Planned Parenthood opposes laws that would allow a woman the chance to see her baby on the ultrasound screen before an abortion. According to Planned Parenthood’s website:
“While the ultrasound bill was amended in Virginia, it is still an appalling and offensive government overreach that is designed to shame women who are seeking legal health care. Governor McDonnell clearly has a political agenda to restrict women’s access to health care, and the ultrasound law is just the latest example of his extreme agenda,” said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “The bottom line is that Governor McDonnell is looking to further his own political ambitions at the risk of hurting women’s health in Virginia. The country has stood up and is taking notice.”
“Planned Parenthood Federation of America Strongly Condemns Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell Signing Mandatory Ultrasound Bill” Planned Parenthood Website
And yet, when commenting on the morality of using ultrasound pictures to determine whether an unborn baby is a girl in order to abort based on her gender, Planned Parenthood’s director of community relations in Lancaster County, PA said:
“The information about a woman’s pregnancy has to be made available to her. We can’t legislate what a man or a woman will do with medical information. Physicians with problems with the way a patient will use information they give them should let the patient know so they can go elsewhere.”
Christopher Farley “The Debate Over Uses of Prenatal Testing” USA Today Feb 2, 1989 1D
Planned Parenthood opposes women’s access to ultrasound technology if it means that they may be dissuaded from abortion, but supports the use of ultrasound technology if its purpose is to determine whether a baby should be aborted. This blatant pro-abortion bias truly shows where Planned Parenthood’s priorities lie.
Amy Hagstrom Miller, head of group of Texas abortion clinics, Whole Woman’s Health:
” Sixty-five percent of the women we serve have one or more children. They’ve all seen an ultrasound before and yet we force them to watch another as if they don’t know what’s growing inside of them. They know, and they are committed…”
“I had decided before the consultation that I wanted to see the picture of the [ultrasound] scan (out of pure curiosity really). However, I was not asked if I wanted to see the scan and after the scan I didn’t regret not asking to see it.”
Pro-choice activist Kathleen Reeves writes about laws requiring sonograms before abortions:
“I think we can be pretty sure that a woman about to have an abortion is aware of what’s inside her womb. And in case she’s not, the doctors who counsel her before the abortion are perfectly capable of telling her…. The legislators behind these bills are arrogant in assuming they have something to say to a woman about her “womb.” There’s no doubt that, as a woman, it’s hard to predict how you’ll feel after an abortion. But an image of the fetus sheds no light on the decision and adds nothing to the emotional process. On the other hand, having a cadre of politicians take this image by force does add something to the experience: the sense of having been intimidated, assumed stupid, and even violated. “
So what are women aware of that is in their wombs? Reeves refuses to come out and say. She may be tacitly admitting that women know they are pregnant with babies, or she may only mean that women are aware of fetal development. A look at women’s stories seems to indicate otherwise. The same stories will show that abortion workers do not give information about fetal development to women.
Seeing an image on a baby in the womb must add to the “emotional process” of abortion decision or pro-choicers would not oppose these laws so vehemently.
“The abortionist knows that if the mother knew there was a heartbeat or saw the fetus (baby) on the ultrasound, she would probably change her mind about the abortion. When an ultrasound was performed at the abortion clinic, the screen was turned away from the mother and the sound was turned off so the mother could not hear or see it.”
Brenda Pratt-Shafer, David Shafer What the Nurse Saw: Eyewitness to Abortion (Mustang, Oklahoma: Tate Publishing & Enterprise, LLC, 2016) 29
Chris Aubert was pro-choice and the father of two aborted babies. He had willingly gone along with his girlfriends’ abortions and was strongly pro-choice. But when his wife had a sonogram of their first child, his views changed:
“When [his wife] was about eight weeks pregnant, I saw for the first time in my life in the ultrasound waiting room a fetal development chart and was stunned by what it showed.
Before I could process this information, we were called into the ultrasound room. On the screen was that supposedly unviable tissue mass moving around, right before my eyes. I couldn’t believe it, and I pointed at the screen excitedly and said out loud, “I want to meet the person who says that’s not a baby, because there is no doubt that’s a baby!”…
Instantly, I understood the evil of abortion and was flooded with shame and sorrow for having been instrumental in the deaths of two of my own little babies.
Literally only minutes earlier I had been pro-choice; now I was pro-life.”
Patrick Madrid Surprised by Life (Manchester, New Hampshire: Sophia Institute Press, 2017) 107
Barbara Chishko of Oklahoma, who works in a crisis pregnancy center, told the following story:
“The images seen through ultrasonography of unborn babies leave indelible imprints on the hearts and minds of all who see them. A young woman came to our office. She wanted to abort her baby. We explained fetal development at which time she told us we were lying about the developing baby. We offered an ultrasound to confirm her pregnancy and she accepted. Upon scanning her abdomen she immediately saw her baby sucking its thumb. Her words were, “look at my baby, it is perfect.” Needless to say she continued her pregnancy.”
Terry Ianora Ordinary Heroes: Creating a Culture of Life (Eugene, Oregon: Camel Heart Media, 2013) 47
“Mary Lou Hendry, sanctity of human life director for the Florida Baptist Children’s Home, said every woman who has agreed to an ultrasound exam in its mobile unit and has viewed an image of her child has chosen life. Cheri Martin said the success rate of ultrasound at the San Marcos, Texas, center is 95 percent.”
A reporter wrote about a woman who came to New Life Pregnancy Center intending to have an abortion. The article quotes Debbie Gillmore, director of the center:
“The woman declined the center’s gift of a baby hat, saying, “No. I’m not so sure I want to go through with this,” Gillmore recalled.”
The pregnant woman later came back for an appointment to see her baby on the ultrasound. The article says:
“The ultrasound technician displayed on the monitor her unborn child, arms and legs moving. When the beating heart appeared on the monitor, the woman blurted out, “There it is,” Gillmore reported in a written account. The technician gave the pregnant woman a model of an unborn baby about the developmental age of hers that she had just observed. Holding the fetal model, the woman looked at the face and paused before telling the technician, “Well, I guess I’d better start thinking about a name.”