Live Action, the pro-life organization responsible for undercover videos that showcase behind-the-scenes discussions and actions at American abortion clinics, is back with the fifth installment of its “Inhuman” video series. In the latest clip, investigators are seen speaking with abortion doctors about the humanity of unborn children.
Among the audio and video tidbits that are captured, one woman is heard asking a counselor at the Southwest Women’s Options clinic in Albuquerque, New Mexico, if her unborn child is a “baby.”
“Well what – how – what do you consider a baby? It’s definitely a fetus,” the counselor responded, laughing at moments. “Um, it depends what the term ‘baby’ means to you, and how you perceive it.”
Dr. Carmen Landau, who works at the same clinic, later compared the shot that would terminate the baby’s life to a flu shot or a vaccine. And she told the undercover investigator that the baby would not feel anxiety or suffering, as he or she would not be capable of experiencing these emotions.
Landau, in speaking about the purported absence of fetal pain related to the shot, said that an unborn baby is “not a thinking being in the same way that — that you and I are.”
Dr. LeRoy Carhart — an abortion practitioner who was the subject of a past Live Action investigation and who previously compared the abortion process to “putting meat in a crock pot” — is, once again, depicted in a past interview sharing his controversial views about when life begins.
“Well, in my heart and my mind, you know, life begins when the mother thinks it begins, not when anybody else thinks it begins,” he said. “For some women, it’s before they conceive; for some women, it’s never. Even after they deliver, it’s still a problem, not a baby.”
Also included in the video is the story of Toby, a child who was born prematurely at 24 weeks, but who survived and is shown at various stages throughout his early development.
Watch the latest Live Action clip, below:
In the past, TheBlaze has explored the journalistic standards and ethics surrounding undercover videos. The central question is: Is it ever permissible to lie to get the truth? While some would quickly answer affirmatively, it’s a challenging dynamic — and one that deserves scrutiny.
Experts have a variety of opinions, but the general consensus is that, unless deceit is the only option to retrieving information of monumental importance to the public, lying to obtain it is not ethical journalistic practice. There are, of course, differing ideas on how this dynamic unfolds. In 2011, Fred Barnes of The Weekly Standard told TheBlaze that these rules do not apply to those outside of media.
“It’s dishonest for anyone in journalism to pretend to be someone they’re not. This rule doesn’t apply to folks outside the profession,” he said at the time.
But not everyone agrees with this assessment. Poynter has developed a list of standards for when it is — and is not — appropriate to use undercover tactics. And read more about TheBlaze’s exploration of undercover journalistic standards here.