Year: 2017

I am here to remind UNM, SWWO, and NM Attorney General Hector Balderas that respecting human life is relevant. I am here to remind them that as a taxpayer funded institution, upholding the law and punishing violators is relevant.

We have reached a critical point where UNM and the NM Attorney General must decide if the rule of law applies to everyone, or if they will remain silent and let the negligence of laws and human life become the status quo. The laws of fetal tissue procurement are exact and prescriptive, and by their own admission UNM and SWWO either don’t know the laws or don’t care about them. It is time for the leaders of UNM and the New Mexico Attorney General to ensure that illegal and unethical conduct at the expense of innocent New Mexicans is investigated and met with just punishment.

It is stunning how silent political and church leaders have been about UNM’s full term abortion business and relations as well as many other immoral activities undertaken by the university. Republicans are supposed to be prolife and our churches are supposed to be moral watchtowers. Equally shocking is the silence of these leaders about Catholic Democrat NM AG Hector Balderas’ failure to do his job and investigate the long list of complaints brought forth against UNM. Thank you, Congressman Pearce for leading the effort to shed light on Balderas and UNM,” stated Fr. Stephen Imbarrato, Priests for Life.

Pearce Urges UNM Board of Regents, New Mexico Attorney General to Uphold Laws and Respect for Human Life

Washington, DC (January 6, 2017) Congressman Steve Pearce released the following statement after the second criminal referral to New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas was made by the U.S. House Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives, imploring state and university leaders to address the serious violations uncovered by the Panel’s investigation.

“The entire report released by the Select Panel raises serious concerns of ethical and legal violations occurring at UNM and Southwestern Women’s Options. Most troubling though is their complete disregard for regulations put in place by lawmakers to protect women and children. UNM and SWWO have created a culture where obtaining baby body parts, deceiving patients, and maintaining faculty perks are higher priorities than following laws and basic healthcare principles,” said Pearce.

During the Select Panel’s investigation an employee of SWWO and faculty member of UNM admitted that she had never received proper consent from a patient for the harvesting of baby body parts, and further acknowledged that she did not recognize the consent form SWWO and UNM provided to the Panel. Another faculty member from UNM admitted that there is no procedure in place to handle infants who are born alive during an abortion, and confirmed that there have been instances of infants exiting the womb before expected.  When asked if she was familiar with the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act, she responded that she was not familiar and that she did not understand the relevancy to her practice.

“I am here to remind UNM, SWWO, and NM Attorney General Hector Balderas that respecting human life is relevant. I am here to remind them that as a taxpayer funded institution, upholding the law and punishing violators is relevant.  In the UNM Health Sciences Center Code of Ethics, Dr. Paul Roth writes that, ‘In order to maintain public trust and accountability, we adhere to the highest ethical standards and compliance in all research activities.’  So I ask Dr. Roth, the UNM Board of Regents, NM Attorney General Hector Balderas and the taxpayers of our state; is it ethical to disregard procedures that check for signs of life, such as looking for a heartbeat or giving an Apgar test? Is it ethical for UNM to obtain the body parts of aborted babies, including baby brains for a high school summer camp dissection project, without proper consent? Is it ethical to leave a baby to die without care or acknowledgement in the name of research?

We have a reached a critical point where UNM and the NM Attorney General must decide if the rule of law applies to everyone, or if they will remain silent and let the negligence of laws and human life become the status quo. The laws of fetal tissue procurement are exact and prescriptive, and by their own admission UNM and SWWO either don’t know the laws or don’t care about them. It is time for the leaders of UNM and the New Mexico Attorney General to ensure that illegal and unethical conduct at the expense of innocent New Mexicans is investigated and met with just punishment.”

The Select Panel on Infant Lives sent their first criminal referral in June of 2016 and, after finding more evidence of violations in the procedures of fetal tissue procurement by the University of New Mexico and Southwestern Women’s Options, sent their second criminal referral in December 2016

– The Panel identified several research institutions across the United States, mostly state universities and virtually all recipients of federal as well as state funding, that have formed a close relationship with one or more abortion clinics.

– Most of the doctors west of the Mississippi who openly perform third- trimester abortions have faculty positions at either the University of New Mexico or the University of Colorado.

– The transfer of fetal tissue from Southwestern Women’s Options (SWWO) to UNM was one part of an aggressive campaign under which leadership personnel at UNM medical school: (1) expanded UNM’s role both in providing abortions and in training new abortion providers; (2) expanded UNM’s referral for abortion services to outside clinics, including the clinic from which it obtained fetal tissue;

–   The close relationship between UNM and SWWO led to allegations of shoddy clinical practices, including failure to utilize a consent form for fetal tissue donation and improperly combining consent for tissue donation with consent for the underlying abortion procedure.

– Abortionist Eve Espey, who is described by the panel as the “arguably most responsible for making UNM an abortion provider” refused to answer questions about UNM’s own protocol regarding babies born alive during abortions. This policy states that “When an induced abortion results in a live-born infant showing any signs of life, such as a heartbeat or voluntary movement, a birth certificate should be completed. . . . A death certificate will be completed if the infant dies.”

[Essentially, even though the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act provides protections for babies who survive abortions, Espey who is chair of the OBGYN department at UNM stated that she was not familiar with the law and didn’t see it’s relevance to her practice. ]

– It also found that the transfer of fetal tissue from SWWO to UNM for research purposes is a systematic violation of New Mexico’s Spradling Act, under which tissue from aborted infants cannot be anatomical gifts.” According to the panel’s evaluation, “The Spradling Act was enacted in 2007 to replace the State’s existing Anatomical Gift Act  with provisions mirroring the The Uniform Anatomical Gift Act (UAGA). In their new law, New Mexico decided to follow the suggestion in the UAGA to treat aborted fetuses differently: “‘decedent’ means a deceased individual whose body or part is or may be the source of an anatomical gift.” It “includes a stillborn infant and …a fetus but (does) not includ(e) a fetus that is the subject of an induced abortion.”

Further, the Spradling Act provides that the Act “applies to an anatomical gift or amendment to, revocation of or refusal to make an anatomical gift, whenever made.” In other words, all anatomical gifts in the State of New Mexico must comply with this act, and the bodies or body parts of aborted infants cannot be anatomical gifts.

– Virtually every entity and individual from whom the Panel sought documents did not fully comply, regardless of whether the documents were required to be produced pursuant to a subpoena, or were requested via a letter.

– Scientific societies and universities have made misleading claims about fetal tissue research. Human fetal tissue constitutes only a tiny fraction of the overall research effort. Moreover, research involving human fetal tissue is less productive and has lower importance/impact when compared to non-fetal research from the same laboratories.”  [Note: This is a justification that UNM uses which according to the panel’s research, fetal tissue research has not produced, nor is it necessary, to bring about the greatest impact and advances.]