity to rescind the request to kill themselves. 

The law would also grant immunity to medical professionals who offer life-ending drugs to patients, so long as they are “acting in good faith and in accordance with generally accepted health-care standards under this Act.” As the bill states, those “acting with negligence, recklessness, or intentional misconduct do not have criminal or civil immunity.” (All emphasis added)

THE RESPONSE

The National Association of Pro-Life Nurses, which has advocated against assisted suicide legislation for over 30 years, condemned the bill, calling it a “moral catastrophe that corrupts the very soul of healthcare.”

Marie Ashby, NAPN’s executive director, argued in a statement to The Christian Post that the bill “preys” on “the desperate and devalues the disadvantaged,” adding that it offers “poison as a perverse form of mercy” to people society deems “inconvenient.”

“Legitimate healthcare heals; it doesn’t kill,” Ashby added. “This law perverts our profession’s sacred duty, turning nurses from guardians of life into agents of death. We will not be silent. We will not comply.”

NAPN President Dorothy Kane contends, “Delaware has chosen death over dignity, despair over hope.” (All emphasis added)

CONCLUSION-two personal stories

My Daughter Marie Killed Herself Using an Assisted Suicide Technique

In 2009, I lost a beautiful, physically well 30-year-old daughter, Marie, to suicide after a 16-year battle with substance abuse and other issues. Her suicide was like an atom bomb dropped on our family, friends and even her therapists.

Despite all of our efforts to save her, my Marie told me that she learned how to kill herself from visiting suicide/assisted suicide websites and reading Derek Humphry’s book Final Exit. The medical examiner called Marie’s suicide technique “textbook final exit” but her death was neither dignified nor peaceful.

Marie was not mere collateral damage in the controversy over physician-assisted suicide. She was a victim of the physician-assisted suicide movement, seduced by the rhetoric of a painless exit from what she believed was a hopeless life of suffering.

Adding to our family’s pain, at least two people close to Marie became suicidal not long after her suicide. Luckily, these two young people received help and were saved, but suicide contagion, better known as “copycat suicide”, is a well-documented phenomenon. Often media coverage or publicity around one death encourages other vulnerable people to commit suicide in the same way.

The Effect on our Healthcare System

Think the assisted suicide won’t affect you or our healthcare system?

Think again.

As I wrote in my 2018 blog “They are Lying to Us“:

“Several years after Oregon’s law was passed, I was threatened with termination from my job as an intensive care unit nurse after I refused to participate in a deliberate overdose of morphine that neither the patient nor his family requested after an older patient experienced a crisis after a routine surgery.

The patient had improved but did not wake up within 24 hours after sedatives used with a ventilator were stopped. It was assumed that severe brain damage had occurred and doctors recommended removing the ventilator and letting the patient die.

However when the ventilator was removed, the patient unexpectedly continued to breathe even without oxygen support. A morphine drip was started and rapidly increased but the patient continued to breathe.

When I refused to participate in this, I found no support in my hospital’s “chain of command” so I basically stopped the morphine drip myself, technically following the order to “titrate morphine for comfort, no limit.”

The patient eventually died (without food or other treatment) after I left but ironically, a later autopsy requested by the family showed no lethal condition or brain injury as suspected.

The physician who authorized the morphine demanded that I be fired.

I was spared because I argued that I followed the order to “titrate morphine for comfort” by stopping the morphine when he was comfortable!

The family never knew the real story.

We need to reject legalized healthcare provider assisted suicide not only for seriously ill, elderly and disabled but also for ourselves, our loved ones and the integrity of our medical system!

The Supreme Court Rejects Challenge by Pro-life Doctors on Abortion Pill

As Life News reported on June 13, 2024:

“The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a challenge to the abortion pill mifepristone, meaning the abortion drug will be widely available to continue killing babies and injuring doctors nationwide.

The 9-0 decision says the pro-life doctors who brought the case do not have standing – they were not injured, and so the court does not intervene. That’s even though they sued on behalf of women who were injured by the abortion drug by the thousands – including women who have been killed.” (Emphasis added)

The US Supreme Court decision acknowledged that the Mifeprex pill was approved in 2000 but also that:

“FDA placed additional restrictions on the drug’s use and distribution, for example requiring doctors to prescribe or to supervise prescription of Mifeprex, and requiring patients to have three in-person visits with
the doctor to receive the drug.
” (Emphasis added)

The Cout also acknowledges that the restrictions were relaxed further by the FDA (Federal Drug Administration) when:

“In 2021, the FDA announced that it would no longer enforce the initial in-person visit requirement. Four pro-life medical associations and several individual doctors moved for a preliminary injunction that would require the FDA either to rescind
approval of mifepristone or to rescind the FDA’s 2016 and 2021 regulatory actions. Danco Laboratories, which sponsors Mifeprex, intervened to defend FDA’s actions.”

