{"id":289932,"date":"2023-04-26T14:40:25","date_gmt":"2023-04-26T19:40:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=289932"},"modified":"2023-04-28T16:03:06","modified_gmt":"2023-04-28T21:03:06","slug":"biden-hhs-born-alive-language-exclude-preborn","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/biden-hhs-born-alive-language-exclude-preborn\/","title":{"rendered":"Biden HHS using language meant to protect abortion survivors to exclude preborn as ‘persons’"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

The Biden administration is using a provision intended to protect abortion survivors as a way to dehumanize preborn children.<\/p>\n

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released<\/a> a proposed rule change, claiming that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) does not define what a person is. It referenced 1 U.S. Code 8<\/a> (1 U.S.C. 8), from the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002, which reads:<\/p>\n

In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words \u201cperson\u201d, \u201chuman being\u201d, \u201cchild\u201d, and \u201cindividual\u201d, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.<\/em><\/p>\n

Therefore, the proposed rule claims that this excludes<\/em> preborn children from being classified as human beings, noting<\/a>,\u00a0\u201cThe Department understands\u00a01 U.S.C. 8<\/a>\u00a0to provide a definition of \u2018person\u2019 and \u2018child\u2019 that is consistent with the Department\u2019s understanding of that term, as it is used in the SSA, HIPAA, and the HIPAA Rules and does not include a fertilized egg, embryo, or fetus.”<\/p>\n

\"Walgreens<\/a><\/p>\n

The proposed change also states:<\/p>\n

Thus, the Department proposes to clarify the definition of \u201cnatural person\u201d in a manner consistent with 1 U.S.C. 8. In so doing, the Department would make clear that all terms subsumed within the definition of \u201cnatural person,\u201d such as \u201cindividual,\u201d\u2009which refers to a \u201cperson\u201d who is the subject of PHI under the HIPAA Rules, is limited to the confines of the term \u201cperson.\u201d\u2009The Department would also make clear that \u201cnatural person,\u201d as used in the definition of \u201cperson\u201d under the HIPAA Rules, is limited to the definition at 1 U.S.C. 8.<\/em><\/p>\n

This is a brazenly cruel twisting of the intention of the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, legislation that abortion supporters continue to argue is unnecessary on the claim that abortion survivors do not exist<\/a>. Additionally, it’s a complete and utter denial of scientific fact. Based on all basic biological principles<\/a>, preborn children are alive, even before their hearts\u00a0start beating<\/a>. At the moment of fertilization<\/a>, the child \u2014 though a mere single-celled organism \u2014 already has his or her own unique DNA, with traits like sex, hair color, eye color, and countless more already determined.<\/p>\n