Thursday, July 11, 2024

PolitiFact's Humpty Dumpty act on 'abortion'

It was Lewis Carroll's fictional character Humpty Dumpty who gave us one of the classic quotes regarding word games:

‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean–neither more nor less.’ 

Sadly, it's fact checkers who are doing their Humpty Dumptiest to play games with the term 'abortion.' A fact check by "Science Feedback" gave us a definition of abortion a few years ago that encompassed cesarean section, a procedure that regularly results in living babies. A July 10, 2024 fact check from PolitiFact in effect asked Science Feedback to "Hold my beer."

PolitiFact executed a "False" judgment on GOP senatorial candidate Tim Sheehy for saying "Elective abortions up to and including the moment of birth. Healthy, 9-month-year-old baby killed at the moment of birth. That's what Jon Tester and the Democrats have voted for."

Yes, the whole fact check was essentially bunk (we'll explain later), but we were particularly struck by PolitiFact's word game chutzpah in his concluding paragraph (bold emphasis added):

These statements are rooted in Tester’s support for the Women’s Health Protection Act. That bill, however, doesn’t open the door to abortion on demand later in pregnancy. Instead, it allows for the role of medical judgment. In addition, CDC data indicates that late-term pregnancies are rare. Also, the term "elective abortion" is a political rather than medical phrasing.

So far as we can see, PolitiFact fact checker Matt Volz relied entirely on one of his expert interviews for that judgment.

That expert was Katrina Kimport, yet another in a long line of PolitiFact-cited neUTRal experts who give heavily to Democratic Party politicians and causes. PolitiFact readers don't need to know that Kimport gives to the "pro-choice" group EMILY's List ($3,500 since 2020):

Kimport ... also criticized Sheehy’s use of  "elective abortion." In her view, that terminology reflects a political colloquialism that’s come to mean an abortion that is optional. That’s different from the medical definition, she said, in which an elective procedure is one that may be necessary but is not an emergency and can be scheduled for a particular date, such as knee surgery. 

She says it's her view, so PolitiFact just runs with it. PolitiFact didn't just run with it, they twisted it into the term being political and not medical as a matter of fact. That's despite many medical sources (textbooks, professional journals, etc.) using the term. Rather, the evidence suggests that the term has fallen into political disfavor, fostering a movement to stop its use.

Image from ACOG.org

PolitiFact is down with that.

"Elective abortion" means an abortion not done for therapeutic reasons. In the simplest terms, it's an abortion done because the patient doesn't want a baby. Politically, it's advantageous for the pro-choice movement to blur such distinctions.

Of course it's amusing to see fact checkers do their part to empty words of their meaning. The pro-choice movement would have us believe that the choice to have an abortion is automatically therapeutic and that "elective" is a misnomer. Review a few more words from Kimport:

Women have abortions later in pregnancy either because they find out new information or because of economic or political barriers, Kimport said. 

"I have never spoken to somebody whose abortion decision was not informed by deep thought and consideration," she said. 

Kimport's talking point doubtless has its genesis with information parallel to this:

The reasons people need third-trimester abortions are not so different from why people need abortions before the third trimester: 

  1. They received new information—including that they were pregnant—that made the pregnancy not (or no longer) one they wanted to continue
  2. They tried to obtain an abortion before the third trimester but faced insurmountable barriers (including policy restrictions and stigma) that delayed them into the third trimester.

Did Kimport and PolitiFact forget to tell you that the "new information" included patients learning they were pregnant? Oopsie! We are so sorry (not sorry!)!

At PolitiFact Bias we're not here to tell our readers whether to take a pro-choice or pro-life stance. We're here to show you how PolitiFact stops short of fully checking the facts when the facts don't favor the pro-choice view. And maybe the spin is intentional, which is naughty.

As For The Rest of This Steaming Pile of Fact Check ...

We might quibble with Sheehy's mention of abortion "at" the moment of birth. Other than that, it would seem he's right despite PolitiFact's protestations to the contrary.

Here's the key part of the (most recent version PolitiFact linked) of the bill Sheehy's prospective Democratic opponent signed:
After fetal viability, governments may not restrict providers from performing abortions when necessary to protect a patient's life and health. The same provisions that apply to abortions before viability also apply to necessary abortions after viability. Additionally, states may authorize post-viability abortions in circumstances beyond those that the bill considers necessary.