Now as the Wall Street Journal reports:

“Twenty-six states and D.C. allow telehealth for medication abortion. The remaining states have restrictions that supersede federal guidance: 14 ban abortion throughout pregnancy, and the remaining 10 have various combinations of in-person requirements, such as mandatory ultrasounds and visits to doctors and counselors.” (Emphasis added)

WHAT COULD GO WRONG?

As Dr. Christina Francis, an Ob-Gyn doctor herself, wrote in a May 2021 article titled “The government’s abortion pill policy puts mothers’ lives at risk”:

“One of the most significant reasons why an in-person visit has been required is for proper medical oversight as well as a physical exam and ultrasound. These visits are meant to accurately assess the gestational age of a woman’s pregnancy, as well as rule out ectopic pregnancy, which is life-threatening. The difference in size of an 8-week-old and 12-week-old preborn child is significant”

CONCLUSION

I have a personal interest in this because I had an unwed daughter who became pregnant and started bleeding without telling me because of embarrassment.

She went to a local ER where the doctors said she was just having a miscarriage and sent her home.

When the pain and bleeding increased, she called me. I took her back to the ER to demand an ultrasound.

As I suspected as a nurse, her pregnancy was ectopic and emergency surgery was performed.

Afterward, the surgeon showed me the picture he had taken (unasked) during the surgery to remove the then-deceased first-trimester baby, my grandchild. The picture was personally so sad to see but I was comforted that the surgeon cared enough to take a picture of this tiny person and show respect.

We need more respect and help for women with an unexpected pregnancy and their babies than a pill without medical safeguards!

        FEDERAL FUNDING FOR ASSISTED SUICIDE?

        Many people believe that if something is legalized (like marijuana), it must be ok and if something is federally funded, it must be something GOOD.

        In a May 7, 2024, article titled “Democratic Lawmakers Seek To Allow Federal Funding for Assisted Suicide “ in the New York Sun newspaper, Maggie Hroncicht explains the situation and a new petition to oppose this travesty

        As she writes:

        “For nearly 30 years — since Oregon became the first state to legalize physician-assisted death — Congress has prevented federal funding such as Medicare from being used by patients to pay for the practice. A bill proposed by Democratic lawmakers seeks to change that. 

        In 1997, Congress passed the Assisted Suicide Funding Restriction Act, which prohibits using federal funds to provide for any health care services that assisted in someone’s death, including “assisting in the suicide, euthanasia, or mercy killing of any individual.” 

        NOW THE PRO-ASSISTED SUICIDE MOVEMENT IS EXPANDING

        Right now, pro-assisted suicide proponents have been successful in getting assisted suicide laws passed in 10 states and Washington, D.C and several other states are considering passing assisted suicide this year. This includes my home state of Missouri.

        The article notes that:

        “Public polling indicates broad support for doctor-assisted suicide, as the Sun has reported, with Gallup inducing that a majority of Americans have “consistently favored” it for nearly three decades.”

        The article continues:

        ““Medical aid-in-dying, an authorized medical practice, is not euthanasia, mercy killing, or assisted suicide,” a draft discussion of the new “Patient Access to End of Life Care Act’’ obtained by the Sun reads.

        In states where physician-assisted death is legal, the 1997 restrictions “shall not apply to any information, referrals, guidance, or medical care provided consistent with such programs,” the bill, sponsored by Democratic Representatives Brittany Pettersen and Scott Peters, notes.” (All emphasis added)

        CONCLUSION

        But now, an online petition started by Alex Schadenburg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition in Canada has hundreds of signatures is already forming against the proposal, noting that it “would force Americans to pay for assisted suicide (medically approved killing by poison) with their tax dollars.”

        “The Canadian group is outspoken in warning America not to follow its path, arguing that legalizing medically assisted death opens a door that can’t be shut. In Canada, as the Sun reported, assisted suicide numbers have been surging, with more than 13,000 patients dying from the procedure in 2022 — representing 4 percent of the country’s total deaths.”

