Correcting the Record: Retired OB-GYN Says Abortion Is Never Medically Necessary

May 28, 2025
Samantha Flom
Abortion | Commentary

Laying waste to the left's lie that abortion can be necessary to save a mother's life.

A⸱bor·tion (noun): "A medical operation to end a pregnancy so that the baby is not born alive."

At least, that's Oxford's definition, and the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, or AAPLOG, agrees.

"What AAPLOG would maintain is that abortion should be defined as a procedure done for the purpose of producing a dead offspring," Dr. Donna Harrison, the organization's director of research and former CEO, told Restoration News.

Even so, abortion proponents—and even some who consider themselves pro-life—claim that abortion can be a necessary medical intervention to save a pregnant woman's life.

But Harrison, a retired OB-GYN who was board-certified for nearly 30 years, said that if one accepts the common definition of the procedure, "there is never an indication for abortion."

That may seem a radical thought to those who have gotten used to the left's propaganda. But an examination of the facts shows that another way to save a mother's life always exists—one that doesn't involve the intentional killing of her child.

(READ MORE: If Abortion Is Healthcare, Why Is Abortion Data Going Unreported?)

Separation, Not Extermination

Many complications can arise during pregnancy as a woman's body shifts to accommodate the growing life inside her.

Harrison noted that most life-threatening conditions will occur later in pregnancy, when there is a chance to save both mother and child.

For example, preeclampsia, a serious condition characterized by high blood pressure and high levels of protein in the urine, typically develops after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Side effects can include kidney, liver, and brain damage if left untreated.

Placental abruption is another potential complication where the placenta separates from the uterine wall before delivery. This can cause severe bleeding in the mother and a lack of oxygen and nutrients for her baby.

Both conditions threaten the lives of both mother and child. But the appropriate treatment, Harrison said, involves the separation of the two—not the intentional killing of the child.

"Most of the complications that threaten a woman's life in pregnancy happen after the baby can survive separation," she noted.

Doctors can generally achieve that separation by inducing labor or performing a cesarean section, after which both patients can receive life-sustaining care. The most common life-threatening condition pregnant women face, ectopic pregnancy, requires detection and treatment long before the baby is viable outside the womb.

Ectopic pregnancies occur when the fertilized egg implants outside the uterus, usually in a fallopian tube. If allowed to progress, the pregnancy could rupture the tube, causing severe bleeding and, potentially, the mother's death.

"When the baby has implanted inside a tube, then those babies cannot survive [separation]. They're way too young," Harrison said.

Yet even in those cases when doctors don’t expect the baby to survive, "we separate the mom and the baby such that we can maximize the possibility that the mom would have a baby to hold and grieve," she said. "And we respect the bodily dignity of the baby if at all possible."

A War of Words

Because an ectopic pregnancy requires an immediate separation that will certainly result in the child's death, some abortion proponents point to the condition as an example of medically necessary abortion.

The problem with that example is that it's false.

There are two potential treatments for an ectopic pregnancy, neither of which qualifies as an abortion under the commonly accepted definition.

The first treatment is a medication to stop the embryo's growth—and no, it's not the abortion drug mifepristone, which is only effective for intrauterine pregnancies.

Instead, the mother receives an injection of methotrexate. The drug ends the pregnancy, and the body then absorbs it over the following weeks.

Some cases may require surgery to remove the pregnancy. That procedure is not the dilation and curettage, or D&C, that is performed during a first-trimester surgical abortion. Instead, doctors will perform a laparoscopy. The surgeon inserts a lighted camera through small incisions in the abdomen and then locates the pregnancy and removes it. Some cases may also require a salpingectomy, or the removal of one or both fallopian tubes.

But if ectopic pregnancy has nothing to do with abortion, why do so many people believe otherwise?

Harrison says pro-abortion medical organizations use deceptive language to mislead the masses.

Planned Parenthood, for example, defines an abortion as simply "ending a pregnancy."

That definition notably leaves out the key distinction of whether the pregnancy's end came about due to an unfortunate side effect of an emergency medical intervention or a calculated decision.

Harrison pointed to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the organization from which AAPLOG diverged, as another group that has blurred the lines.

"Both ACOG and Planned Parenthood had on their websites that ectopic pregnancy has nothing to do with abortion, and they swept it off their websites as soon as Dobbs happened so that they could do this rhetorical sleight of hand," she said, referencing the Supreme Court's ruling that there is no constitutional right to abortion.

Correcting the Record

It's no secret that this word-fare has been massively effective for the left's ever-expanding, anti-baby crusade.

In the three years since Dobbs, 10 states have adopted amendments enshrining abortion as a constitutional right—including the more conservative states of Ohio, Missouri, and Montana.

Many of those amendments, such as Arizona's, include language barring any restrictions on an abortion that a woman's "treating health professional"—or the abortionist who stands to profit—has deemed "necessary" to protect her life.

Never mind that the baby could be just hours from birth and a mere separation from its mother would suffice.

Meanwhile, at the federal level, legislators routinely embed an exception in the Hyde Amendment—a spending provision that prohibits the federal funding of abortion—to allow taxpayer funding of abortions performed to protect the mother's life.

These laws incorrectly assume that situations exist where an abortion is medically required to save a woman's life. And with the constant fearmongering of the abortion lobby, it's not hard to figure out the origins of that assumption.

That's why Harrison wants to set the record straight.

"I think the most important thing is that we're crystal clear on what we're calling an abortion," she said.

"All laws should reflect an accurate definition of what an abortion is. And none of the laws should lump the term 'abortion' with the lifesaving separation of the mom and the baby to save the mom's life. That's not an abortion."

(READ MORE: At-Home Abortion Pill is 22 Times More Dangerous Than FDA Admits: Report)

Samantha Flom is a Senior Investigative Researcher for Restoration News covering life issues and the transgender agenda. A graduate of Syracuse University, her work has been published by the Epoch Times, Right Side Broadcasting Network, the Ponte Vedra Recorder, First Coast Register magazine, and Jacksonville’s Resident Community News. 

Email Samantha HERE

Related Articles

Get Involved

Join Restoration of America today and receive the latest updates, news, and ways to get involved with our efforts!

By  providing your phone number and checking this box, you are consenting  to receive calls and text messages, including autodialed and automated  calls and texts, to that number from Restoration of America. Message and  data rates may apply. Reply "STOP" to opt-out. Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions apply.