Who is Christina Francis?

The GOP's anti-abortion witness revealed some extreme positions in the Senate HELP hearing.

Replay the full Senate HELP committee hearing here, or take two minutes to watch this particularly fiery exchange featuring Sen. Patty Murray. You can also catch up on the live chat I hosted with readers here. Subscribe to receive an alert when these happen in the future so you don’t miss out! 

---

Let’s talk about Christina Francis, the president of the American Association of Pro-Life OBGYNs (AAPLOG). Francis is testifying for Republicans today in the Senate HELP committee hearing on the consequences of abortion bans. Before she spouts her nonsense, I thought it would be good for you to have a sense of who she is—and how extremist AAPLOG is.

Francis believes:

• Children should be forced to give birth 

• Women should be forced to carry nonviable pregnancies to term

• Abortion is never necessary to save women’s lives

• Women with life-threatening pregnancies should be forced into vaginal labor or c-sections, even before viability 

• Certain kinds of birth control are actually abortions

That’s the short version, now let’s get into the details. Forcing children to give birth is, unfortunately, a common anti-abortion belief. They don’t even bother to hide it anymore: When the story of a 10 year-old rape victim captured national attention, Francis said, “[I]f you look at the data, the complication rates, the medical complication rates of pregnancy in young adolescents, I think is, much smaller than what people would imagine. They can actually carry to term oftentimes.”

Francis—like most anti-abortion leaders—also believes that women should be forced to carry nonviable pregnancies to term. That’s why Francis and AAPLOG will never call a pregnancy ‘nonviable’ or a fetus’ condition ‘lethal.’ Instead, they use the term “life-limiting” or “potentially life-limiting.” (The idea is to make women believe that their fetus might survive, even if that’s never going to happen.)

Remember, the term ‘life-limiting’ is part of AAPLOG’s glossary of terms they’re trying to push onto lawmakers and doctors. Most recently it showed up in last week’s Texas Supreme Court ruling reaffirming that women should be forced to carry nonviable pregnancies to term.

Francis equates ending a doomed pregnancy with killing a sick or disabled child:

“If that child were already born—if they were 12 years old, or 2 years old, or 2 months old—no physician would consider ‘terminating’ them due to a diagnosis of a terminal illness”

Perhaps Francis’ most distressing and dangerous belief is that abortion is never necessary to save women’s lives—and that women who have life-threatening pregnancies should be forced into vaginal labor or c-sections instead of being given abortions.

Now, abortion is easier, safer, quicker and less traumatic—especially in the early stages of pregnancy when those interventions are much more complicated. But Francis and AAPLOG are desperate to argue that life-saving abortions are never necessary. They think forcing women into major abdominal surgery and traumatic vaginal births will ‘prove’ that talking point.

Naturally, anti-abortion activists don’t want to say outright that they’re forcing surgery and labor onto dying women, so instead they talk about ‘maternal fetal separation.’ (Another term from AAPLOG’s glossary.) As a result of bans containing language like ‘maternal fetal separation,’ states like Louisiana are seeing an increase in doctors performing unnecessary c-sections in order to avoid breaking the law.

I’ll never forget this affidavit from Louisiana OBGYN Dr. Valerie Williams, who treated a woman who was forced into “a painful, hours-long labor to deliver a nonviable fetus, despite her wishes and best medical advice.” She said that the patient “was screaming not from pain, but from the emotional trauma she was experiencing.”

Incredibly, Francis’ beliefs get even more cruel: she wants to force women into major abdominal surgery and traumatic vaginal birth before fetal viability. Why? To “respect the dignity of the preborn child” and deliver an “intact fetal body.” Women’s dignity is never mentioned.

In fact, while researching Francis, I came across an interview where says outright that she will perform ‘separations’ before viability on the off-chance the fetus can survive—never mind science, fact, or the wishes of the pregnant person.

When you watch the clip, you’ll notice that Francis uses 21 weeks as an example; that’s deliberate. She doesn’t want to admit that the group pushes for ‘separations’ regardless of gestational age. In fact, horrifically, AAPLOG guidelines also tell doctors that “cesarean deliveries can also be performed in cases of already-deceased fetuses.”

If you think that the danger to women’s lives would change Francis’ or AAPLOG’s position, guess again. AAPLOG guidelines direct doctors not to immediately treat patients with life-threatening conditions like infection and massive placental abruption. Instead the group recommends allowing patients to labor for 24 hours, giving them blood transfusions and putting them in intensive care “to achieve successful induction of an intact fetal body.”

Finally, let’s talk about Francis’ position on birth control. We know that anti-abortion activists have been laying the groundwork for years to ban contraception. Their primary tactic has been arguing that certain kinds of birth control—like emergency contraception and IUDs—are actually ‘abortifacients.’ 

AAPLOG has claimed that emergency contraception “works to kill embryos” and that “IUDs work by either killing the embryo or by preventing the embryo from implanting.” Current AAPLOG guidelines report that emergency contraception can lead to “embryo loss.”

Francis herself says there’s a “definite possibility” that the new over-the-counter hormonal birth control pill could be an abortifacient: “Anyone who wants to use a contraceptive while being one hundred percent certain it has no abortifacient qualities should avoid using this one.”

All of which is to say: the witnesses that Republicans have brought to defend abortion bans aren’t just any old ‘pro-life’ doctors and citizens. They’re radical misogynists who would rather see women dead than free. I’ll never get over how the AAPLOG guidelines dismisses the idea of maternal health:

“AAPLOG expresses significant concern with the inappropriate overuse of ‘maternal health’ when the true reason for the termination of pregnancy is psychosocial stress, fear of consequences of pregnancy, discomforts of pregnancy, lifestyle changes required by pregnancy, or pure autonomy. This is not medical necessity.”

Pretty much says it all.

If you appreciate Abortion, Every Day’s deep-dives into the anti-abortion movement, help the newsletter do more by signing up for a paid subscription!