Reply With Quote
Sick.
Complaint Filed on Behalf of Mother Whose Born-Alive Baby Died at Abortion Clinic
By Melanie Hunter
CNSNews.com Deputy Managing Editor
April 28, 2005
(1st Add: Provides details on the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act.)
(CNSNews.com) - A conservative legal group has filed two complaints against a Florida abortion clinic claiming the clinic refused to help a mother whose baby was born alive, despite a law that protects babies "accidentally" born during abortion procedures from being killed or left to die.
The mother, Angele, had gone to the EPOC clinic in Orlando, Fla., to get an abortion. After the first day of the procedure, she was required to return to the clinic the following day for an induced abortion. When her baby was born alive, the woman screamed for help, but the clinic workers refused to help her, according to the Liberty Counsel.
Angele was forced to watch her son Rowan die, and during the incident, no doctors were present at the abortion clinic, the legal group said.
The Health and Human Services recently announced it would take steps to improve compliance with the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act after receiving "testimony that some infants who had been born alive after unsuccessful abortions were left to die."
According to the law, "born alive" means "the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion."
"We are hopeful that these complaints will lead to immediate change in the form of discipline against the doctors and revocation of the abortion license for the clinic. But we are also hopeful that these complaints will serve as the catalyst for long-term change," said Mathew Staver, president and general counsel of the Liberty Counsel.
Complaints were filed with the Florida Department of Health and the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration. The complaint filed with the Florida Department of Health names Dr. Harry Perper, who performed the procedure the first day but was not on hand the second day, as well as Dr. James Pendergraft, who owns and supervises the clinic.
The complaint also details several violations of Florida laws: the complete absence of a doctor during an abortion procedure, causing a death certificate to improperly state that the baby was still-born, and a complete lack of post-operative care.
The complaint filed with the Agency for Health Care Administration lists the same violations of state law as the claim filed with the Florida Department of Health, but it focuses on unsanitary conditions at the clinic.
The clinic "delivery room" had dried blood on the floor and the walls, and Angele saw a used, bloody cotton ball on the floor, the complaint said.
After the procedure, Angele was rushed out the door with no follow-up care, and she did not receive a rhogam shot, which was medically necessary for her given her blood type, the legal group said.
"Abortion clinics are the least regulated medical facilities in the state of Florida. That needs to change. It is a travesty that tattoo parlors are more heavily regulated than abortion clinics," said Staver.
"These doctors need to be held accountable for their actions, and we intend to pursue these complaints to that end. Part of promoting a culture of life in America means holding abortion doctors and clinics accountable when they violate the law," he concluded.
Sick.
And illegal. Let's hope they're made an example of.
I don't see how anyone can read that and still be pro-abortion (or, in the case of Manny, pro-choice).
One weird thing about this story is this ....
If she was having an abortion, why would she name the baby?Angele was forced to watch her son Rowan die, and during the incident, no doctors were present at the abortion clinic, the legal group said.
maybe she named him after the abortion... very weird indeed...
If true, then this wasn't an abortion, so I don't really think it's even a pro-life vs. pro-choice issue.
Of course, CNS doesn't really provide any response from the clinic's perspective.
People who have stillborns name their babies postmortem. She obviously had a big change of heart once she saw that what she was getting rid of was a baby, not just some lump of tissue, and it's entirely possible she named her son after he died. I don't think it's that unusual.
Sure, people name their stillborns because they were intending on having the baby. I cannot imagine that she decided to name a baby before she aborted it. So yes, she named it afterward. Maybe I'm nuts but that seems extremely unusual to me. I think there's something weird to this story besides the obvious. Perhaps they had to name it because they had to file a death certificate. But it's weird.People who have stillborns name their babies postmortem. She obviously had a big change of heart once she saw that what she was getting rid of was a baby, not just some lump of tissue, and it's entirely possible she named her son after he died. I don't think it's that unusual.
Because it survived the "procedure."
Really, what was it then? Do you have any idea how many abortions result in a still living fetus?
That's convenient.
Yeah, I agree, it would have been better had they printed the clinc's "no comment."
Well, Kori, I'm betting the mother didn't have the vaguest notion it would be delivered kicking and breathing and alive.
The baby deserved a name and a burial. It also deserves justice.
I wouldn't define it as an abortion unless the fetus was dead (or unavoidably on the brink of death), but that's semantics. You know what I meant. I think that if the mother changes her mind at any time while the fetus is alive, the fetus should be treated as any sick patient brought to an emergency room on the brink of death.Really, what was it then? Do you have any idea how many abortions result in a still living fetus?
In most cases, though, I would imagine there's nothing the clinic can do to save the child. If these clinics could regularly save fetuses removed from the womb that early, you would see it happening more often.
Yes, it would have, because then we'd know they actually contacted the clinic for their point of view, instead of writing up a one-sided agenda-driven article. Basic journalism. And they should know that seeing as they're owned by an alledged "media watchdog group" that looks for the slightest instances of biased stories in the news.Yeah, I agree, it would have been better had they printed the clinc's "no comment."
I'd be curious to hear if anything COULD have been done, and I'd also like to hear what the mother and her conservative legal team thinks SHOULD have been done... for example, should the fetus have been re-inserted into her womb?
This article offers nothing but emotional manipulation and very few hard facts. We'll just have to wait and find out if this goes anywhere.
Last edited by Spurminator; 04-29-2005 at 01:15 PM.
Sounds to me like you may be describing a murder.
But, isn't is just a piece of tissue? At what point does it become a life worth saving -- when the mother says so? Wow! That's a new twist to the abortion debate -- "Mothers are God, get to determine whether extracted tissue is human or not!" I can see the headlines now.
