Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Border Crisis: Biden Admin Transporting Pregnant Unaccompanied Girls to States Without Abortion Restrictions

Border Crisis: Biden Admin Transporting Pregnant Unaccompanied Girls to States Without Abortion Restrictions

“This may involve transporting a minor to a state in which abortion is lawful and available, if the minor is currently in a state in which abortion is not lawful or available.”

The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), an agency within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), works to house unaccompanied children (UC) at the border who are not legal American citizens.

ORR revised Field Guidance #21 to include directions to send pregnant UC to states without abortion restrictions since SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade.

In 2017, the ACLU sued the Trump administration (J.D. V. AZAR, FORMERLY GARZA V. AZAR AND GARZA V. HARGAN) after ORR prevented a teenager from getting an abortion.

In September 2020, under Biden’s administration, the ORR “adopted a new policy under which it would not interfere with immigrant minors’ access to abortion and related services and would adopt strict limits on disclosure of minors’ pregnancy and abortion information.”

Yes. Children. In other words, minors. Humans under 18 years old (emphasis mine):

This Field Guidance confirms that ORR staff and care providers must not prevent UC from accessing legal abortion- related services and that ORR staff and care providers must make all reasonable efforts to facilitate access to these services if requested by the UC. This may involve transporting a minor to a state in which abortion is lawful and available, if the minor is currently in a state in which abortion is not lawful or available.

I cannot find an age restriction within the document. So does that mean they can take little children to get abortions?

ORR stressed the new policy is in compliance with the Garza decision. From the document (emphasis mine):

When receiving a DHS referral for UC to ORR, ORR Intakes Team typically attempts to place the UC at a care provider program located in geographical proximity to the area where DHS encountered the UC, taking into consideration the individual needs of the UC (see UC MAP Section 1.3.2).

In the case of any referral of pregnant UC and/or UC who are a victim of sexual based crimes:

• ORR Intakes Team must prioritize placement of pregnant UC and UC who are victims of sexual-based crimes in states without abortion bans and with broad access to reproductive health care for minors. When bed space in those states is limited, the ORR Intakes Team must use their professional discretion and judgment and available information, to place UC in the least restrictive placement with available bed space, prioritizing facilities that are licensed to care for pregnant UC.

The care provider staff must inform the pregnant UC of her “reproductive health care options.”

The provider has to inform ORR immediately if the girl requests an abortion. That’s when ORR will move the girl to an abortion state.

ORR can take a girl to a state with restrictive abortion laws if the state has a clinic willing to perform the abortion:

• ORR will, to the greatest extent possible, transfer pregnant UC requesting an abortion to an ORR program that is state-licensed to care for pregnant UC and in an appropriate location to support the UC’s health care needs and access to an appropriate medical provider who is able to legally perform the requested abortion.

• ORR must ensure that the pregnant UC has access to available abortion care they have requested and that the care provider assists in the transportation of the UC for the purpose of an abortion, which may include travel across state lines.

• Consistent with Garza, ORR prioritizes the transfer of UC requesting abortion to a state with access to abortion care, in the same manner as ORR would transfer a UC to another care provider to secure appropriate medical services.

o The only instance in which a transfer may be made to a state that does not provide abortion access is if such a transfer will facilitate access to an abortion, such as providing a travel route, because the UC will be placed in a different ORR facility geographically close to lawful abortion care. This may include states with a major airport with routine direct flights to states with abortion access. Travel to access medical services is permissible and routine for UC in ORR care and custody (see ORR Policy Guide Sections 3.4, 3.4.3 and 3.4.4). If access cannot be facilitated, an additional transfer must be made so that the UC can access abortion care.

Who pays for this? Who makes sure the child is not forced to have an abortion?

On the subject of confidentiality, remember, these are female children who’re bouncing around the country. The children are also supposed to have sponsors who are usually relatives:

o In general, ORR federal staff and care providers must not communicate information about a UC’s pregnancy (including the fact of the pregnancy) or UC’s decision on whether to have an abortion (before or after the abortion) to individuals other than ORR federal staff and care providers directly involved in the UC’s case. Procedures in the UC MAP Section 3.4.7 outline four exceptions to the confidentiality requirements.

The policy regarding notification says: “ORR federal staff and care providers shall not communicate information about a UAC’s pregnancy (including the fact of the pregnancy) or decision whether to have an abortion (before or after the abortion) to individuals other than staff members or the UAC…”

The exceptions are if the UC “needs emergency medical care and is unable to inform an emergency medical provider herself; or authorizes the ORR federal staff or care providers to communicate the information to a specific individual.”

The memo includes “in good faith” instructions for the provider:

Nothing in this provision prohibits the ORR federal staff from communicating information to an applicant or approved sponsor regarding a serious health complication arising from pregnancy, birth or abortion that ORR finds in good faith the UAC may experience or require follow-up care to address after having been transferred to the custody of that applicant or approved sponsor. In addition, nothing in this provision prohibits the ORR federal staff from communicating information regarding the UAC’s pregnancy to an applicant or approved sponsor if the ORR federal staff has found in good faith that ORR must communicate the information to confirm that the applicant or approved sponsor can provide the financial and emotional support needed by the UAC associated with carrying the pregnancy to term, giving birth, and/or parenting.

