Tag Archives: pregnancy

Report Finds Women Who Refuse Abortions Often Face Violent Attacks, Death

By Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor

Women who refuse requests from their husbands or boyfriends to have abortions are often finding themselves subject to violent attacks that sometimes result in their deaths. That’s the finding of a new report from the Elliot Institute, which calls the problem a “widespread epidemic.”

The new report, Forced Abortion in America, is drawing attention to attacks on pregnant women and girls in order to prevent them from continuing their pregnancies.

It points out a “widespread epidemic of unwanted, coerced and forced abortions taking place in the United States.”
The report notes how research suggests most abortions are likely unwanted or coerced, with one survey of women who had abortions finding that 64 percent said they felt pressured by others to abort.

The same survey found 80 percent of women said they did not receive the counseling they needed to make a decision — even though more than half said they felt rushed or uncertain about the abortion.

The consequences for those who refuse abortion can be dangerous and even deadly, according to the report, which details cases of women and girls facing violent attacks or murder for resisting abortion.

Studies of death rates among pregnant women in the U.S. have found that homicide is the leading cause of death among pregnant women, the authors say.

The cases detailed in the report represent only a fraction of the more than 200 cases the Elliot Institute has on file of women and girls being attacked or killed with the intent of getting rid of the pregnancy. The updated report contains new cases as well as a new special section on teens and forced abortion.

Among the new cases added to the report:

* A Kansas man and his wife were convicted of sexual abuse after the man raped his stepdaughters over a several year period, resulting in four pregnancies and at least one abortion, performed on an 11-year-old. The case was reported to authorities by a pro-life organization after one of the girls visited their office seeking an abortion; the group says that the abortion business did the abortion without informing authorities of any suspected abuse.

* Two Ohio teenagers were convicted for kidnapping and assaulting a pregnant teen, killing her unborn child. Police said one of the boys thought he had fathered the child, and the two hit the teen and kicked her the abdomen to cause the death of her 8-month-old unborn child. One of them allegedly told her that she should have gotten an abortion, and that “now your baby is going to die.” DNA tests showed the teen was not the father.

* A man was sentenced to 9 years in prison for secretly giving his wife an abortion-inducing drug after she refused to abort. The woman secretly taped him admitting to giving her the drug but trying to convince her that she really wanted to have an abortion.

* A high school junior was beaten to death by her 22-year-old boyfriend after she refused to have an abortion. According to police, the man hit the teen at least four times on the head with a bat and admitted he did not want her to have the baby. He pleaded guilty after leading police to the girl’s body, which he had buried under leaves in the woods. The man was sentenced to 22 years to life in prison.

“Our files contain hundreds of stories from women and girls who were attacked or killed with the intent of getting rid of the pregnancy,” said Elliot Institute spokesperson Amy Sobie.

She told LifeNews.com, “We’ve been collecting these stories for more than six years through mainstream media sources and pro-life organizations who have been diligently reporting on these kinds of cases. The information is out there, but many people aren’t aware of what might be going on in their own communities.”

Sobie said people might not immediately connect this with abortion because in many cases the woman or girl never makes it to an abortion center — she’s attacked or killed before she even gets there.

“In our opinion, the availability of abortion makes it easier for those around her to think that she shouldn’t be having this baby, and gives those with an interest in getting rid of the unborn child a justification for doing so,” she said.

Some of the new cases included in the report involve assailants using abortifacients or other drugs to secretly induce an abortion. For example, in several cases the attackers secretly put the RU-486 abortion drug in their wives’ or girlfriends’ food or drink with the intent of killing the unborn child.

In addition to destroying the life of the unborn child and subjecting the mother to the emotional trauma of the loss of her child, these attacks may also put the mother at risk of physical problems without her being aware of it. Side effects of RU-486 include hemorrhaging, nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, painful cramping, heart problems, infections and death of the mother.

And the availability of the drug may make it easier for those who want to cause an abortion to do so without the need to use pressure, intimidation or force to get the mother to an abortion business — putting more women and girls at risk.

Other new cases focus on pregnancy discrimination by employers, schools and others that can make women feel they have no choice but to abort.

For example, a study published in the Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics found that student athletes conceal pregnancy, feel forced into abortion or fear losing financial aid because of pregnancy, which could jeopardize their ability to stay in school.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission recently settled cases with two large U.S. companies for refusing to hire a pregnant applicant and firing an employee who became pregnant.

“Pressure may also come from bosses, school counselors and others who see a pregnancy as a threat to the woman’s ability to do her job or continue her education,” Sobie said. “The EEOC has reported an increase in the number of pregnancy discrimination complaints filed against employees, and a number of large companies have settled or are facing lawsuits over claims they fired or demoted female workers who became pregnant.”