        The petition states:

        “Dear Representative Jeffries and Representative Scalise,

        Thank you in advance for upholding my conscience rights by not approving the use of tax dollars for killing.

        I oppose The Patient Access to End-of-Life Care Act (HB 8137) that would force Americans to pay for assisted suicide (medically approved killing by poison) with their tax dollars.

        I oppose assisted suicide and I vehemently oppose paying for medically approved killing.”

        “Sign and share our petition opposing The Patient Access to End-of-Life Care Act (petition link) 

        I have signed and I encourage others to do the same!

        Great News-Utah is Twelfth State to Pass Simon’s Law!

        For several years, Sheryl Crozier and I worked to get a law passed in Missouri protecting our children with disabilities from medical discrimination such as DNR (do not resuscitate) orders, withholding of basic treatment, etc. without our knowledge or consent. (See my 2016 blog “My testimony for Simon’s Law”).

        That law was finally passed in Missouri in 2019 and in February 2024, Simon’s Law was introduced in Congress.

        The push for states to adopt a Simon’s Law has continued and Simon’s Law has now passed in 12 states.

        Here is Sheryl’s post on the latest Utah law:

        “FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 25, 2024

        Sheryl Crosier

        Simon’s Law

        (314) 443-3770

        Sheryl@SimonsLaw.org

        HB-0200 Passes Utah Legislature

        “Designating a Child as DNR Without Parental Consent” is Unprofessional Conduct

        Salt Lake City, UT: Simon’s Law today announced the passage of HB-0200, concerning life-sustaining procedures, which is scheduled to go into effect on May 1st.  The new amendment modifies Titles 58 and 75, providing much needed parental rights protection during the process of life-sustaining medical treatment decisions concerning a minor.

        Scott and Sheryl Crosier founded the non-profit after the death of their son, Simon, when they discovered a Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) order was placed in his medical chart without their knowledge or consent.

        “No child’s medical chart should have a DNR order or the withholding of life-sustaining treatment without parental knowledge or consent,” said Simon’s Law CEO and co-founder, Sheryl Crosier.  The Crosiers soon discovered a growing trend in hidden DNR orders without parental awareness or permission and felt the call to make a difference.

        The new Utah amendment protects parents’ rights to have the final say in their child’s medical treatment, and is presently the 12th state to either pass a version of Simon’s Law, or be identified as already having similar legislation on the books.

        “I can’t bring my son, Simon, back,” said Crosier, “but I want to make sure that no parent or guardian of a minor child is stripped of their parental rights in the determination of their child’s life or death.”

        Features and benefits of HB-0200 include:

        • Makes designating a child as do not resuscitate without parental consent unprofessional conduct for physicians, advance practice registered nurses, and physicians assistants.
          §58-31b-502(1)(s), 58-67-502(1)(h), 58-68-502(1)(h), 58-70a-503(1)(h)
        • Makes technical and conforming changes related to orders for life sustaining treatment.
          §75-2a-103(17), §75-2a-106(3)(b)(iii), §75-2a-106(4), §75-2a-106(8)
        • Protects parental rights to have the final say in do not resuscitate orders and orders for life sustaining treatment for their minor child. (Emphasis added)

        For more information on HB-0200, visit https://simonslaw.org/state-by-state/.  

        About Simon’s Law: We are a national network of families and professionals influencing legislation to preserve parental rights in Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) determinations.  In addition to influencing or identifying such legislation across the nation, we have also introduced The Simon Crosier Act (HR-6344) in Congress to amend titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security Act pertaining to the Medicare and Medicaid codes regarding DNRs on unemancipated minors.”

        CONCLUSION

        While it is wonderful that this protective law has been passed, there is a larger question to be asked: Shouldn’t these protections for children and their families have already been part of medical and nursing ethics education?

        I remember when it used to be!

        NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PRO-LIFE NURSES JOINS ASSOCIATION CHALLENGING CHEMICAL ABORTION IN LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASE

        Washington, D.C. — The National Association of Pro-Life Nurses (NAPN) has proudly joined the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, an association of medical organizations suing the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for its reckless removal of essential safeguards for the use of chemical abortion drugs.

        The Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, other medical organizations, and individual doctors argue that the FDA’s actions not only blatantly disregard established protocols for drug safety but also gravely jeopardize women’s health. This case now heads to the Supreme Court asking that the Court hold the FDA accountable for its callous disregard for women’s health and safety.

