Born-Alive Baby Dies in Abortion Clinic

[desflood]

Follow-up.

Autopsy Contradicts Woman's Botched Abortion Claim

POSTED: 12:04 pm EDT April 29, 2005
UPDATED: 5:01 pm EDT April 29, 2005

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Channel 9 has uncovered new details about a woman's claim that a local abortion clinic botched a late term abortion. She says the infant was born and later died.

EPOC Clinic

Friday afternoon, the Orange County Medical Examiner's Office announced that they reconsidered this case and did perform an autopsy. They found the baby, who the mother named Rowin, was not born alive.

"These allegations are nothing more than an attempt to attack those medical professionals and the staff who perform medical termination services," commented EPOC clinic spokesperson Marti MacKenzie.

Friday, the clinic at the center of the controversy defended itself against allegations that an aborted baby was born alive and allowed to die, suggesting the woman who made the claim lied.


This image is taken from a pre-recorded interview with the woman making the claims.

"I can't get into the motive of why anyone is saying anything, but Doctor Pendergraft says it absolutely never happened," said MacKenzie.

Thursday, attorneys for the woman making the claim released a pre-recorded interview with her. She claims staffers at the EPOC Clinic did nothing to help her child after she believed he was born alive and she had a sudden change of heart.

"I saw my son, Rowin, move. Of course, my heart stopped and I screamed very loudly," the woman said in the interview.

A clinic spokesperson said they could not comment on specifics of the case.

The Medical Examiner's Office said they performed an autopsy, but did not perform toxicology tests. An official complaint filed with the state claims a doctor failed to administer a drug called digoxin, which would have killed the unborn child before delivery.

"It is very easy, through a toxicology report, to find out if that drug is in Rowin," said pro-life activist Rev. Patrick Mahoney.

The fact that no toxicology screening was done may be the one thing that keeps this dispute from ending now. The woman's attorney has suggested hiring a private pathologist to perform the toxicology. They have not said yet if that's what they plan to do now.

[Nbadan]

Friday afternoon, the Orange County Medical Examiner's Office announced that they reconsidered this case and did perform an autopsy. They found the baby, who the mother named Rowin, was not born alive.

I would not be surprised if this lady made the whole thing up. Nobody names a fetus they plan on aborting. Clearly, she was not of sane mind when she made the decision to continue with the procedure. Perhaps a phychological evaluation of the patient is in order.

[desflood]

Believe it or not, Dan, there is a bit of emotion involved in such a thing. She probably saw what she had really done (too late, of course) and became hysterical. I was under the impression that patients are supposed to be evaluated before an abortion?

[Nbadan]

Believe it or not, Dan, there is a bit of emotion involved in such a thing. She probably saw what she had really done (too late, of course) and became hysterical. I was under the impression that patients are supposed to be evaluated before an abortion?

I'll leave it up to the attending phycians to decide whether or not this was a viable fetus, and so far all indications are that it was not. Toxicology tests not withstanding. Of course abortion is very emotional, but its not like anyone druged her or forced her to have this abortion. She made the decision of her own free will. If she had any doubts about her decision it was already too late.

[The Ressurrected One]

I notice the article doesn't state how they know the baby wasn't born alive and, at 22 weeks, why wouldn't they do toxicology to verify the woman's claim that digoxin wasn't used?

Frankly, I see the article attempting to exonerate the clinic as more su ious than the originals...

[ChumpDumper]

I notice the article doesn't state how they know the baby wasn't born alive

All one has to do is check the lungs. Even you could figure that one out. OK, maybe not.

[The Ressurrected One]

All one has to do is check the lungs. Even you could figure that one out. OK, maybe not.

Just because the baby wasn't able to take its first breath doesn't mean it didn't emerge trying to breathe, moving, and struggling -- with a pulse.

My daughter didn't breathe for almost two minutes due to a blocked trachea...if she'd died, her lungs wouldn't have told you anything either.

Try again?

[ChumpDumper]

They could look at the trechea too, genius.

Are you accusing the ME of a cover-up?

Come out and say it.

[The Ressurrected One]

They could look at the trechea too, genius.

Are you accusing the ME of a cover-up?

Come out and say it.

I'm saying an autopsy wouldn't necessarily show the child emerged from the uterus dead or alive. Particularly if it only lived for a few minutes after birth -- which probably means it wasn't doing any of those things a baby does, post-partum, to stay alive (which by the way is one of the mother's complaints -- that no one would help the baby) and, therefore, might to a medical examiner look like it was born dead.

I'm accusing you of stupidity...you couldn't cover up a grain of sand.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm saying an autopsy wouldn't necessarily show the child emerged from the uterus dead or alive.

Are you a medical examiner? How many autopsies have you done on fetuses?

[The Ressurrected One]

Are you a medical examiner? How many autopsies have you done on fetuses?

No, but, I've been present at about 20. And, I spent about 7 years in the emergency medical field...

Your qualifications?

[ChumpDumper]

No

That's all that's needed.

I'm not the one questioning the findings of the ME.

You are.

Tell me the ME's role in this cover up.

Or what he missed.

You sure can tell alot from one sentence in a newspaper article can't you -- it's like you examined the fetus yourself.

[The Ressurrected One]

That's all that's needed.

I'm not the one questioning the findings of the ME.

You are.

Tell me the ME's role in this cover up.

I'm telling you they didn't say how the ME knew it was born dead. That was my question.

That's a very difficult call particularly on an infant that died so soon after birth (unless, as you said it drew a breath)...and, yes Virginia, there are ME's that have agendas. Abortion has polarized the entire country.