Elliot Institute director Dr. David Reardon said that cases of women being pressured, threatened, or subjected to violence if they refuse to abort are not unusual. He pointed out that studies have shown that homicide is the leading killer of pregnant women in the U.S. and that women in abusive relationships are at risk for increased violence during pregnancy.

“In many of the cases documented for this report, police and witnesses reported that acts of violence and murder took place after the woman refused to abort or because the attacker didn’t want the pregnancy,” he said. “Even if a woman isn’t physically threatened, she often faces intense pressure, abandonment, lack of support, or emotional blackmail if she doesn’t abort. While abortion is often described as a ‘choice,’ women who’ve been there tell a very different story.”

Reardon said the report underscores the need for legislation, like that recently passed in Nebraska, holding abortion businesses liable for failing to screen women for evidence of coercion or pressure to abort and to direct them to people and resources that can help them.

“Too often, abortion clinics and others simply assume that if a woman is coming for an abortion, it is her free choice,” he said. “This ‘no questions asked’ policy is especially harmful to those in abusive situations, including young girls who are victims of sexual predators. Women should not be forced into unwanted abortions and subjected to violence or pressure from others.”

Link: www.lifenews.com/nat6356.html

Cell phone use during pregnancy and childhood behavioral problems

In the July edition of Epidemiology, researchers reported that children whose mothers used cell phones while pregnant were more likely to have emotional and behavioral problems.

A team of scientists looked at a group of more than 13,000 children, including their time in utero. When the children reached age 7, mothers were asked to complete a questionnaire about their own cell phone use in pregnancy and their child‘s use of cell phones, as well as their children‘s behavior and health.

Children with both prenatal and postnatal cell phone exposure were 80 percent more likely to have emotional problems, conduct problems, hyperactivity, or problems with peers. Children who were only exposed prenatally had a higher likelihood of behavior problems compared to those who were only exposed postnatally, but not as high as those who were exposed at both times.

Dr. Mercola believes that an 80 percent increase in behavior problems is pretty drastic. In a recent article on the subject, he wrote,

“Could it be, as some have suggested, that mothers who use cell phones frequently are simply not very attentive parents? Sure. But those children who were only exposed in utero had significant increases in behavior problems too, which suggests there may be something deeper going on.”

Dr. Mecola also explained that something deeper.

“Electromagnetic radiation from cell phones poses a unique hazard to a developing fetus. Animal studies have shown that electromagnetic fields in that frequency range can affect their liver enzymes, glands, muscles, hormone balance, and heart and bone marrow. In fact, the cellular stresses caused by information-carrying radio waves can actually alter the DNA structure of both you and your child.

Autonomic nervous system expert Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt has noted this radiation can easily flip certain genes in the mitochondria. If this gene sequence is altered in a pregnant woman, she can pass her damaged mitochondria on to the child.

The child can then develop a mitochondrial disorder, which can include muscular atrophy and severe developmental problems. Even autism has been associated with cell phone use.

Because children are still growing, they also have far thinner skulls than adults. This makes their brains far more susceptible to these information-carrying radio waves. If you are, say, holding your infant while talking on a cell phone, the radiation plume can easily reach the child and penetrate their skull.

Of course, if you allow your child to talk on the cell phone himself, then this radiation will reach him directly.

To see an illustration showing just how much higher the electromagnetic radiation absorption rates are in a 5- and 10-year old’s brain versus that of an adult, see this article from a previous newsletter.

It’s very important that you keep cell phones away from infants, babies, children and pregnant women now, as the damage may not start showing up for 10 years or more, and by then it will be too late.

So, why hasn’t our government done something about this? A part of the deeper problem is that they are powerless. They serve the interests of the powerful, which means those corporations and politicians making big money. Yes, the FDA, FCC, and EPA have called for research on the problem, but the study reported by Epidemiology was conducted in the Netherlands not the USA. Dr. Mecola also goes into greater detail why the federal agencies are not doing much about the problem.

I should add that scientists have known about 20 years (maybe more) that high doses of electromagnetic waves is harmful to animals and humans. As Dr. Mercola points out, “[t]hese radio waves are literally everywhere, transmitting signals to wireless computers, cordless phones, cell phone base stations and countless other wireless technologies.”

In another article by Dr. Mecola, “Why Your Cell Phone Can Hurt Your Children,” a list of health problems caused by RF radio waves (cell phone, wireless, etc.) included:

*  Alzheimer’s, senility and dementia
*  Parkinson’s
*  Autism
*  Fatigue
*  Headaches
*  Sleep disruptions
*  Altered memory function, poor concentration and spatial awareness
*  Cancer and brain tumors
*  Sterility

Notice, health problems like sleep disruptions, headaches as well as the problems mentioned in the Epidemiology study such as hyperactivity, emotional and behavioral problems are related. In a previous post, I reported on the discovery that ADD and hyperactivity were often related to lack of sleep and even mild appendicitis. Yet, children have been drugged out the wazoo for profit not for a cure. The cure is to limit or end cell phone, wireless computer, iPod, and cordless phone use and maintain good health practices.

