Antiabortion OB/GYNs again push for C-Section abortions
Medical suggestion for riskier methods going relatively unchallenged in government hearings
The push to get OB/GYNs to adopt C-sections as the primary method of legally performing abortions in states where the exception came into play was once again front and center as an antiabortion doctor testified before Congress.
Christina Francis, a board-certified OB/GYN and member of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, spoke before a committee that was chaired by Washington Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), former Chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee.
Murray created a HELP Committee hearing, “The Assault on Women’s Freedoms: How Abortion Bans Have Created a Health Care Nightmare Across America,” about the tremendous harm, chaos, and heartbreak the Dobbs decision and Republican abortion bans have created over the past two years since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.
In the testimony, Francis said that medication abortion had four times the likelihood of other methods bringing complications. Her organization is at odds with the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which advocates for greater abortion access and against bans and restrictions limiting the procedure. One passage was particularly telling:
Our intent when we treat an ectopic pregnancy or other life-threatening conditions in pregnancy is to save the life of the mother, not to directly end the life of the embryonic or fetal human being. Therefore, these are not abortions, a fact even Planned Parenthood acknowledges. Life-threatening conditions in pregnancy most commonly occur after the point of viability (where the fetus can survive outside of the mother’s womb). In these situations, it is absolutely ludicrous to suggest that an induced abortion is needed. We simply deliver the mother and provide care for both her and her baby – something that is not only consistent with the oath we took as physicians to never intentionally harm our patients, but is also much more expedient than an abortion procedure at this stage of pregnancy. In the rare, but real, circumstances where this occurs prior to the point of viability (now 21-22 weeks in some centers), we can provide life-saving care to the mother in a way that also respects the dignity of her preborn child. Again, these interventions are not prevented by any law in this country.
Other experts, including some from the pro-choice side, testified at the hearing. The video of the hearing and each person's testimony is available here.
As a side note, abortion rights leaders need to start providing counter-testimony to the argument that C-sections are the preferred method to address dangerous pregnancies. In most of the testimony I read from this hearing, that wasn’t discussed head-on and was alluded to by Francis. Medical experts should be part of this discussion and rebut or outright refute these arguments.