The federal bill has a somewhat narrower pathway to elective abortion than the Florida bill PolitiFact cited in this piece, but it's there. "After fetal viability" obviously doesn't have anything to do with abortion before viability. It's specifically addressing post-viability abortion.

The opening comes with the "health of the mother" language. When it isn't defined, it can mean nearly anything. And, as we have noted before, the medical profession can claim (Harvard.edu) that every pregnancy carries risk. If every pregnancy carries risk, then an abortion can be "necessary" to avoid that risk for any pregnant patient.

PolitiFact can't figure that out because it's inconvenient for the ideology PolitiFact favors. Plus by sticking with the opinions of liberal experts the inconvenient stuff gets suffocated with a pillow.

And of course there's the last line, explicitly allowing states to go as far as they wish in allowing post-viability abortion.

So, no truth at all to what Sheehy said. Or something.

Fact checkers. 

Meh.


Afterword

I could not resist a follow up question. 

Find the abortion conversation with Gemini AI here. Gemini's got its own Humpty Dumpty going on.

5 comments:

  1. It seems that by saying "Healthy, 9-month-year-old baby killed at the moment of birth," Tim Sheehy is defining his use of "elective abortion" to mean that it can be done even when there is no medical need, but as you point out, the bill says it can only be done "when necessary to protect a patient's life and health," so I think Sheehy is false by his implied definition of "elective abortion."

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Paulie, thanks for commenting.

    You argument is pretty much the standard one from the left, and here's the problem (standard argument from the right!): There's nothing concrete in the prohibition. It's so vague it can mean anything, including nothing. As our post notes, a the service provider can claim that all abortion carries risk, therefore an abortion is medically necessary to avoid that risk. By defining all pregnancy as inherently risky, that's the same as making all abortions medically necessary (in terms of avoiding that inherent risk). And that's equivalent to making elective abortion legal in any circumstance.

    I hope that helps, and you're welcome of course to respond.

    Oddly enough, I had the same problem posting a comment that you described in your email. I had to use a similar workaround to post a comment to my own blog! LOL

    Thanks, Google!

    ReplyDelete
  3. It might be possible for an unscrupulous doctor to claim there is a medical need when there isn't, but that's an edge case, and every study I have read has found that essentially every case of 3rd trimester action is because of a very serious medical condition. The comment from Tim Sheehy feels like he's trying to say that the bill doesn't try at all to put any restrictions, which is not true.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "that's an edge case"
      It's an edge case showing Sheehy's right. The abortion rights bill doesn't force women to have third trimester abortions but it effectively makes them *legal* for any reason the provider offers.

      "every study I have read has found that essentially every case of 3rd trimester action is because of a very serious medical condition"

      Our article explains the spin PolitiFact's cited expert applied to a study. Care to comment on that one?

      I'm answering your second comment in this reply.

      "there is a miniscule risk of someone having a later abortion for a non-medically critical reason, so that doesn't seem worth all the massive additional suffering."

      Put another way, it would see that you're saying it's okay that the law would make elective abortion up through the moment of birth legal because it hardly ever happens without good reason.

      That's a moral argument of sorts, and it's basically the way PolitiFact implicitly handles the question. But that's not a fact-checking answer. Instead it's a moral justification. PolitiFact is supposed to be doing fact-checking, not moral justification.




      Delete
  4. Also, we now know how horrible the alternative is. Conservatives agree that going through an abortion is a very emotional ordeal, and the states that have very strict "life of the mother" requirements put a huge additional burden on these parents that are already suffering so much (and of course, the horrible situations where it's so legally ambiguous, so people have to be airlifted to other states). In other words, there is a miniscule risk of someone having a later abortion for a non-medically critical reason, so that doesn't seem worth all the massive additional suffering.

    ReplyDelete

Thanks to commenters who refuse to honor various requests from the blog administrators, all comments are now moderated. Pseudonymous commenters who do not choose distinctive pseudonyms will not be published, period. No "Anonymous." No "Unknown." Etc.