Philadelphia doctor accused of murdering patient, newborns

[Trainwreck2100]

Gosnell didn't advertise, but word got around. Women came from across the city, state and region for illegal late-term abortions, authorities said. They paid $325 for first-trimester abortions and $1,600 to $3,000 for abortions up to 30 weeks. The clinic took in $10,000 to $15,000 a day, authorities said.

"People knew near and far that if you needed a late-term abortion you could go see Dr. Gosnell," Williams said.

White women from the suburbs were ushered into a separate, slightly cleaner area because Gosnell believed they were more likely to file complaints, Williams said.

Few if any of the sedated patients knew their babies had been delivered alive and then killed, prosecutors said. Many were first-time mothers who were told they were 24 weeks pregnant, even if they were much further along, authorities said.

Prosecutors said Gosnell falsified the ultrasound examinations that determine how far along a pregnancy is, teaching his staff to hold the probe in such a way that the fetus would look smaller...

State regulators ignored complaints about Gosnell and the 46 lawsuits filed against him, and made just five annual inspections, most satisfactory, since the clinic opened in 1979, authorities said. The inspections stopped completely in 1993...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...011902911.html

Bull

[Viva Las Espuelas]

The picture they paint is just too macabre for no one at all, with any sense, to notice and report what the was going on there for all those years. It's to the point where it sounds like fiction.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PHILADELPHIA – When Davida Johnson walked into Dr. Kermit Gosnell's clinic to get an abortion in 2001, she saw what she described as dazed women sitting in dirty, bloodstained recliners. As the abortion got under way, she had a change of heart — but claims she was forced by the doctor to continue.
"I said, 'I don't want to do this,' and he smacked me. They tied my hands and arms down and gave me more medication," Johnson told The Associated Press.
Johnson, then 21, had a 3-year-old daughter when she became pregnant again. She said she first went to Planned Parenthood in downtown Philadelphia but was frightened away by protesters.
"The picketers out there, they just scared me half to death," Johnson, now 30, recalled this week.
Someone sent her to Gosnell's West Philadelphia clinic, at the Women's Medical Society, saying anti-abortion protesters wouldn't be a problem there. She said she paid him $400 cash.
A few months after the abortion, she began to have gynecological problems. An examination revealed venereal disease. She blames Gosnell, 69, for the lifelong illness, which she declined to identify, and for the four miscarriages she has subsequently suffered.
Johnson learned last week that Philadelphia prosecutors believe Gosnell frequently delivered late-term babies alive at his clinic, then severed their spines with scissors, and often stored the fetal bodies — along with staff lunches — in refrigerators at the squalid facility. Tiny baby feet, prosecutors said, were discovered in specimen jars, lined up in a macabre collection.
"Did he do that to mine? Did he stab him in the neck?" Johnson asked at her North Philadelphia home. "Because I was out of it. I don't know what he did to my baby."


Rest of the artice.

[lil'mo]

right right..i'm also pro choice, i think i should have hte choice to kill ugly babies like that bas child of yours

shyeah right brah, i have the most beautiful & handsome baby boy in existence

[Jekka]

Are you for the banning of any types of guns?

... non sequitur much?

Hmmm and I imagine the reason for you saying your last statement is because birth control wasn't available for free and everywhere to everyone, right?
ok.................

Holy crap, you're taking a sentiment that I don't think MOST people would argue with (that this is tragic and none of these women should have been at that "clinic" in the first place) and made an issue out of it. I just pointed out that it would be better make it easier to prevent these situations than not. This was a really dumb place to come looking for an argument.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

... non sequitur much?

Holy crap, you're taking a sentiment that I don't think MOST people would argue with (that this is tragic and none of these women should have been at that "clinic" in the first place) and made an issue out of it. I just pointed out that it would be better make it easier to prevent these situations than not. This was a really dumb place to come looking for an argument.

Well, thanks for letting explain myself. Silly me to ask politely where you stood before I did..........but I guess I missed the mark there, huh?...........

By you answering that way, It tells me you'll give more liberties to a clear-state-of-mind minor, rather that a clear-state-of-mind adult. That they would do the right thing with something readily available that could have a life-altering affect if not used properly.

.............That's all.

[MannyIsGod]

Rick Perry doing his best to keep "doctors" like this guy in business.

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=171032

I wonder what Perry's stance on gun laws is (Obviously very important in this debate).

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Well I'm sure the catch-all birth control devices out there will prevent that from ever happening.

And I believe he's pro second amendment, iirc.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Also, I'm saying all I've said here in regards to minors. Kids. If you're in preK-12th, you're a kid. I didn't read that thread in the other forum. Didn't know about it til now. I don't think it's the government's place to do that. Especially, since we'll all be paying for it, but in the grand scheme of things, we'll be paying for it either way.

