A student organization at UCLA has published a report documenting a pro-abortion lobbying effort at the tax-funded school’s health services center for students, even to the point of advising how a student could get the state to pay for an abortion without notifying her parents or using her own insurance.
The report comes from the The Advocate, a publication of the Live Action student organization. The group dispatched the publication’s editor, Lila Rose, into the state university’s health system posing as a woman with a 7-week-old pregnancy.
“Now I don’t know how closely they question you about having insurance because if they found out you had insurance they’d probably say ‘Oh no, this is for people that don’t have any coverage at all,’” one of the counselors, identified as Ann Brooks, told her. “I do know that for ending a pregnancy I have a colleague who draws the line at you don’t have your own insurance, period. She doesn’t ask, you don’t ask.”
However, for continuing a pregnancy? “The difference is if you were terminating the pregnancy, I have a place that I can send you where they will get you signed up for the Medi-Cal coverage and they just don’t ask … But I don’t think they could do that for pregnancy, for on-going pregnancy.”
In California, the state Health and Human Services Agency confirms that people requesting Medi-Cal must “report to the county department, and to the health care provider, any health care coverage/insurance they carry or are entitled to use. If they willfully fail to give this fact, they may be guilty of a criminal offense.”
Officials with the school’s media office were contacted for a reaction, but neither they, nor anyone from the student health organization, responded to WND questions.
The report in The Advocate said the Arthur Ashe Student Health Center’s lobbying went beyond the offer to set up an abortion at taxpayers’ expense.
The health center’s Brooks, a nurse practitioner, gave the visiting “pregnant” coed three options, including continuing the pregnancy.
“[Look] forward to the physical difficulties of pregnancy,” Brooks told her. “The embarrassment of your classmates, both this quarter and next quarter; living in the dorm, being pregnant in the dorm, that would be a little different. Frequency of urination – you know, you’re sitting in class. You’d have to go to the bathroom,” according to the report.
The second option, adoption, was little better, the report said. “There’s not one [adoption referral center] here at UCLA that I know of. I occasionally get letters from either people who want to represent people who want to adopt or people who are trying to adopt themselves. But I don’t investigate it at all,” was Brooks’ advice.
The third was the “best.”
“[RU-486] is more private, it’s more personal, you can do it when you want to and, you know, be where you want to be and so forth and so on. But the advantage of surgical [abortion] is that when you walk out of the office it’s done … They both have very, very low risk. As far as medical concerns, neither of them affect your future fertility,” she said.
“UCLA Health Services should remain apolitical,” wrote Rose in an editorial. “It receives funding from tuition and state support, so it ought to act as the agent of those who pay tuition and taxes. But for young, pregnant women, it instead operates much like a referral program to abortion providers.”
Rose also questioned the services, since some information apparently was left out of the recommendations she was given. For example, Brooks said RU-486, the chemical abortion, is “a very safe medication. It’s pretty crampy. It’s like a bad menstrual period … Now, there have been a couple of deaths associated with it.”
Rose said since 2000, when the Food and Drug Administration approved its use, eight women in the U.S., two in the United Kingdom, one in Sweden and another in Canada have died following the use of the drugs.
An abortion provider Brooks recommended also listed as possible side effects: “Nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, heavy vaginal bleeding, headache, dizziness, backache and fatigue. Cramping may become quite severe … As in surgical abortion, risks of hemorrhage to exist.”
The political messages also were loud and clear, Rose reported.
Another counselor with whom she visited, identified as Christine Miller, told her that religious leaders “are kind of like, ‘Abortion is bad, don’t do it.’ If you talk to someone like that … you’d feel pressured to do something you don’t want to do.”
And Brooks added that if there’s a pregnancy, parents should not be contacted.
“This is something that is maybe not best for them to take care of,” she told Rose.
Some random other thoughts that Brooks shared with the reporter:
- “I don’t need more [pro-life] people out there … it makes my job that much more difficult.”
- “There are some people who feel very strongly, and I respect the strength of their belief, that abortion is a bad thing. And it’s fine that they believe that, and it’s fine with me that they can talk about it, but it’s not fine with me if they think that nobody else should do it here.”
- “Well, they feel that human beings don’t have the right to end a life whether it’s a few cells or whether it’s a gang rapist or something … You gotta be consistent, and if you’re against taking the life of a few cells then you shouldn’t be killing someone even if they’re a terribly nasty person.”
- “I agree with abortion … I believe that a woman should have a choice … I think there are people here [health clinic workers] who are probably not comfortable with abortion. But I think that most of the people who work here, we expect them to not put their opinions on the patient. And if they have a strong opinion about it, to not say it.”
Related special offers:
The definitive handbook for battling ‘pro-choicers.’ Be ready with the perfect answers to the abortion issue’s toughest questions.