{"id":279995,"date":"2022-11-22T10:42:28","date_gmt":"2022-11-22T16:42:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=279995"},"modified":"2022-11-25T10:43:57","modified_gmt":"2022-11-25T16:43:57","slug":"mom-images-10-week-miscarried-twins","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/mom-images-10-week-miscarried-twins\/","title":{"rendered":"Mom shares images of 10-week miscarried twins, refuting Guardian’s ‘pregnancy tissue’ farce"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

A mother who recently miscarried twins at 10 weeks penned a letter to The Guardian<\/a> in response to its recently published and highly inaccurate article on fetal development \u2014 an article that has been labeled as “fake news” by various individuals on social media and criticized by doctors. The mother has shared an adaptation of her letter with Live Action News, addressing the article, “What a pregnancy actually looks like before 10 weeks\u00a0\u2014 in pictures,” which featured images that were missing the actual preborn child<\/em>.<\/p>\n

The Guardian published its inaccurate piece about fetal development last month and immediately received harsh criticism<\/a> and pushback from pro-life and pro-abortion readers alike. It claimed the images it shared from the pro-abortion MYA Network were of “pregnancy tissue” or a “gestational sac” with “no visible embryo,” and that it was sharing them to counter “misinformation” about life inside the womb. But evidence shows that it is The Guardian and MYA Network<\/a> that are spreading misinformation, and the news outlet appears to be\u00a0contradicting<\/a> its own reporting from 2009<\/a>.<\/p>\n

URGENT:\u00a0<\/b>For every dollar given, 34 more people can be reached with the truth about abortion. Will you join us in this life-saving work as a monthly donor today?<\/i><\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

\"\"

Guardian article from 2009 showing preborn child in first trimester<\/p><\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"

Guardian article 2022 allegedly showing “pregnancy before 10 weeks”<\/p><\/div>\n

Dr. Christina Francis, an OB\/GYN and chair of the\u00a0American Association of Pro-life Obstetricians and Gynecologists<\/a>, called the outlet’s images \u201cintentionally misleading,” adding, “They state that they are pictures of gestational sacs, ignoring the inconvenient fact that in pregnancy, the gestational sac surrounds the embryonic or fetal human being \u2014 which have clearly been removed before these photos were taken.\u201d<\/p>\n

The backlash from readers came quickly following the article’s release on social media.<\/p>\n

\u201c… Where is the fetus in any of those pictures?? If you truly support all that abortion involves, then you should not have anything to hide and should embrace EVERYTHING about it,\u201d @merryfull1\u00a0wrote<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\u201cThat\u2019s just tissue and an empty sac. It wouldn\u2019t be a pregnancy without the embryo. Why don\u2019t your photos include the embryo? I suspect it\u2019s so that it resembles the \u2018clump of cells\u2019 you like to talk about rather than the developing human it actually is. Misleading photos!\u201d\u00a0tweeted<\/a>\u00a0@jrjuara.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"

Guardian’s image at 9 weeks (left) vs. mother’s images of miscarried twins at 10 weeks (photos right)<\/p><\/div>\n

Yet the most powerful responses<\/a> came from parents who shared images of their miscarried babies at or about the same gestational age that The Guardian claims its photos represent. One mother, Maria, sent a letter to the MYA Network and The Guardian this week after miscarrying 10-week twins, Amanda and Jireh, noting that the misleading images the news outlet shared could prove dangerous.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Amanda’s hands at 10 weeks and one day. Photo courtesy of Maria. Do not reprint.<\/p><\/div>\n

“The images presented in the [G]uardian and on this link\u00a0https:\/\/myanetwork.org\/the-issue-of-tissue\/<\/a>\u00a0are potentially misleading and dangerous. If your aim is to protect women’s health it is imperative\u00a0that you provide accurate images AND acknowledge that there is a wide variety in how a pregnancy could\u00a0look at those stages depending on whether it is a normally progressing pregnancy,” wrote Maria.<\/p>\n

She noted that such images could lead women to believe their at-home abortion is complete when it isn’t \u2014 which can cause a life-threatening infection if not caught in time. The abortion pill carries a risk of incomplete abortion with\u00a02-7% of women needing a follow-up surgical abortion to end their pregnancy or to stop too much bleeding, according to\u00a0GenBioPro<\/a>, the manufacturer of generic mifepristone, one of the two drugs used in the abortion pill regimen.<\/p>\n

Thirty-one-year-old Sarah Dunn\u00a0died<\/a>\u00a0after taking the abortion pill in the UK in March 2022. It has been confirmed that her death was due to sepsis caused by the abortion pill. The abortion pill has actually been found to be\u00a0four times more dangerous<\/a><\/em>\u00a0for women than a first-trimester surgical abortion.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Photo of Jireh’s foot at 10 weeks and one day. Photo courtesy of Maria. Do not reprint.<\/p><\/div>\n

Maria continued, “The images you provided are simply images of sacs. The embryo at 9 weeks (which is actually called a fetus at 9 weeks, as I’m sure you know) is absolutely easily visible to the naked eye. A quick [G]oogle search reveals that the fetus is about an inch long, has discernible limbs and facial features taking shape, etc. The fetus is also developing a placenta at 9 weeks. Anyone miscarrying or doing an at home abortion at 9 weeks should absolutely expect to see and confirm that they are seeing FAR more than what you pictured on your website or in the [G]uardian.”<\/p>\n

Maria noted in the letter that whether or not a person is excited about being pregnant does not change fetal development. What an embryo or a fetus looks like does not change based on a person’s feelings about life inside the womb or about abortion.<\/p>\n

“The only way an embryo would not be visible to the naked eye with [an] 8 or 9 week pregnancy would be if it was destroyed and dismembered during the [D&C procedure<\/a>], if the “embryo” was actually a blighted ovum or if the embryo had stopped growing quite a while before 9 weeks. You know that and so does anyone who has miscarried a pregnancy at this time,” wrote Maria.<\/p>\n

A D&C or aspiration abortion is a first-trimester surgical procedure during which the abortionist uses suctioning equipment to rapidly and powerfully pull the embryo or fetus from the uterus at a force so strong that the baby is torn to pieces. An embryo and fetus would likely not be distinguishable because their body has been destroyed, though their arms or legs and potentially other body parts may be intact enough to be recognizable.<\/p>\n