        The lawsuit, brought forth by the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine and others, highlights the following concerns:

        • Removal of safety standards: The FDA removed safeguards for mifepristone and misoprostol, even though its own label states that nearly 1 in 25 women who consume these drugs will end up going to an emergency room.
        • Increased patient risks: The removal of abortion drug safety standards could lead to a greater number of complications, including hemorrhage, life-threatening infection, and incomplete abortions.
        • Lack of informed consent: Remote prescription practices and the elimination of in-person doctor visits endanger women, particularly those at risk for ectopic pregnancies.

        https://nursesforlife.org/press-releases

        NAPN President Dorothy Kane issued the following statement on behalf of the organization:

        “Nurses are on the front lines witnessing the serious harms to women caused by the FDA’s reckless removal of essential safeguards for the use of chemical abortion drugs. Women deserve the ongoing, in-person care of a medical professional when taking high-risk drugs. The FDA has compromised patient safety and shown a callous disregard for women’s health and safety. This case is about safeguarding women’s health, protecting the integrity of the healthcare profession, and committing to evidence-based care.”

        For more information on the legal case, visit Alliance Defending Freedom, the legal organization representing the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine: https://adflegal.org/case/us-food-and-drug-administration-v-alliance-hippocratic-medicine

                                                                       ###

        The National Association of Pro-Life Nurses (NAPN) is dedicated to promoting respect for every human life from conception to natural death, and to affirming that the destruction of that life, for whatever reason and by whatever means, does not constitute good nursing practice.

        Victory: “After Initial Hope, Medically Assisted Suicide Bill Won’t Move Forward in Maryland”

        In 2019, I testified in Maryland against another “medically assisted suicide” bill that was expected to pass and wrote a blog about it titled “Lessons from the Victory against Assisted Suicide in Maryland”. It failed to pass by one vote.

        Now, yet another attempt to pass an assisted suicide bill in Maryland failed by “one or two votes”, according to a Baltimore Sun article titled “After initial hope, medically assisted suicide bill won’t move forward in Maryland”, thanks to efforts like that of Mary Bogdan BSN, MA-C, DNP-S, ALNC who wrote an excellent expert witness testimony stating in part:

        “The physician assisted suicide bill has been called many things: medical aid in dying, euthanasia, withholding of food and water, etc., etc., etc. The bottom line is this: I did not become a nurse to kill people. The American Nurses Association (ANA) says that nurses should support patient autonomy, the desire to have control over one’s life. I submit this; if we allow patients to end their lives as desired by them, we subject ourselves to unfathomable consequences.” (Emphasis added)

        Note this sentence from the article in the Baltimore Sun “I think that as we slowly got closer to the vote and had more in depth discussions with their constituents, folks just expressed unreadiness to move on it at this time,” Smith said. “I’m obviously very disappointed, but you have to respect the decisions of the individual senators who were listening to their constituents and listening to their conscience.” (Sen. Will Smith is chair of the Judicial Proceedings Committee and a previous sponsor of the bill)

        CONCLUSION

        Nurse Bogdan’s testimony ends with a powerful quote from Dr.  Harvey Max Chochinov, MD, PhD in his December 2023 recent Medpage article ” Intensive Caring: Reminding Patients They Matter— How to care for those who no longer care about themselves”:

        “There is abundant evidence that patients approaching death are susceptible to feeling that they no longer matter. When patients feel life is no longer worth living, healthcare professionals must affirm their intrinsic worth to patients for all that they are, all that they were, and all that they will become in the collective memories of those they will eventually leave behind.” (Emphasis added)

        Virginia is now facing SB 280, an assisted suicide bill.

        Unfortunately, the assisted suicide proponents never seem to give up and we must continue to be vigilant in every state and continue to educate legislators, healthcare providers, and the general population about these dangerous assisted suicide laws.

        Great News: Simon’s Law Introduced in Congress

        Sheryl Crosier, the mother of Simon, a baby with Trisomy 18, and I, with my baby Karen who had Down’s Syndrome and a severe heart defect, worked for years to get a law passed In Missouri to get our children protected from the lethal medical discrimination against children with disabilities we encountered (See my 2016 blog “ My testimony for Simon’s Law” )

        Sheryl worked hard to get other states to do the same and in 2020, I wrote a blog titled “Strongest “Simon’s Law” Yet is Passed in Iowa” .

