{"id":214967,"date":"2019-12-06T08:30:21","date_gmt":"2019-12-06T14:30:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=214967"},"modified":"2024-09-20T16:21:00","modified_gmt":"2024-09-20T21:21:00","slug":"facts-ohio-not-force-reimplant-ectopic-pregnancies","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/facts-ohio-not-force-reimplant-ectopic-pregnancies\/","title":{"rendered":"THE FACTS: New Ohio bill would not force doctors to try to reimplant ectopic pregnancies"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

After Representative Candice Keller <\/span>introduced HB 413<\/span><\/a>, a bill that defines an “unborn child” as a person “from fertilization until live birth” and which would ban nearly all abortions in the state of Ohio, abortion activists and mainstream media immediately attacked the bill with unfair distortions of the law\u2019s treatment of ectopic pregnancies. A <\/span>piece<\/span><\/a> recently published by Time is a prime example.<\/span><\/p>\n

FALSE CLAIM: Under the bill, a doctor would be required to try to reimplant an ectopic pregnancy into the uterus or face prison time.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The article alleges physicians would be required to treat an ectopic pregnancy by attempting to reimplant the preborn baby in the womb, thus causing potentially serious harm to the woman, since current medical treatment <\/span>has not yet found a way<\/span><\/a> to safely and reliably do this. In an ectopic pregnancy, the baby is implanted outside the uterus, most often in the fallopian tube but sometimes in the mother\u2019s abdomen. The condition is always fatal for the preborn baby if implanted in the fallopian tube, and almost always fatal if in the abdomen. It is also one of the <\/span>leading causes of death<\/span><\/a> for women in the first trimester.<\/span><\/p>\n

The author states: \u201cUnder the bill, physicians who perform abortions would face 15 years to life in prison \u2014 unless the mother\u2019s life is in danger, or if the physician \u2018takes all possible steps\u2019 to save the fetus\u2019 life. The bill claims that one example of a procedure to protect the fetus would be \u2018attempting to reimplant an ectopic pregnancy into the woman\u2019s uterus.\u2019\u201d She paints a grim picture: \u201cIn essence, the bill seems to suggest that doctors could avoid jail time by performing a procedure that does not exist.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

THE FACTS:<\/strong> This section of the bill actually<\/em> states that\u00a0while requiring physicians to take “all possible steps to preserve the life of the unborn child, while preserving the life of the woman,\u201d it clarifies that \u201c[s]uch steps include,<\/span> if applicable<\/i><\/b>, attempting to reimplant an ectopic pregnancy into the woman’s uterus” (emphasis added).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The use of the phrase “if applicable” means that the law<\/a> isn’t<\/em> requiring physicians to conduct a procedure that is presently not possible; it simply leaves room for medical discretion if such a procedure ever becomes available and widespread in the future. The bill also\u00a0does not assert that it is medically possible to reimplant an ectopic pregnancy<\/strong>.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Attacking a pro-life bill for something it does not require<\/em> is misleading but unfortunately <\/span>not surprising<\/span><\/a>, given the pro-abortion media’s standard mode of operation. This kind of fallacious argument discredits abortion activists. Elsewhere in the article, the author even takes a jab at pro-life heartbeat laws with a false (and unsubstantiated) claim about preborn babies, namely that \u201cscientists say that a fetus does not possess what most people would call a heart\u201d early in development. On the contrary, <\/span>the scientific consensus<\/a> is clear that a preborn baby has a functioning heart by 22 days after conception, and possibly even sooner.<\/span><\/p>\n