In most cases? Just how many cases of aborted children squirming and tryingn to breathe are you willing to tolerate in defense of "choice?"
That's both naive and disheartening.
You honestly believe a clinic dedicated to abortions, probably staffed by strong pro-abortionist employees and doctors is going to accurately report the number of aborted babies they've let just die in a sink?
They know such information would sink the "pro-choice" movement...and, quite frankly, so does everyone in this forum.
You have a point here. I'd love to hear the clinic's side of the story.
Yes, the baby could have been left in the womb.
How 'bout have never been removed. I'm not relieving the mother of her culpability here but, it's well known -- and this is a prime example -- that pregnant women are rarely told of the chance a baby could survive the procedure. If so, they might make a different choice.
Enough facts to warrant investigation. And, I agree on your second statement.
Yeah, I think this story is bogus. Besides CNS News, a shady right-wing news source at best ( shades of the Gannon run Talon News perhaps?), a google search for other sources of this story don't exist. Seems that the writer tried to styme research of this story by not revealing the mothers full name thus the, 'The mother, Angele'.
A google search of the name Angele, EPOC clinic in Orlando, and Florida Department of Health and the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration turned up nothing impertenant. Kinda strange for a story that the right could use to attack women right to choice.
I would describe it the same way I would describe a hospital allowing someone without Health Insurance to die. But that's a whole other discussion.Sounds to me like you may be describing a murder.
I don't believe it's just a tissue and never have. I've never used the scientific argument of human vs. non-human because I believe they're human, and even if they aren't, they will eventually be.But, isn't is just a piece of tissue? At what point does it become a life worth saving -- when the mother says so? Wow! That's a new twist to the abortion debate -- "Mothers are God, get to determine whether extracted tissue is human or not!" I can see the headlines now.
My argument has always been from the perspective of the government's involvement in forcing a mother to see her pregnancy to its fruition. My argument would be the same whether we're talking about an embryo or a 5-year-old child that somehow finds its way into a mother's womb.
Your have a convenient view of "pro abortionists" that seems to imply that they are in the business to kill babies. The purpose is to end pregnancies, and right now we are not scientifically advanced enough to reliably end pregnancies early while also saving the babies. If we could, you can bet abortion doctors would be on board.You honestly believe a clinic dedicated to abortions, probably staffed by strong pro-abortionist employees and doctors is going to accurately report the number of aborted babies they've let just die in a sink?
They know such information would sink the "pro-choice" movement...and, quite frankly, so does everyone in this forum.
And if you need a sinister reason to help you imagine this scenario, think of the capital they could gain by providing abortion services and fetal health care.
Ah, so they're suing the clinic for performing an abortion. This is going to go really well for them.How 'bout have never been removed.
No disagreement here. They should be counseled more thoroughly than women who are counceled before having cosmetic surgery done.I'm not relieving the mother of her culpability here but, it's well known -- and this is a prime example -- that pregnant women are rarely told of the chance a baby could survive the procedure. If so, they might make a different choice.
Did I miss something? Was she having a late term abortion? How far along was she?
From what I can tell, it was just your everyday run of the mill abortion. You know if they'd pick those little puppies apart in-utero, like they used to, we wouldn't have them coming out trying to breathe and struggling to live.
From what I read in the original article on the website, the baby was 23 weeks.
Sorry, 22 weeks.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=44027
Here's another article with pictures of Rowan
Warning, not for the faint of heart
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=43962
I find it incredible that a woman could know a 22 week baby looks like that and could still go ahead with the procedure...
Nothing surprises me anymore. Nothing.
I intentionally avoided the word surprise...
Good point.
You two are nuts. WorldNetDaily and the Christian News Service are not legitimate news sources. Either the rest of the main-stream media has collectively decided to avoid this story or more than likely, it's not real!.
Independent Reproductive planning centers like P.P. will not do an abortion after the first trimester. Too many lawsuits. A mothers health must be in danger for a private physician to do a abortion after the first 16 weeks for many of the same reasons.
Planned Parenthood does abortion up to 24 weeks.Independent Reproductive planning centers like P.P. will not do an abortion after the first trimester.
Technically, your right, but in some states after the first trimester a independent second physician must also be present to care for any viable fetus and can only be waivable if the mothers heath is in danger...
Meanwhile, the same immature adolecents who Righties blame for not taking more personal control over their life situations are 30% more likely to wait until after the first 13 weeks to seek an abortion...In Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (476 U.S. 747 (1986)), the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a state may require that a second physician be present at the abortion of a viable fetus to care for it should it be born alive, but that requirement must be waivable in a medical emergency.
Planned ParenthoodAdolescents are more likely than older women to obtain abortions later in pregnancy. Adolescents obtain 30 percent of all abortions performed after the first trimester (CDC, 2003).
Among women under age 15, nearly one in four abortions are performed at 13 or more weeks' gestation (CDC, 2003).
The very youngest women, those under age 15, are more likely than others to obtain abortions at 21 or more week's gestation (CDC, 2003).
Common reasons why adolescents delay abortion until after the first trimester include fear of parents' reaction, denial of pregnancy, and prolonged fantasies that having a baby will result in a stable relationship with their partner (Paul et al., 1999). In addition, adolescents may have irregular periods (Friedman et al., 1998), making it difficult for them to detect pregnancy. Also, as previously noted, state laws requiring parental consent or court-authorized bypass for minors often cause delays.
In some states, like I mentioned before, the definition for when a fetus is viable has become so muddled that most doctors won't touch a fetus after the first 13 weeks of first trimester.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