[vy65]

I'd like to know what makes this type of abortion so (morally) wrong compared to abortions that take place earlier? Is it there an argument that the fetus feels more pain compared, and that's why it's bad? Is it because there's a horror-movie quality to the image of snapping a fetus's spine with scissors?

I'm just curious as to how you can justify opposition to partial-birth abortions while claiming that a woman has a right to chose?

And for the record, I'm not supporting what this doctor did. I just wonder if these two positions are or are not contradictory.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

I just wonder if these two positions are or are not contradictory.

Well I know two people here don't understand contradiction. Or so it seems.

[MannyIsGod]

Well I'm sure the catch-all birth control devices out there will prevent that from ever happening.

And I believe he's pro second amendment, iirc.

I don't think anyone ever advocated that "catch all" BC would eradicate this. I think it should be obvious that better birth control policies lower instances of illegal abortions taking place. But maybe we should think about gun control and see where it factors in that situation.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

You are easily distracted. Not surprised.

[MannyIsGod]

I'd like to know what makes this type of abortion so (morally) wrong compared to abortions that take place earlier? Is it there an argument that the fetus feels more pain compared, and that's why it's bad? Is it because there's a horror-movie quality to the image of snapping a fetus's spine with scissors?

I'm just curious as to how you can justify opposition to partial-birth abortions while claiming that a woman has a right to chose?

And for the record, I'm not supporting what this doctor did. I just wonder if these two positions are or are not contradictory.

Its not a contradiction if you believe abortion is Ok at one point in the pregnancy but not at another. Its a contradiction because of the way you're framing it but its obviously not cut and dry. There could be many reasons why someone would feel this is the case but more than likely it has to do with the development level of the fetus.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Forest. Not tree.

[vy65]

Its not a contradiction if you believe abortion is Ok at one point in the pregnancy but not at another.

That's my question: what's the logic for that belief?

[MannyIsGod]

You are easily distracted. Not surprised.

Maybe, doesn't change that you brought in completely irrelevant information into the debate and missed an obvious and fairly widely accepted point.

[MannyIsGod]

That's my question: what's the logic for that belief?

I gave you an example as far as the developmental level of the fetus goes. I'm not going to speak for everyone, but personally I don't view a fetus that cannot survive without the mother's body as an independent life. Obviously, as we get further into the term this changes.

[MannyIsGod]

Forest. Not tree.

Can tree's own guns?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Maybe, doesn't change that you brought in completely irrelevant information into the debate and missed an obvious and fairly widely accepted point.

Forest. Not tree.

Thanks for confirming my point. Have a good day.

[MannyIsGod]

I support gun control for trees.

[LnGrrrR]

I guess everyone has to follow their own moral compass...I'm pretty sure I'd be saying "You dumb ...you waited six ing months to decide to get an abortion? You need to talk to an adoption agency because I'm not killing that baby..."

That's pretty much how I feel about it too. I don't think it's quite as bad, morally speaking, if it happens early in the pregnancy (within the first two/three months). Still not great, but better than late-term.

In a realpolitik-way though, outlawing abortions just leads desperate mothers to places like this, sadly.

[LnGrrrR]

I gave you an example as far as the developmental level of the fetus goes. I'm not going to speak for everyone, but personally I don't view a fetus that cannot survive without the mother's body as an independent life. Obviously, as we get further into the term this changes.

Manny, I used to think that way too, but then someone brought up the point that babies, even independent of the mother physically, are still dependent on the mother (or caregiver) to provide nutrition for them.

Is the difference between acceptance of abortion and non-acceptance only the matter of a baby being physically co-located with the mother? That doesn't seem a strong enough rationale.

[lil'mo]

no way scrah, i saw that pic and the child definitely has him him

who's re ed now?

that blank absent minded "nobody's home" look =/

i was holding a french fry in front of his face

[Jekka]

Manny, I used to think that way too, but then someone brought up the point that babies, even independent of the mother physically, are still dependent on the mother (or caregiver) to provide nutrition for them.

Is the difference between acceptance of abortion and non-acceptance only the matter of a baby being physically co-located with the mother? That doesn't seem a strong enough rationale.

But isn't the point that a caregiver or someone besides the mother could give care? Prior to viability, a fetus cannot survive with ANYONE except the mother. At 24 weeks (generally accepted viability in most cases currently), machines and formula could keep a baby alive. At that point, the mother could relinquish parental rights of a child and let someone else take care of him/her. Prior to that, the fetus is not developed enough to survive outside the womb, and is therefore not an independent life (as far as science and semantics go, at any rate).

By your rationale, a child who cannot survive without a caretaker is one that has not yet attained independence, but I think we can generally agree that a 4 year old is an independent life - even if he/she can't survive without a caretaker.

[Jekka]

I support gun control for trees.

The loggers of America thank you for your support.