        Now, Sheryl and Allies of Simon’s Law have had HR-6344 (The Simon Crosier Act) introduced into Congress.

        Nancy V.

        Legislative Action Alert for Congressional HR-6344 (The Simon Crosier Act) – All Star Press.com

        Legislative Action Alert for Congressional HR-6344 (The Simon Crosier Act)

         RNILSEN12  FEBRUARY 9, 2024 3 MIN READ 

        The Board of Directors of Simon’s Law, a nationwide network of families, guardians, and professionals dedicated to creating national awareness and protection for medically endangered pediatric dependents with life-threatening diagnosis through education, accountability, parental rights legislation, and Patients’ Bill of Rights, calls on all citizens to petition their congressmen to support The Simon Crosier Act.

        HR-6344 (The Simon Crosier Act) proposes to amend titles XVII and XIX of the Social Security Act to require providers of services and health maintenance organizations under the Medicare and Medicaid programs to provide for certain policies to be in place relating to do-not-resuscitate orders or similar physician’s orders for unemancipated minors receiving services.

        The Simon Crosier Act (HR-6344) is currently waiting for the House Committee On Energy and Commerce to mark it up. Please take a moment to reach out to committee members, especially Chairwoman Rodgers (R-Washington) at (202) 225-2006, with the following message:

        “My name is your name, I am the parent of a child with a life-limiting diagnosis, who is at risk of having resuscitative measures withheld without my consent, with every hospitalization in your state. Therefore, I urge you to mark up HR-6344 (The Simon Crosier Act), so that it has the opportunity to move beyond the House Committee On Energy and Commerce to protect my parental right to be included in DNR determinations for my child.“

        REPUBLICAN:

        1.     Cathay McMorris Rodgers, WA (202) 225-2006

        2.     Michael C. Burgess, TX (202) 225-7772

        3.     Robert E. Latta, OH (202) 225-6405

        4.     Brett Guthrie, KY (202) 225-3501

        5.     H. Morgan Griffith, VA (202) 225-3861

        6.     Gus M. Bilirakis, FL (202) 225-5755

        7.     Larry Bushon, IN (202) 225-4636

        8.     Richard Hudson, NC (202) 225-3715

        9.     Tim Walberg, MI (202) 225-6276

        10.              Earl L. “Buddy” Carter, GA (202) 225-5831

        11.              Jeff Duncan, SC (202) 225-5301

        12.              Gary J. Palmer, AL (202) 225-4921

        13.              Neal P. Dunn, FL (202) 225-5235

        14.              John R. Curtis, UT (202) 225-7751

        15.              Debbie Lesko, AZ (202) 225-4576

        16.              Greg Pence, IN (202) 225-3021

        17.              Dan Crenshaw, TX (202) 225-6565

        18.              John Joyce, PA (202) 225-2431

        19.              Kelly Armstong, ND (202) 225-2611

        20.              Randy K. Weber, Sr., TX (202) 225-2831

        21.              Rick W. Allen, GA (202) 225-2823

        22.              Troy Balderson, OH (202) 225-5355

        23.              Russ Fulcher, ID (202) 225-6611

        24.              August Pfluger, TX (202) 225-3605

        25.              Diana Harshbarger, TN (202) 225-6356

        26.              Mariannette Miller-Meeks, IA (202) 225-6576

        27.              Kat Cammack, FL (202) 225-5744

        28.              Jay Obernolte, CA (202) 225-5861

        DEMOCRAT:

        1.     Frank Pallone, Jr., NJ (202) 225-4671

        2.     Anna G. Eshoo, CA (202) 225-8104

        3.     Diana DeGette, CO (202) 225-4431

        4.     Janice D. Schakowsky, IL (202) 225-2111

        5.     Doris O. Matsui, CA (202) 225-7163

        6.     Kathy Castor, FL (202) 225-3376

        7.     John P. Sarbanes, MD (202) 225-4016

        8.     Paul Tonko, NY (202) 225-5076

        9.     Yvette D. Clarke, NY (202) 225-6231

        10.              Tony Cárdenas, CA (202) 225-6131

        11.              Raul Ruiz, CA (202) 225-5330

        12.              Scott H. Peters, CA (202) 225-0508

        13.              Debbie Dingell, MI (202) 225-4071

        14.              Marc A. Veasey, TX (202) 225-9897

        15.              Ann M. Kuster, NH (202) 225-5206

        16.              Robin L. Kelly, IL (202) 225-0773

        17.              Nanette Diaz Barragán, CA (202) 225-8220

        18.              Lisa Blunt Rochester, DE (202) 225-4165

        19.              Darren Soto, FL (202) 225-9889

        20.              Angie Crian, MN (202) 225-2271

        21.              Kim Schrier, WA (202) 225-7761

        22.              Lori Trahan, MA (202) 225-3411

        23.              Lizzie Fletcher, TX (202) 225-2571

        The contact list of politicians and their office contacts is available from the public Congress website for the Committee On Energy and Commerce.

