Infanticide is the new abortion. I’m not saying infanticide will be the new abortion, but that it is. Wherever abortionists kill late-term babies—across the fruited plain—inconvenient live births occur. And inconvenient live births are taken care of. If your patient is shelling out a thousand bucks to end the life of her baby, you are not about to send her home with a baby and a formula starter kit.
Infanticide was the unseen presence throughout the Gosnell trial, formally listed among the charges but never addressed until Judge Jeffrey Minehart sprung an 11th hour surprise by spelling it out in his instructions to the jury. Till then the two months of heated debate had seemed to be between murder and innocence. When the judge finished his presentation, reporters rushed the defense attorney for clarification. He tossed off a thumbnail sketch while packing his suitcase: Murder involves killing; infanticide is withholding help.
The judge had been more specific in his definition of infanticide: (1) the defendant is a physician; (2) the physician attended the birth of a live child, i.e., a “human being” who was “completely expelled from the mother” and exhibiting signs of life; (3) the physician failed to provide that child care; (4) the physician did so “intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly.”
This took me back to the first week of April when a witness for the prosecution described what she does at her hospital with aborted babies born alive: She administers “comfort care,” which turns out to be draping the baby with a cloth “until it passes.” Why, that sounded positively Florence Nightingale-like. Such wording does not conjure a struggle for life, or a gasping for breath.