Trump forms anti-abortion coalition and would ban public funding for procedure

Donald Trump on Friday named one of the nation’s top anti-abortion activists to his campaign coalition, in the clearest signal yet that the presidential candidate has fully embraced Republicans’ typically harsh stance against abortion.

Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of Susan B Anthony List, a group that works to elect Republican, anti-abortion women, will chair the loose coalition of conservative, anti-abortion rights leaders who are working to elect the Republican nominee. Trump’s campaign also announced that he would commit to a law banning public funding of abortion.

The appointment is a sharp about-face for both Dannenfelser, formerly one of Trump’s most vocal critics, and the Republican presidential nominee. Although he has espoused harsh anti-abortion positions, Trump has nevertheless spent much of the campaign out of step with the anti-abortion establishment – praising Planned Parenthood and, conversely, calling for the punishment of women who have abortions illegally.

In response, anti-abortion groups have sometimes accused Trump of being ignorant of their positions.

On Friday, Dannenfelser signaled that her group considered Trump’s policies to be wholly in line with the anti-abortion movement’s priorities. Trump “doubled down [on his] commitments to the pro-life movement,” Dannenfelser said. “The contrast could not be clearer between the two tickets, and I am proud to serve as national chairwoman for Donald Trump’s pro-life coalition.”

The announcement is a further sign that Trump has succeeded in wooing social conservatives who once viewed the Manhattan real estate magnate with suspicion and chimes with his choice of Mike Pence, governor of Indiana, as his running mate. The former congressman is credited with laying the blueprint for the Republican party’s crusade against Planned Parenthood.

Trump has only recently claimed to oppose abortion. In 1999, in his last public statement on abortion before he flirted with a presidential run, Trump proclaimed himself to be “very pro-choice”. He first declared he was “pro-life” in 2011 at an annual conservative confab.

During the Republican primaries, Dannenfelser was one of the loudest voices to oppose Trump, calling on Iowa caucus-goers in a January letter to “support anyone but Donald Trump”. “We are disgusted by Mr Trump’s treatment of individuals, women, in particular,” the letter read. “Trump … has through the years made disparaging public comments to and about many women.”

Reproductive rights groups immediately condemned Marjorie Dannenfelser’s addition to Trump’s campaign. Photograph: UPI / Barcroft Images

Her comments came as Trump repeatedly equivocated on abortion rights and one of the anti-abortion movement’s most cherished goals, the federal defunding of Planned Parenthood.

A little more than a year ago, Trump said he could not commit to defunding Planned Parenthood without weighing whether the group was “good for women”. Trump later committed to stripping federal funds from Planned Parenthood – “because I am pro-life” – in a February primary debate. But he added that he admired Planned Parenthood’s work on reproductive health, saying: “Millions of millions of women – cervical cancer, breast cancer – are helped by Planned Parenthood.”

A month later, Trump said he would support “some form of punishment” for women who have abortions if the procedure were illegal, comments that anti-abortion groups criticized as out of step with their mission. In April, he further angered anti-abortion groups by saying he believed abortion should remain legal. “The laws are set,” he said. “And I think we have to leave it that way.”

His campaign in both cases quickly sought to undercut his comments, claiming the candidate believed in punishment only for abortion providers and saying Trump would appoint anti-abortion nominees to the supreme court.

In Friday’s announcement, Trump committed for the first time to signing the Hyde amendment into law. The amendment is an annual budget rider that prohibits federal Medicaid funding from paying for abortion services. Making the amendment law is the strictest position Trump has staked out on abortion funding, although it is not surprising. Trump, in a January opinion column, called public funding for abortion “an insult to people of conscience”.

Hillary Clinton, by contrast, in an apparent first for a major party candidate, has promised to repeal Hyde.

Reproductive rights groups immediately condemned Dannenfelser’s addition to Trump’s campaign.

“Let’s be clear: just like Donald Trump, Susan B Anthony List hasn’t done a thing to empower women and everything to advance an extreme agenda that aims to entirely end women’s access to abortion in America, often even for survivors of rape, incest, and women whose health is endangered,” said Ilyse Hogue, the president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, a reproductive rights group.

“Between his support from the dangerously similar anti-choice and alt-right movements, and his record of misogyny, we know Donald Trump will be a disaster for women in the White House.”

Trump forms anti-abortion coalition and would ban public funding for procedure

Pre-signing abortion forms is unlawful, General Medical Council admits

The act tends to make clear that they should signal to certify that they formed the viewpoint “in excellent faith”.

In their letter, the MPs stated: “As it is impossible to come to a health care judgment with out realizing any of the specifics of a patient’s case, pre-signing is regarded unlawful.”

It quoted remarks manufactured by Earl Howe, the overall health minister, who told the Lords earlier this month that: “Forms becoming pre-signed is a clear breach of the law and if it is found to be occurring, a prosecution need to be brought.”

A Scotland Yard spokesman confirmed the letter to Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe had been acquired and its contents were being regarded as.

The GMC had earlier accepted the practice was “wrong” but ruled against bringing any fitness to practise hearings due to the widespread nature of the issue.

It also refused to identify the medical doctors or give any detail of their positions.

Although admitting pre-signing was illegal, Mr Dickson pointed out this was partly due to broad-reaching modifications in clinical practice since the 1967 Act was drawn up.

He mentioned the Crown Prosecution Services (CPS) had looked into two pre-signing instances and concluded it was not in the public interest to pursue the individuals concerned.

He wrote: “We do act exactly where medical doctors are convicted – but in these cases there had been no prosecutions, allow alone convictions.

“The principal concern for us, therefore, was how to bring this unlawful and unacceptable practice to an end.

“We demanded and obtained assurances from all the medical professionals recognized in the inspections that they would no longer pre-sign these forms.

“We also made it clear that there would be extreme consequences if doctors ignored our guidance in this location.

“Inspections by the Care Quality Commission given that that investigation took location have found that the practice has now stopped.”

The breaches 1st came to light for the duration of inspections by the Care Top quality Commission, the health watchdog, triggered by a Telegraph investigation which uncovered evidence of medical professionals agreeing to abortions simply because of the gender of the little one.

Mr Dickson was keen to separate the situation of pre-signing kinds from medics agreeing to terminate pregnancies due to the baby’s gender.

He wrote: “It is critical not to confuse this matter of pre-signing of abortion varieties with the separate instances in which it is alleged that abortions have been sanctioned on the basis of the gender of the foetus.

“We are actively investigating two this kind of instances and have barred these medical professionals from any involvement with abortion while our enquiries are continuing.”

The GMC is doing work with the Division of Overall health to give more advice about doctors’ responsibilities below the Abortion Act, Mr Dickson stated.

“We hope this will give medical professionals and patients with the details and support they require about what constitutes good practice in this location,” he mentioned.

“This is a very controversial element of health-related practice and significantly has altered given that the present law was passed.

“Dealing with that must be a matter for parliament and society. Our position is to make positive that medical doctors realize what is expected from them in delivering excellent care and that they work inside of the law.”

Pre-signing abortion forms is unlawful, General Medical Council admits