        For further information or media inquiries, please contact:
        Sheryl Crosier – Mother of Simon, Founder of Simon’s Law – Sheryl@SimonsLaw.org
        Sand Enzminger – Director of Operations, Simon’s Kids – Sandi@SimonsLaw.org
        Website: www.SimonsLaw.org

        Read about Simon’s Life and His Impact

        Victory on Assisted Suicide, Conscience Rights and AMA Proposed Resolutions

        “First Do No Harm-Hippocrates”

        Last November, I wrote my blog “NAPN Position Paper on AMA Considering New Resolutions on Assisted Suicide”.

        Now, the Life Legal Defense Foundation has announced a great victory on this as well as conscience rights.

        I have personally worked with The Life Legal Defense Foundation for years and they are awesome!

        Here is their statement:

        VICTORY over DEATH PEDDLERS in the American Medical Association…! – LIFE LEGAL DEFENSE FOUNDATION

        / Active Euthanasia / By Life Legal / January 9, 2024:

        “In 2022, Life Legal sued California Attorney General Rob Bonta to stop enforcement of SB 380, which would have prohibited physicians from opting out of the state’s assisted suicide scheme. SB 380 required doctors to provide most of the documentation needed for their patients to receive so-called “aid-in-dying” drugs – even if doctors were morally opposed to participating in assisted suicide. The law imposed draconian punishments on physicians who refused to comply, including civil and criminal penalties and professional discipline.

        Life Legal, along with Alliance Defending Freedom, represented the Christian Medical and Dental Association (CMDA) in the lawsuit – and we won! After a hard fight, we were able to get the law enjoined (blocked). Life Legal, Alliance Defending Freedom, and the CMDA were victorious in protecting physicians’ rights of conscience – but the wins did not stop there.

        Recently, the CMDA joined with members from the Catholic Medical Association (CMA) to oppose two American Medical Association resolutions supporting physician-assisted suicide. As a result of the pro-life stance taken by the CMDA and the CMA, the American Medical Association declined both resolutions. This means the AMA officially remains in opposition to assisted suicide, holding that “permitting physicians to engage in assisted suicide would ultimately cause more harm than good. Physician-assisted suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the physician’s role as healer, would be difficult or impossible to control, and would pose serious societal risks.”

        We are honored to represent pro-life physicians and we are grateful for their powerful witness in opposition to assisted suicide.” (Emphasis in original)

        CONCLUSION

        We nurses are also grateful for this victory and so should everyone who cares about healthcare ethics!

        Are “Anti-abortion activists” Really Looking “To Rebrand Themselves As Not Religious”?

        Last May, I was interviewed by Dr. Anne Whitesell, an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Miami University “as part of a research project to understand the work of pro-life organizations post-Dobbs and common misconceptions about the movement.”

        Dr. Whitesell was very gracious during the interview, and we had a long conversation about what motivates pro-life people-and especially nurses.

        I told her about our National Association of Pro-life Nurses and the why and how we do what we do because we call about all lives.

        I also told her that the National Association of Pro-life Nurses was not a religious organization but rather open to nurses of any religion or none.

        I explained how the National Association of Pro-life Nurses is a “registered non-profit organization that brings nurses together who look for excellence in advancing ethics in nursing practice “and “seeks to establish and protect ethical values of the nursing profession. The organization educates its members on a wide range of bioethical issues” from conception to natural death”.

        I also told Professor Whitesell that we are not about being judgmental but rather about truly caring and offering help to desperate people in crisis situations and the people around them before-or even after- a person has chosen abortion or is considering medically assisted suicide. (see “Pro-Life and Other Resources for Help and Information to Protect Human Life”)

        Our motto is “I Care” and we even have developed a button with that simple message for our nurses to wear.

        PROFESSOR WHITESELL’S NOVEMBER 6, 2023 ARTICLE

        Professor Whitesell said she would send me a copy of her eventual article but instead I discovered her November 6, 2023 article titled “As Ohio and other states decide on abortion, anti-abortion activists look to rebrand themselves as not religious.”

