However, data analysis from the New York Times has suggested that many women who would otherwise have sought a surgical abortion in Texas traveled to other states — including neighboring Oklahoma — or made use of mail-order abortion pills. Texas Alliance for Life notes that the abortion industry still “thrives” in Texas, with all of the state’s nearly two dozen abortion facilities remaining in operation and abortions performed at the rate of 27,000 per year.
Texas Alliance for Life, another pro-life group, called the ruling a “stunning rebuke of abortion providers in Texas.”
“While the law does not ban any abortions, it does prevent the dismemberment of the unborn child if the child is alive,” said Dr. Joe Pojman, Texas Alliance for Life’s executive director.
“While the goal of the pro-life movement remains the complete protection of all unborn babies from abortion, the terrible Supreme Court precedent under Roe v. Wade prevents this…Our hope is that the Court will modify or reverse Roe and allow states to ban abortion when it takes up the Dobbs case later this year.”
The day after the March for Life in Washington, on Jan. 25, the Texas Rally for Life (TexasRallyforLife.org) in the state capital of Austin will begin with a prayer vigil near the city’s Planned Parenthood and include a Divine Mercy Chaplet and Masses at two parish churches.
Amy O’Donnell, director of communications for Texas Alliance for Life, said that 2019’s rally drew a police-estimated 10,000 supporters, and she hopes this year there will be between 10,000 and 15,000, highlighting additions such as a gospel choir being part of the rally. Claire Culwell will speak at this event, too.
Texas Alliance for Life, another pro-life organization, noted that the case centers on the dispute resolution process in TADA.
“Texas Alliance for Life supports TADA. It is good public policy, it is constitutional, and it provides a balance between the patient’s autonomy and the physician’s conscience protection rights to do no harm,” the group stated.
Texas Alliance for Life, along with the Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops and several other pro-life groups, disability advocates, and medical groups, submitted an amicus curiae brief in the case Dec. 11 stating that TADA “helps achieve their essential objectives” and arguing for its constitutionality.
The Texas Catholic Conference, joined by the Texas Alliance for Life and organizations that represent medical providers and people with disabilities, jointly filed an amicus brief in defense of the Texas law. They argued that the law provides a resolution for “intractable” cases where relatives demand medical treatment even after a doctor, compelled by their ethical obligation to do no harm, concludes further intervention would only extend or enhance suffering.
“Though we’d like to see some added protections for patients, at its core, it’s a good law because it balances the rights of patients to their autonomy about medical decisions and the conscience rights of physicians and medical providers to not have to provide something that is harmful or immoral,” said Joe Pojman, the executive director of Texas Alliance for Life.
Pojman told the Register that a Texas physician’s decision not to continue care is reviewed by an ethics committee, which gives the family at least 10 days to find a different provider that is willing to provide the disputed treatment. During that time, the treatment must be provided. In Dunn’s case, the hospital contacted more than 60 other providers, but none were willing to provide the treatment, Pojman said.
Joe Pojman of the Texas Alliance for Life in Austin told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram that “some of [Texas Right to Life’s] goals are not well-founded in law.”
The group has come under criticism from others who claim that even pro-life legislators face reprisal from Texas Right to Life if they vote contrary to the group’s recommendations.
Republican Kyleen Wright, president of Texans for Life, told the Star-Telegram, “I thought our pro-life lawmakers would need protection from abortion-minded people. But no — we have to protect them from Texas Right to Life saying they’re not pro-life enough.”