Another thing. The mother was present at the event and, barring some revelation that she is lying, said the baby moved. It's plausible. The ME wasn't there.

[Das Texan]

there seems to be a of a lot of missing pieces in this story.


maybe once all the pieces are put together we will get the real answer to what the actually happened.


but mothers dont name kids they plan on aborting, that much is pretty much well known fact.

[The Ressurrected One]

there seems to be a of a lot of missing pieces in this story.

maybe once all the pieces are put together we will get the real answer to what the actually happened.

but mothers dont name kids they plan on aborting, that much is pretty much well known fact.

Mothers don't get abortions planning on seeing them writhe and struggle to live, either. I'm sure, if it happened the way she said, it was horribly traumatic and might just cause some guilt. Enough to name the baby and give it a proper burial, I suspect.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm telling you they didn't say how the ME knew it was born dead.

So you filled it with your conspiracy theory to fit your agenda.

Another thing. The mother was present at the event and, barring some revelation that she is lying, said the baby moved. It's plausible.

It's clear whom you believe and whom you do not. I'm completely content to wait it out.

[The Ressurrected One]

So you filled it with your conspiracy theory to fit your agenda.It's clear whom you believe and whom you do not. I'm completely content to wait it out.

No, given the uncertainty with which I know such determinations are made, it is irresponsible journalism not to say how the medical examiner knew the infant was born dead in direct conflict with the mother's story.

I'm complaining about the journalist, not the ME.

Okay, our contentment is irrelevant. We're not driving the story...so, yes, we'll just have to wait. But, as far as you being content with waiting, a few posts ago, you seemed ready to accept the ME's determination at face value and totally discount the mother's account. That's not very patient, is it?

[ChumpDumper]

No, given the uncertainty with which I know such determinations are made, it is irresponsible journalism not to say how the medical examiner knew the infant was born dead in direct conflict with the mother's story.

I don't think that at all. The ME's autopsy contradicts the mother's story, that's the point and quite likely all that could really be said give the time and space constraints of newspaper articles. It could be the only information that was released at the time.

Stories develop. Give it time.

[The Ressurrected One]

I don't think that at all. The ME's autopsy contradicts the mother's story, that's the point and quite likely all that could really be said give the time and space constraints of newspaper articles. It could be the only information that was released at the time.

Stories develop. Give it time.

And, the mother's account contradicts the ME. Who was present at the event?

Really? That's all that could be said? The reporter couldn't have asked the ME, "But sir, the mother claims the baby was alive at birth, how can you be certain it was born dead?"

Seems a reasonable question given the cir stances. Maybe the question was asked and the reporter didn't like the answer.

[The Ressurrected One]

As an example of selective reporting - from another post:

Washington Post — specifically noting a comment by former senior State Department counterterrorism official Larry Johnson — quoted:

"They [The administration and Bush State Department] are deliberately trying to withhold data because it shows that as far as the war on terrorism internationally, we're losing."

Now, let's look at Larry Johnson's (yes, the same Larry Johnson) blog from April 14, 2005:

"It is tough to argue we are winning the war on terrorism when the numbers in the official Government report will show the largest number of incidents ever recorded since the State Department started reporting on terrorist incidents. In the Secretary's defense, however, the sharp jump in numbers has more to do with a change in methodololgy of counting rather that an actual surge in Islamic extremist activity. In fact, if you take time to parse the numbers, the actual scope of terrorism by Islamic extremists in 2004 appeared to decline relative to the attacks during 2003 (except for Iraq)."

Did the Washington post conveniently, deliberately, or accidentally omit Mr. Johnson's qualification? Could the medical examiner, in the subject of this thread, similarly been taken out of context? Just a question.

[ChumpDumper]

you seemed ready to accept the ME's determination at face value and totally discount the mother's account.

Wrong. I accept that it contradicts the mother's story. That's it. As more information is known, I'll consider that too.

You can't find my saying anywhere that the mother is full of crap. I personally don't think something like this could be staged if true, and I would be for outlawing abortion if I knew every kid born was guaranteed a fair shot at a real life and women wouldn't be going back to coathangers if that came to pass.

[The Ressurrected One]

All one has to do is check the lungs. Even you could figure that one out. OK, maybe not.

One would assume the ME did check the lungs. Given that, this post seems to suggest you buy the ME's version over the mother's.

[ChumpDumper]

One would assume the ME did check the lungs. Given that, this post seems to suggest you buy the ME's version over the mother's.

And you buy the mother's, right? I said I haven't drawn any hard and fast conclusions. You obviouisly have.

[The Ressurrected One]

And you buy the mother's, right? I said I haven't drawn any hard and fast conclusions. You obviouisly have.

I see no reason to not believe the mother. She described the incident in plausible detail. Presuming she's never witnessed this before, it was well scripted if falsified.

All we have to counter is an unqualified statement from the ME.

Pardon me if I'm not convinced.

But, if they qualify the medical examiner's statement in an equally plausible manner, yeah, I could be persuaded. Right now, I'm believing the mother.

[The Ressurrected One]

I looked again at the article that started this debate over the ME's findings. They didn't even quote the medical examiners office...the reporter characterized their statement.

Friday afternoon, the Orange County Medical Examiner's Office announced that they reconsidered this case and did perform an autopsy. They found the baby, who the mother named Rowin, was not born alive.

Notice there's nothing in quotes. If they announced, wouldn't it have been more effective to re-print the announcement? And, considering the paragraph is followed by a quoted statement, attacking the mother, makes this suspect.