        Here are some excerpts:

        “My research shows that anti-abortion organizations in the U.S. fall into one of three camps. Some are openly religious. Others may have religious staff, but refrain from using religion in their advocacy. A small proportion outright reject the use of religion.

        “In my interviews, anti-abortion rights activists said they understood that the public views their movement as anti-woman and driven by conservative Christians. More recently, the movement has adopted pro-woman messaging to counter the perception that they do not support women.

        These organizations are increasingly choosing to speak less about religion and more about human rights and science to combat the narrative that the anti-abortion movement is solely a Christian movement.”

        and

        “Most of the activists I interviewed said their organization does not have a formal stance on religion. Approximately one-quarter of the 45 activists I interviewed, however, said their organizations are explicitly Christian. (Emphasis added)

        Professor Whitesell concludes that:

        “Instead of using religion to bolster their arguments against abortion, these activists frame abortion as a human rights issue. For them, any loss of human life is tragic, whether it is from abortion, war or the death penalty.

        This kind of framing could help the anti-abortion movement shift conversations about abortion away from religious beliefs.” (All emphasis added)

        CONCLUSION

        Unfortunately, the abortion rights movement’s animus against using religious beliefs in discussions about abortion has real world consequences.

        For example, a January 16, 2024, CNA article titled “Religious Americans’ lives possibly at risk in 2024, new report by U.S. bishops says” states:

        “Since the overturn of Roe v. Wade in the June 2022 Supreme Court Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, attacks against the Catholic Church as well as pro-life organizations have risen considerably. The bishops said that annual hate crime statistics gathered by the FBI in 2022 reported anti-Catholic crimes as nearly 75% higher than for any other bias.“

        All this is compounded with, the bishops said, a “general failure” on the part of the “federal government to apprehend and prosecute the perpetrators of such attacks.” (All emphasis added)

        It is disheartening that articles like Professor Whitesell’s and most mainstream news reporting about abortion and the pro-life movement continue to misrepresent the “anti-abortion movement” as primarily religious rather than a movement based on science, human rights and, above all, helping those involved in crisis situations.

        NAPN: Ohio’s Issue 1 Abortion Vote Marks a Temporary Setback, Not a Surrender

        FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

        November 7, 2023

        National Association of Pro-Life Nurses

        Contact: media@nursesforlife.org

        Columbus, Ohio – The National Association of Pro-Life Nurses (NAPN) is expressing deep disappointment over the passage of Ohio’s extreme, deceptive abortion initiative. Despite the passage of Issue 1, NAPN remains committed to upholding ethics in healthcare practice.

        Issue 1 undermines common-sense health and safety protections by lowering the standard of care in Ohio. Its passage will enshrine discriminatory abortion practices into the state’s constitution, including for reasons of gender or disability. Further, the ballot initiative will expand abortion into the third trimester, when a preborn child is capable of feeling pain. Issue 1 is radically out of touch with the 7 in 10 Americans who support common-sense abortion limits after 15 weeks. NAPN firmly believes in upholding the principles of compassion, empathy, and respect for all human life, echoing the fundamental principles of the nursing profession.

        Executive Director Marie Ashby, on behalf of the NAPN, stated, “While we are deeply concerned by the passage of extreme, anti-life legislation, it does not diminish our resolve to protect human life in all its stages. We must continue to support families facing unexpected pregnancies through pregnancy resource clinics and Federally Qualified Health Centers. NAPN remains steadfast in advancing a higher standard of patient care, which is fundamentally incompatible with abortion.”

        NAPN will continue to push back against healthcare disinformation, as it paves the path forward for excellence in nursing practice. The National Association of Pro-Life Nurses calls upon policymakers to consider the profound ethical implications of legislation that erodes patient protections. The association stands ready to counter public health threats by educating lawmakers and healthcare providers on policies that seek to undermine patient care.

        The National Association of Pro-Life Nurses is a not-for-profit organization uniting nurses who are dedicated to promoting respect for every human life from conception to natural death, and to affirming that the destruction of that life, for whatever reason and by whatever means, does not constitute good nursing practice.

        ###

        For further inquiries or interviews, please contact:

        Marie Ashby

        Executive Director

        National Association of Pro-Life Nurses

        marie@nursesforlife.org

        www.nursesforlife.org