Montana voters reject law requiring medical care for infants post-birth

By Chris Alexis

As the news cycle has continued to buzz about the 2022 midterm elections, a related story emerged that is absolutely chilling.

Residents of Montana voted down the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act, which would have required medical professionals to attempt to save the lives of infants who survive abortions or are born prematurely. 

A total of 52.6% of voters rejected the act while 47.4% supported it—with a difference of about 20,000 votes at the time the Associated Press called the results. 

The bill states: 

“A health care provider performing an abortion shall take all medically appropriate and reasonable steps to preserve the life and health of a born-alive infant who is viable. If an abortion performed in a hospital results in a live birth of a viable infant, the health care provider shall provide immediate medical care to the infant.”

It also states that an 

“infant born alive is a legal person for all purposes under the laws of the state and is entitled to the protections of the laws, including the right to appropriate and reasonable medical care and treatment.” 

There were also criminal penalties included for medical professionals who would refuse to take those life-saving measures. 

According to the text of the measure: 

“A health care provider who purposely, knowingly, or negligently violates [section 4] is guilty of a felony and upon conviction shall be fined an amount not to exceed $50,000, be imprisoned in a state prison for a term not to exceed 20 years, or both.” 

Horrifyingly, infants being left to die is nothing new. 

There has been Congressional testimony on the subject from medical professionals who have first-hand experience. 

Let’s examine the testimony of Jill Stanek, a nurse who spoke at the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act Hearing before the U. S. Senate Judiciary Committee on February 11, 2020, having also previously testified more than a dozen times before Congressional committees and state legislatures.

Stanek shared a harrowing experience of a baby who was aborted because of Down syndrome. The child survived and was given only “comfort care.” Doctors refused to save the child’s life. 

Stanek testified:

“I could not bear the thought of this suffering child dying alone, so I rocked him for the 45 minutes that he lived. He was 21 to 22 weeks old, weighed about 1/2 pound, and was about the size of my hand. He was too weak to move very much, expending all his energy attempting to 2 breathe. Toward the end he was so quiet I couldn’t tell if he was still alive unless I held him up to the light to see if his heart was still beating through his chest wall.”

She added:

“After he was pronounced dead, I folded his little arms across his chest, wrapped him in a tiny shroud, and carried him to the hospital morgue where we took all our dead patients.”

According to the official court documents, a spokesman for Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Ill., where Stanek had witnessed the aborted child’s tragic end, told the Chicago Sun-Times that between 10%-20% of babies victimized by abortion actually “survive for short times.” 

Stanek said that based on her personal observations, it “was not uncommon for a live aborted baby to linger for an hour or two or even longer.”

“One abortion survivor I was aware of lived for almost eight hours, she said.

Another excerpt from the official court testimony

Allison described walking into the Soiled Utility Room on two separate occasions to find live aborted babies left naked on a scale and the metal counter. She told about the patient that she herself had who didn’t know that her baby might be aborted alive and who did not then want to hold him. After he was taken to the Soiled Utility Room she kept asking, “Is he dead yet? Is he dead yet?” 

Yet another nurse coworker told me about her aborting patient who didn’t realize her baby might be aborted alive. The mother was not only shocked when her little boy was aborted alive, she was also shocked that he didn’t appear to have the external physical deformities she had been told he was going to have. The mother screamed for someone to help her baby, and my colleague rushed to call a neonatologist over from the unit. 

But after the neonatologist examined the baby, he said that there was nothing he could do because the little guy had been born too early. The mother was so traumatized that my friend had to give her a tranquilizer. The baby had to be held by his grandmother for the half hour that he lived.

Now that we have a fuller, fact-based look at what this is, we must ask the obvious question:

Why did Montana voters reject the Born-Alive Act?

Perhaps it has something to do with the bombardment of messaging that these children don’t have human rights – That they are not worthy of life.

For example, Hillary Clinton infamously said that an unborn person does not have constitutional rights. And Planned Parenthood consistently uses dehumanizing language, like taking “a pregnancy out of your uterus.”

Think about all the arguments that come from Planned Parenthood and other arms of the pro-abortion movement. For all the lip service from the abortion lobby about “human rights” and “healthcare” these concepts are luxuries not afforded to the child. The child is not part of the human rights messaging. 

And as it is repeated again, again and again, unborn babies are further dehumanized

This is something that has worked in the past. 

Why were some “good people” in favor of slavery centuries ago? Why were some Germans accepting of the Nazi movement?

Because the prevalent powers had normalized the dehumanization of certain populations. It had become accepted.

And now the same thing is happening to unwanted infants: breathing their last, alone and abandoned.

The head of the world’s largest network of pregnancy help spoke to this insidious pattern of dehumanization and the nefarious influence of abortion industry.

“Big Abortion interference failed Montanans by elevating their demand for all abortions over the most basic protections in place, that of compassionately rescuing a baby surviving a late-term abortion attempt,” said Jor-El Godsey, president of Heartbeat International. 

“Pro-abortion efforts like this are echoes of the same life devaluing efforts of the pro-slavery states in the 19th century,” Godsey said.

The Heartbeat president offered the reminder that despite the disturbing outcome of the Montana vote, the state has solid pregnancy help available for women and families to see to it that women do not need abortion. 

“Women facing an unexpected pregnancy in Montana have help today,” Godsey said. 

He also implored future Montanans to see beyond Big Abortions scare tactics and profiteering and establish protections for its smallest residents.

In the Bible, Jesus says “Let both grow together until the harvest.” (Matt. 13:30).

The term “both” refers to good and evil. Both are growing until “the harvest,” which is His return.

There is good in the world. But there is also evil. And Montana’s vote against protecting born children in need of medical care is the embodiment of it. 

Editor’s note: Heartbeat International manages Pregnancy Help News where this appeared. Reposted with permission.