If an ORR official or care provider has a religious objection to abortion, they must file a request for permission not to help with this process.

How about a moral objection to abortion?

An anonymous source told CBS News the federal government has a “relatively small” population of pregnant girls.

The same official confirmed “HHS has already transferred some pregnant girls from states that have banned abortions.”

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

The GOP would have been charged with Killing Anchor Babies!

    Pro-Abortion is in part financed by advocates for sequestering the “burden” of evidence (e.g. underage girl with “benefits”, women on casting couches, deplorable Jews, excess children, parenthood, parent/hood) in darkness.

      Concise in reply to n.n. | November 11, 2022 at 5:03 pm

      I think more to the point is that the Office of Refugee Resettlement is financed with US tax dollars and it is a violation of the Hyde amendment to use those monies to pay for abortions. This policy is us tax dollars to promote and facilitate abortions. Seems to run counter to the spirit and letter of the law. I’d say add it to the impeachment pile but I suspect that politicians from both parties will do nothing given women voters’ overwhelming support of all things abortion. They’ll make wonderful mothers I’m sure.

        Subotai Bahadur in reply to Concise. | November 11, 2022 at 5:30 pm

        What is this “law” you speak of that is supposed to restrict the actions of the US government? Is there such a thing anymore?

        Subotai Bahadur

          The Hyde Amendment is an appropriations rider attached yearly to federal spending bills since 1976 barring the use of federal funds for abortions with limited exceptions not applicable here. Yeah, it is the law. No quotations needed.

Catastrophic Anthropogenic Immigration Reform (CAIR).

Reproductive rights are human rites performed for social, redistributive, clinical, political, and fair weather causes.

As for victims of CAIR (e.g. underage girls raped and the “burden” of evidence aborted and sequestered in darkness), emigration reform to mitigate the progress of immigration reform at both ends of the bridge and throughout.

A government that freely indulged in the forced sterilization of minorities, from the eugenics years all the way up to 2020 (the culprit in that case being ICE), is now so concerned about “women’s health issues” that it wants nothing to stand in the way of killing their babies.
Same shit, different day.

I infer that underage is supposed to matter because of statutory rape, but these are girls who became pregnant en route to the border where those laws don’t apply. It’s a different culture. Who knows the age of consent may be ten where there aren’t first world problems. If she wants an abortion obviously it has to be in a state that permits abortion.

Oprima el número dos.
Hey, yeah, um, l- I’m just calling to procure a hasty abortion.

– Juno (2007)

Having to go to another state to get an abortion is a script-writers’ opportunity to show ambivalence. In Spiral season 6, Laure buys tickets and gets on a train from Paris to Holland where the abortion time limit is higher, and then gets off again before it leaves.

    henrybowman in reply to rhhardin. | November 11, 2022 at 2:37 pm

    This is like the third time you have pointed this exact same thing out. I still have yet to see the relevance to any real-life situation. Personally, I have never either backed nor opposed a law on the basis of how much or how little fiction fodder it hands to scriptwriters.

      rhhardin in reply to henrybowman. | November 11, 2022 at 2:50 pm

      It’s a drama, like stories that make up the news. Soap opera. Nobody is in the market for hard news. Think city council meetings.

“BORDER CRISIS”

The border crisis isn’t a handful of foreign nationals seeking abortion—-it’s the big horde of illegals numbering in the millions who are rushing across our border every year.

Anyone stupid enough to write that down must also by definition be pro-slavery.

Otto Kringelein | November 11, 2022 at 1:36 pm

I cannot find an age restriction within the document. So does that mean they can take little children to get abortions?

Yes

Who pays for this?

The U.S. taxpayer

Who makes sure the child is not forced to have an abortion?

Nobody.

If an ORR official or care provider has a religious objection to abortion, they must file a request for permission not to help with this process.

Which will be automatically denied and you will be forced to participate in the “process”. Your only option being resigning from your positions as ORR official or care provider.

How about a moral objection to abortion?

Morals? What are those. Denied.

You might also ask the question at what stage of pregnancy will an abortion not be provided to an unaccompanied child (UC) in the custody of the ORR given the fact that some states have now passed laws/constitutional amendments that allow abortions at any stage of pregnancy up to the day of birth.

So much for not spending federal tax dollars on abortions.

Can you say “Mann Act?”

So they can be defined as “unaccompanied children” under the Office of Refugee Resettlement because the government won’t tell the parents? Are they now “abortion refugees?”

Doesn’t “resettlement” mean given an new home? Will they be “resettled” to the new state?

Lastly, while they are in there, will they offer sexual “reaffirmation” or reassignment services to the underage children?

The left will redefine anything to support their perversions, particularly on underage children.

I’m surprised the Biden admin is doing this, I would have thought pulling as many anchor babies across the border as possible would their priority.