Nurses
 
     
  Michigan Nurses     For Life
EVENTS CONFERENCES MEMBERSHIP NEWSLETTERS LINKS CONTACT US
 
Articles of Interest

ABORATION ACTIVISTS: NO, UNBORN BABIES DON’T FEEL PAIN IN DISMEMBERMENT ABORTIONS

Of all the indefensible claims made by abortionists, there are some that apparently even they can’t bring themselves to take seriously — or argue in court.

Ultrasound in uteroTake, for example, the abortion lobby’s allegations against the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, a law now being enforced in 15 states and with a national version set to come up for a vote in the House of Representatives next week.

The measure has been on the books since Nebraska passed the first such law in 2010, protecting from abortion any unborn babies old enough to feel the pain of having their arms and legs ripped from their bodies. Yet, while major abortion profiteers and their enablers verbalize opposition to the legislation year after year, they remain all talk and no lawsuit.

Read more here...

THE AP STYLEBOOK AND HOW THE ABORTION ISSUE IS DESCRIBED

AP StylebookLet me offer just a few words about a couple of posts I’ve seen online regarding the Associated Press’ influential stylebook and the abortion issue.

If I understand the criticism it is that the new AP Stylebook has changed “pro-life” to “anti-abortion” and “pro-abortion” (or “pro-choice”) to “abortion rights.”

First things first. Clearly the change is a huge tactical and rhetorical advantage for pro-abortionists.

Read more here...

ANOTHER THREAT TO CONSCIENCE RIGHTS FOR MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS

2012 New York Times:  “Instead of attempting to legalize physician-assisted suicide, we should focus our energies on what really matters: improving care for the dying — ensuring that all patients can openly talk with their physicians and families about their wishes and have access to high-quality palliative or hospice care before they suffer needless medical procedures. The appeal of physician-assisted suicide is based on a fantasy. The real goal should be a good death for all dying patients.” (Emphasis added)

2016, Journal of the American Medical Association: “CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are increasingly being legalized, remain relatively rare, and primarily involve patients with cancer. Existing data do not indicate widespread abuse of these practices. (Emphasis added)

Read more here...

THE BIOETHICS PERIL

Thousands of medical ethicists and bioethicists, as they are called, professionally guide the unthinkable on its passage through the debatable on its way to becoming the justifiable until it is finally established as the unexceptionable. — Richard John NeuhausThe late Richard John Neuhaus

If you want to see what is likely to go awry in medical ethics and public healthcare policy, pay attention to the advocacy of bioethicists—at least of those who don’t identify themselves as “conservative” or “Catholic.” In their many journal articles and presentations at academic symposia, they unabashedly advocate for discarding the sanctity- and equality-of-life ethic as our moral cornerstone. Instead, most favor invidious and systemic medical discrimination predicated on a patient’s “quality of life,” which would endow the young, healthy, and able-bodied with the highest moral value—and, hence, with the greatest claim to medical resources.

Read more here...

CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS RELATING TO ASSISTED SUICIDE AND EUTHANASIA IN MI

This is a timeline of events focusing particularly on Dr. Jack Kevorkian and the 1998 campaign to legalize assisted suicide in Michigan, one of America's crucible experiences with the issues of assisted suicide and euthanasia. For a history focused on U.S. and international events ...

Read more here...

NEW YORK’S HIGHEST COURT FINDS THAT “AID-IN-DYING” IS ASSISTED SUICIDE AND THERE IS NO RIGHT TO ASSISTED SUICIDE

Gavel & SyringeThe Euthanasia Prevention Coalition commends the New York Court of Appeals for the unanimous ruling the state’s highest court made Thursday in Myers v. Schneiderman. The court found that aid-in-dying is assisted suicide and that there is no right to assisted suicide in New York.

This is not the first time that a State court has decided that aid-in-dying is assisted suicide while upholding a State assisted suicide law.

Read more here...

HUMAN GENETIC ENGINEERING BREAKTHROUGH RAISES ETHICAl CONCERNS

Shoukhrat MitalipovScientists in Oregon have successfully genetically modified human embryos, according to research published earlier this month. The researchers used a gene editing technique called CRISPR to repair a disease-causing mutation.

“In altering the DNA code of human embryos,” explains the MIT Technology Review, “the objective of scientists is to show that they can eradicate or correct genes that cause inherited disease, like the blood condition beta-thalassemia. The process is termed ‘germline engineering’ because any genetically modified child would then pass the changes on to subsequent generations via their own germ cells—the egg and sperm.”

Read more here...

ONE THIRD OF U.S. ADULTS HAVE ADVANCE MEDICAL DIRECTIVES

(Reuters Health) - Nearly 37 percent of Americans have advanced directives for end-of-life care if they become seriously ill or unable to make health care decisions, according to a new analysis of recent research.

