NRL News

Arizona pro-abortionists trying to eliminate all protections for abortion survivors

by | Feb 20, 2019

By Dave Andrusko

It is, indeed, a sign of the times, an illustration of how abortion on demand has spilled over into an insistence that we do nothing for babies who survive abortions.

Back in 2017, NRL News Today wrote about passage of Senate Bill 1367 that required abortionists to use all available means and medical skills to save an abortion survivor.

“The bill would require hospitals and clinics providing abortions at 20 weeks or beyond to have medical equipment on site to care for a fetus delivered alive,” the Arizona Republic reported at the time. According to the pro-abortion blog, “At least three Arizona clinics offer terminations at and beyond 20 weeks gestation.”

Protecting abortion survivors was not new. Senate Bill 1367 strengthened a law first passed in 1975! But evil never gives up.

There are hundreds of pro-life citizens at the Arizona Capital today to oppose HB 2696, introduced last week by 17 members of the Arizona House of Representatives, that would repeal the entirety of the provisions going back 44 years. This is all the more sickening because back in 2017 there was plenty of testimony these children were not being cared for.

In a passionate two-hour debate in April 2017, the Arizona House Judiciary and Public Safety Committee advanced the bill described by its sponsor State Sen. Steve Smith as “the good Samaritan abortion bill.”

“This bill is not about Planned Parenthood, it’s not even really about abortions per se,” Smith said, according to Court House News. “We’re just talking about a living baby in front of you with clear signs of life.”

Courthouse News’ Jamie Ross included an extended set of quotes from Smith, explaining why he said the legislation is needed:

During the hearing, Smith testified about two instances where he said a fetus was alive following an abortion but did not receive medical care.

“Here you have a woman who went in, had an abortion, baby survives, baby lives, baby is alive,” Smith told the panel of one incident. In that case, the fetus was alive for over an hour without medical care, he said.

“An hour and 18 minutes a living, human being child lay on effectively a cold steel table until it died with no medical attention given to it, with doctors nearby. That’s pretty disheartening to say the least,” Smith said.

In another incident, he told the panel an abortion clinic called 911 when a fetus was reported to be breathing.

“By the time the paramedics got there and got to the hospital, baby died,” Smith said. Both incidents are cited in the bill.

“The bill is simply saying when there is an abortion, if the baby lives we aren’t talking abortions anymore,” he continued. “Can we just exact a little bit of medical care to this child?”

Opponents argued the bill would needless inflict pain on children born with anomalies incompatible with life and put medical professionals at risk. Rewire included the curious argument that SB1367 “is essentially a new form of targeted regulation of abortion providers, or TRAP laws.”

Not so said state Rep. Smith. In March 2017 he told, “All we’re saying is if this is happening, we want to make sure that the baby is taken care of,” adding, “We want the Department of Health Services to adopt some basic operating procedures for the minimum standards of care that these places will have to follow.”

Categories: Abortion Survivor