Read Dr. Mecola’s articles for tips on cell phone safety, good health practices, or for more in-depth information.

Women, what you wear and eat may be killing you and your loved ones

Dr. Joseph Mecola always comes up with an interesting problem and advice in his weekly newsletter. This week is an exception–there are more than two. As the title of this post indicates, only two will be covered here.

The Poison Kiss: Lead in Lipstick

Last year it was revealed that many lipsticks sold in the United States contain lead. And these were not off brands from a discount store, either.

More than half (61 percent) of 33 name-brand lipsticks tested in September 2007 contained lead levels ranging from 0.03 to 0.65 parts per million (ppm). And one-third of them had more lead than the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s 0.1 ppm limit for lead in candy.

It may sound shocking, but the FDA has not set a lead limit for cosmetics, including lipstick!

Yes, you put it directly on your lips. And yes, you ingest it when you wear it (the average women ingests 10 pounds of lipstick in a lifetime). But it can contain as much lead as the manufacturers see fit, and it doesn’t have to say so on the label.

Among the U.S. lipsticks with the highest lead levels were:

* L’Oreal Colour Riche “True Red” –- 0.65 ppm
* L’Oreal Colour Riche “Classic Wine” –- 0.58 ppm
* Cover Girl Incredifull Lipcolor “Maximum Red” –- 0.56 ppm
* Dior Addict “Positive Red” –- 0.21 ppm

I think names like “Toxic Red” or “Maximum Lead Red” would be more fitting, don’t you?

Dr. Mecola suggests that women watch out for the following particularly harmful ingredients in their lipstick:

* Paraben, a chemical found in underarm deodorants and other cosmetics that has been shown to mimic the action of the female hormone estrogen, which can drive the growth of human breast tumors.

* Phthalates, plasticizing ingredients (present in nearly three-quarters of 72 products tested by the Environmental Working Group), which have been linked to birth defects in the reproductive system of boys and lower sperm-motility in adult men, among other problems.

* Mercury, used in mascara, gels, and even eye drops, this metal can damage your brain function. Look for it listed as “thimerosal.”

* Musks, used as fragrances, can accumulate in your body, and have been linked to skin irritation, hormone disruption, and cancer in laboratory studies.

* Artificial fragrances, which are among the top five known allergens, and can cause asthma and trigger asthma attacks. Fragrances can also contain neurotoxins and cause hormone disruption.

* Petroleum byproducts, used in makeup, shampoo (even baby shampoo), face creams and more, these chemicals have been linked to cancer.

* Methylisothiazolinone (MIT), a chemical used in shampoo to prevent bacteria from developing, which may have detrimental effects on your nervous system.

Dr. Mecola says, “Your cosmetics should be just as pure as the food you eat because ultimately they both end up in the same place: your body.” Yes, but what is happening to the bodies of those you lovely women kiss?

Dr. Mecola recommends visiting Campaign for Safe Cosmetics and Environmental Working Group’s Skin Deep Cosmetic Safety Database. More information about these two organizations and about this issue can found at Dr. Mecola’s online newsletter.

Okay. So you have wowed the guy of your dreams with your charm and good looks and maybe a few smooches. You married the sap, danced the tango in bed, and now your expecting yout first, second, or … whatever born child.

Dr. Mecola says, Just Say No to Nuts During Pregnancy

In recent health studies, researchers found that daily consumption of nut products increases the odds that a child will have wheezing by 42 percent, shortness of breath by 58 percent, and steroid use to ease asthma symptoms by 62 percent. Overall, the odds of developing asthma symptoms for a child whose mother ate nuts daily are 47 percent.

I think it’s important to realize that while DAILY consumption of nut products increased the odds that a child would develop asthma, the researchers did not find an association between rare or regular consumption of nuts, wrote Dr. Mecola.

After reviewing thousands of medical studies, Dr. Mecola is convinced that “the single most important dietary influence for prenatal nutrition is adequate omega-3 fats. Optimizing your omega-3 intake will virtually guarantee that your baby is full term.”

He claims that birthing premature babies can be easily avoided by consuming optimal dietary amounts of Omega-3 oils. He believes the best source of omega-3 is krill oil, which also contains essential fatty acids DHA and EPA. Other sources are flax seeds and walnut but he warns that walnuts can kill a weight loss or weight maintaining diet. He advises to avoid trying to substitute animal omega-3s with those plant types mentioned.

“So, to recap, if you’re healthy, seeds and nuts are likely to be fine in SMALL quantities, however you may want to avoid nuts altogether during pregnancy if you have a family history of asthma,” says Dr. Mecola.

To read Dr. Mecola’s article, go here.