By Amelia Wigton
November 4, 2005

The House Constitution Subcommittee held a hearing on November 1 to explore the legal, political and medical information regarding fetal pain and the constitutionality of laws that would require physicians to provide women, before they undergo an abortion, with information regarding the pain to the unborn.

Four experts from the fields of law and medicine testified at the hearing. Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) presided over the proceedings.

Two key pieces of legislation, each titled the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act of 2005, specify that women who seek abortion must be notified about the pain their unborn baby will experience.

S. 51, introduced in the Senate by Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kansas), was referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. It has 34 co-sponsors. The House version of the bill (H.R. 356) has 127 co-sponsors, is in the House Committee on the Judiciary and was introduced by Rep. Christopher Smith (R-New Jersey).

"CWA has been lobbying members of the Senate since the origination of this bill," said Lanier Swann, director of government relations. “This significant legislation is among our top priorities. We will continue to follow its progress accordingly."

The proposed legislation would require physicians to tell women about the pain that their child will likely endure during the abortion and offer anesthesia for the baby.

Remarkable, common sense evidence demonstrates that newborns and pre-born children experience pain. The Executive Director of the Children’s Hospital at the Memorial Health University Medical Center in Savannah, Georgia, Dr. Jean A. Wright testified at the hearing on her extensive professional experience with fetal and pediatric pain. Dr. Wright noted that her work with premature infants aged 23 to 40 weeks shows that the small babies always respond to pain.

In addition, extensive evidence says that the unborn have pain receptors early in their development.

According to Dr. Wright, "Studies at 16 weeks and beyond show hormonal responses to painful stimuli that exactly duplicate the responses that the infant and adult possess."

She notes that, unlike infants and adults, "the unborn lacks the ability to modulate itself in response to this pain." This means that the unborn feel pain more intensely because they have not developed the hormones necessary to regulate it.

This tragic discussion presents an obvious dilemma for pro-abortion advocates, because it assigns humanity to an unborn child. Some abortion procedures involve dismemberment, the introduction of a salt solution into the womb or crushing of the skull followed by removal of the brain.

"Not only do unborn children feel pain, the evidence suggests they feel pain more acutely than at any other stage of life," said Wendy Wright, CWA’s executive vice president. "The Constitution forbids cruel and unusual punishment for the guilty; we should not have a lesser standard for the innocent.

"Each woman considering an abortion has the right to know the excruciating pain her innocent unborn baby will experience. In order to make an informed decision on whether to undergo an abortion, mothers should be aware that the 20-week-or-older baby they are carrying will feel agonizing pain."

During surgery on premature or pre-born children, it is standard that mothers and their children receive anesthesia. A Harvard Law Review article, titled "The Science, Law, and Politics of Fetal Pain Legislation," points out:

"Outside of the abortion context, it is clear that fetal pain matters to women and to physicians who perform surgical procedures involving fetuses." The article goes on to say, "People act differently when abortion is involved."

The hearing showed terrible inconsistencies within current law regarding the sanctity of human life. According to testimony submitted from the National Right to Life Committee, because of strict humane slaughter laws in the livestock industry, animals who are slaughtered for food in America endure less pain than children who are aborted. This tragic consequence is another sad chapter in America’s abortion history.

Even Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, stated that her organization will not oppose the legislation because "women deserve access to this relevant information."

The issue of fetal pain from abortion must be discussed. CWA applauds leaders on Capitol Hill who have boldly stepped up to stop further suffering of the unborn.


Home