Roughly half of people with living wills or other types of advanced medical directives were not suffering from a chronic illness, the researchers note.

“Improving end-of-life care has been a national conversation for some time now, presumably because it will affect all of us at some point and is a very personal matter,” said senior study author Dr. Katherine Courtright of the Fostering Improvement in End-of-Life Decision Science Program at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.

Read more here...

SCIENTISTS KILL UNBORN CHILDREN IN HUMAN GENETIC ENGINEERING EXPERIMENTS

Some of the most powerful technologies ever invented–which can literally change human life at the DNA level–are moving forward with very little societal discussion or sufficient regulatory oversight. Technology Review is now reporting an attempt in the US to use CRISPR to genetically modify a human embryo. From the story:

The first known attempt at creating genetically modified human embryos in the United States has been carried out by a team of researchers in Portland, Oregon, Technology Review has learned.

The effort, led by Shoukhrat Mitalipov of Oregon Health and Science University, involved changing the DNA of a large number of one-cell embryos with the gene-editing technique CRISPR, according to people familiar with the scientific results…

Now Mitalipov is believed to have broken new ground both in the number of embryos experimented upon and by demonstrating that it is possible to safely and efficiently correct defective genes that cause inherited diseases.

Read more here...

THE AMA CLAIMS IT IS NOT STUDYING THEIR POSITION ON PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE

AMARecently, numerous accounts in the media and online have indicated that the American Medical Association (AMA) is taking steps toward changing their official policy position on physician-assisted suicide [PAS] from opposed to neutral. Fortunately, this chatter is inaccurate. In fact, although the AMA is currently considering the policy landscape in the U.S. surrounding PAS, they have no plans to make any changes to their policy of opposition.

This confusion was laid bare in a New York Times article from January 16th that originally stated the AMA planned to change their policy position on PAS from opposed to neutral.

However, as you can see below from the January 19th correction to this article, the AMA responded that they have no such plans and are not actively considering any change to its policy on this issue.

Read more here...

FOUR MYTHS ABOUT DOCTOR-ASSISTED SUICIDE

IN a little more than a week, voters in Massachusetts will decide whether to allow doctors to “prescribe medication, at the request of a terminally ill patient meeting certain conditions, to end that person’s life.” A similar bill is being debated in New Jersey. Unfortunately, like so many health care questions, the debate about physician-assisted suicide is confused, characterized by four major falsehoods.

PAIN The fundamental claim behind arguments for physician-assisted suicide is that most patients who desire it are experiencing excruciating physical pain. The 1996 decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit supporting a constitutional right to physician-assisted suicide in Washington State summarized the conventional wisdom: “Americans are living longer, and when they finally succumb to illness, lingering longer, either in great pain or in astuporous, semi-comatose condition that results from the infusion of vast amounts of painkilling medications.”

Read more here...

Editor’s note: In the article below, these pictures provided the general public with the first glimpse of the humanity of the unborn child. They made a compelling argument against abortion.

“MY BODY, MY CHOICE”: WHY BODILY AUTONOMY DOESN’T JUSTIFY ABORTION

Abortion is justified, many of its defenders argue, because women have a right to control their own bodies. “My body, my choice,” signs and bumper stickers proclaim. The bodily autonomy argument takes a few different forms. None, however, are successful.

Some people think that the unborn (the human embryo or fetus) is a mere part of the woman’s body. But science, of course, has established that the unborn—though physically dependent on and inside of the mother—is a distinct, self-developing individual with his or her own DNA, brain, arms and legs, etc.

Abortion attacks and kills the body of someone else.

Read more here...

Editor’s Note: The following article is a critique of “Back to the Future of Nursing: What Progress Have We Made” published in the last update?

 

THE SLED TEST

What follows here is a way of presenting a clear rationale for the defense of unborn human life. The summary here is brief, but full details of this argument can be found here.

A way to demonstrate the value of the unborn child can be offered by using the SLED test.

SLED stands for Size, Level of Development, Environment and Degree of Dependency. As the defense unfolds it is easy to see that all of the “qualifications” society places on the unborn child for continued existence are artificial and would never be imposed on a child, perhaps a toddler, present before us.

Size: we come in all sizes—big, small, short, tall. Size clearly does not determine the value of life

Level of Development---we develop as individuals throughout the continuum of our lives—we never stop learning, experiencing and expanding our abilities

Environment—we all need a place to live, food to eat and air to breathe. Some of us live in mansions, some in bungalows. Some of us eat caviar and steak, some of us eat chicken and potatoes. Some of us have full lung capacities, some of us breathe less well—but breathe we do!

Level of Development—the infant develops physically into the toddler, to the child, to the teen, to the adult, to the mature person. As he/she develops physically, mental development takes place also. We do not say that the toddler had more value than the infant or the mature person more than the adult. Again, such development is a continuum.