On August 30, ACOG made explicit its absolutist pro-abortion stance in a letter to the editor of The Washington Post. Responding to a pro-life opinion piece, ACOG interim chief executive Dr. Christopher Zahn and Society of Family Planning Dr. Jenni Villavicencio said the following (emphasis added):
As medical experts, physicians, scientists and advocates for unrestricted access to abortion care, we understand that many people have complex feelings about abortion. But publishing misleading information about abortion ā such as that espoused by Kellyanne Conway and Marjorie Dannenfelser in their Aug. 25 op-ed, āRepublicans need to go on offense on abortionā ā does nothing to advance compassionate, accurate discussions about abortion as an essential part of health care.
The misinformation perpetuated by Ms. Conway and Ms. Dannenfelser (and by the crisis pregnancy centers they wrongly praise) is commonly used to strip access to abortion from patients such as ours and prevent clinicians from providing people with evidence-based health care.
Abortion is safe. It improves and saves lives, and it must be available without restrictions, without limitations and without barriers ā just as any other critical part of health care.
-ACOG
Though it is clear to us that ACOG has held this radical position for a long time, this is the first instance of which we are aware in which they have articulated it so explicitly. Unfortunately, ACOGās open endorsement of induced abortion at any point in pregnancy and for any reason is a reflection of neither the medical evidence or excellent healthcare for our patients. Their claim that abortion āimproves and saves lives and it must be available without restrictions, without limitations and without barriersā is a purely political statement, not a medical one. It is out of step with the views of this nationās OB-GYNs, the vast majority of whom do not perform induced abortions. Obstetricians enter this specialty to promote the health of both pregnant and preborn patients.
AAPLOG will not stop fighting for these patients, both of whom are gravely harmed by ACOGās obvious politicization. We will continue to combat this radical agenda through our public advocacy, as well as by publishing resources to help medical professionals defend life-affirming healthcare. One such resource will be highlighted in the next story.