Infanticide Is Compassionate ‘End of Life Care,’ Says Democratic Organizer

Michael Foust | ChristianHeadlines.com Contributor | Thursday, February 28, 2019
Infanticide Is Compassionate ‘End of Life Care,’ Says Democratic Organizer

Infanticide Is Compassionate ‘End of Life Care,’ Says Democratic Organizer


A Democratic organizer who worked on the campaigns of Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders sparked a social media debate this week when she said abortion doctors aren’t killing babies who survive abortion but instead are providing compassionate “end of life care.” 

Melissa Byrne, an organizer on the 2008 Obama campaign and a member of the digital team on Sanders’ 2016 campaign, made the remarks during a Twitter debate with Republican and CNN commentator S.E. Cupp.

The back-and-forth debate began when Cupp made a comparison between the separation of families at the border and the killing of a baby who survives abortion.

“This policy is disgusting, and this administration should be held accountable,” Cupp wrote, referencing the border debate. “But let’s also talk about a stranger ripping a child from a parent’s arms...to kill it because it’s survived an abortion. I’m clear on my moral consistency. Where’s yours?”

The Tweet wasn’t directed at Byrnes, but she soon pushed back at Cupp’s argument. 

“Heya. Strongly reccomend (sic) you talk with an OB,” Byrne wrote. “The myths around miscarriage maintenance are very harmful. Drs aren’t killing babies. They are helping families handle end of life care for a dying newborn with dignity and compassion.”

The debate took place the same day that Democrats blocked a Senate bill that would have required doctors provide life-saving medical care for abortion survivors. The bill, according to its text applies only to “abortion or attempted abortion that results in a child born alive.”

“I’ve had a miscarriage,” Cupp responded. “I don’t speak in myths. When a baby is born alive and doctors are allowed by law to kill him or her, they aren’t dealing in ‘end of life care.’ They are forsaking an oath not to harm a viable life.”

Byrne retorted, “They aren’t killing born alive babies. I get that the right wing loves these talking points but that is not what happens at 7,8, or 9 months. Should a dying baby’s parents be forced to use a ventilator even when there is no hope like when there is no brain?” 

Cupp responded, “This isn’t a talking point. You can present worst case scenarios, but answer me this: is the child still ALIVE?  By your definition, YES.”

One person wrote, “Setting them aside to die of dehydration is killing through human negligence. If you did the same to a 1-year-old you’d go to prison. When a child is no longer in [a] mother’s body, is living, breathing on own? It’s not [a] Reproductive Rights issue. It’s [a] Human Rights issue! It’s murder!”

Both seemed to be referencing the controversy over comments by Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam about a state bill that protected late-term abortion. Northam said, “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

His communications director issued a clarifying statement that said “no woman seeks a third-trimester abortion except in the case of tragic or difficult circumstances.” 

A 2013 study found that 80 percent of women seeking late-term abortion fit into one of five profiles. They either were “raising children alone, were depressed or using illicit substances, were in conflict with a male partner or experiencing domestic violence, had trouble deciding and then had access problems, or were young and nulliparous [had never given birth].”

Meanwhile, the debate over the abortion survivors bill received little to no coverage on CNN, MSNBC, ABC and NBC, according to The Federalist. David Harsanyi, senior editor at the website, said MSNBC didn’t mention it at all.

“Clearly, however, most of them did their best interference for Democrats, who took an unconscionable vote this week that couldn’t be spun by the typical bias,” he wrote. “Or put it this way, if Republicans had taken a vote that was deeply unpopular with the majority of Americans, you’d be hearing about it. Over and over again.”

Michael Foust is a freelance writer. Visit his blog, MichaelFoust.com.

Photo courtesy: Kelly Sikkema/Unsplash