The Unfilled Demand for Abortion Providers creates a House of Horror in a Pennsylvanian Abortion Clinic

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 14th, 2013

Week in Review

Girls grow up so fast these days, don’t they?  Why when I was in high school I remember girls being girls.  Hanging out with their friends.  Getting involved with after-school activities.  I even remember some of the cool girls in the marching band playing inside the school on Friday.  And at the pep rallies.  Today these girls are managing their birth control.  Even having an abortion or two.  Because the liberal Left has empowered them.  So they can be free and do whatever they want to.  So these girls aren’t playing in marching band anymore at pep rallies.  But giving in to the constant begging of the cool boys they want to like them.  So instead of those innocent after-school activities they’re having consequence-free sex.  Well, what they thought was consequence-free sex.

Which brings us to the ugly side of all that empowering girls.  Some of them are getting venereal diseases they will live with for the rest of their life.  Some are getting pregnant.  Some are having babies.  And some are having abortions.  And all of this is happening even before they graduate from high school.

It’s getting harder to get an abortion these days.  As more people are turning away from the heady days of the Seventies.  Where women went on the pill.  And Roe v. Wade made abortion legal.  Anything went in those days.  But after seeing the explosion in abortion rates people are having a change of heart on the issue.  Especially those in the health care field.  Making it hard to find abortion providers in some areas.  And because fewer and fewer people are providing these services stories like this appear in the news (see Why Pro-Lifers And Pro-Choicers Both Blame The Other Side For Kermit Gosnell’s ‘House Of Horrors’ Abortion Clinic by Grace Wyler posted 4/12/2013 on Business Insider).

The gruesome murder trial of Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell has inflamed political passions on both sides of the abortion debate, both for its horrific content and for the potential policy implications that the trial could have on abortion rights and women’s health.

If you are just tuning in to the Gosnell story, here is the ugly synopsis, from the 2011 grand jury report (emphasis added):

This case is about a doctor who killed babies and endangered women. What we mean is that he regularly and illegally delivered live, viable, babies in the third trimester of pregnancy – and then murdered these newborns by severing their spinal cords with scissors. The medical practice by which he carried out this business was a filthy fraud in which he overdosed his patients with dangerous drugs, spread venereal disease among them with infected instruments, perforated their wombs and bowels – and, on at least two occasions, caused their deaths. Over the years, many people came to know that something was going on here. But no one put a stop to it.

Let us say right up front that we realize this case will be used by those on both sides of the abortion debate. We ourselves cover a spectrum of personal beliefs about the morality of abortion. For us as a criminal grand jury, however, the case is not about that controversy; it is about disregard of the law and disdain for the lives and health of mothers and infants. We find common ground in exposing what happened here, and in recommending measures to prevent anything like this from ever happening again

So what are the two sides of the abortion debate saying?  Here’s the pro-life point of view:

To that end, pro-life groups like SBA List have used the Gosnell trial to bolster support for new state laws that impose further restrictions on abortion clinics, including so-called Targeted Regulation of Abortion Provider (TRAP) laws that require abortion clinics to meet the same standards as ambulatory surgical centers and often require abortion providers to have hospital admitting privileges.

“One solution is to increase the standards that these clinics and facilities are held to,” Quigley said. “The types of legislation that we’re focusing on are precisely these types of common-sense measures that ensure health and safety standards for abortion clinics.”

To emphasize this point, pro-life advocates point to the fact that Gosnell’s clinic was not inspected by the Pennsylvania Department of Health after 1993, when the agency decided to stop inspecting abortion clinics at all.

According to the report from the grand jury, this decision was made for “political reasons” because the state didn’t want to be “putting a barrier up to women” who wanted abortions. The board considered restarting inspections in 1999, but officials were concerned that abortion clinics wouldn’t meet inspection standards, resulting in fewer abortion facilities.

So, in other words, they want to make an abortion clinic as clean and professional as my veterinary doctor’s office.  Where my vet works hard to keep his standards up.  Because there are a lot of vets out there doing the same thing and he doesn’t want to lose my business.  As there is no stigma in being a vet.  And no political controversy.  Which tells you a lot about abortion.

Now the pro-choice point of view:

Still, pro-choice advocates say that the Philadelphia “House of Horrors” is also the tragic by-product of a hostile political climate that has driven legitimate abortion providers out of business and forced women to seek out low-cost butchers like Gosnell.

“We all thought we had said goodbye to the days of back-alley abortions,” said Jessica Arons, director of the Women’s Health and Rights program at the Center for American Progress. “The majority of abortions provided in this country are legal and safe. But there are people like Gosnell who take advantage of the polarized atmosphere and exploit women. So hopefully people will take away the right lessons from this case.”

According to Arons, TRAP laws are the result of a decades-long push by pro-life lobbyists to limit access to abortions at the state level. She explained that these laws put cumbersome architectural and bureaucratic restrictions on abortion clinics, forcing providers to comply with medical standards designed for far more complicated surgical facilities.

In the end, clinics are often unable to meet the requirements and are forced to shut down — which, of course, is the goal of these laws from the outset.

Laws requiring doctors to have hospital privileges are also a “catch-22,” Arons said, because hospitals are often reluctant to grant privileges to qualified abortion providers for fear of political backlash.

Hostile political environment?  Back alley abortions?  They couldn’t have left Gosnell more alone.  The only thing restricting access to abortion was the trouble in finding more abortion providers to work in an unregulated industry.  Which means it must be more of a matter of conscious than politics.

Of course the bigger picture here is what the liberal Left is doing to girls by empowering them with free birth control and access to abortion.  It is because of this girls feel that it must be okay to use sex to get a boy to like them.  And because boys can have more sex with more girls they continue this behavior after high school.  Which is a large reason for women turning to online dating services to find someone to marry.  Because most men these days are just looking for a good time.  Like they were back in high school.  Which leads to multiple sex partners.  Greater transmission of venereal diseases.  And abortions.

In hindsight these women probably wished they did play in that marching band in high school.  And enjoyed being a girl.  Having some wholesome fun in those after-school activities.  Instead of empowering themselves.  By objectifying themselves.  And creating a whole lot of stress in their lives they don’t need.  Caused by the Left.  Who exploited these women.  And girls.  To make them fear Republicans.  And vote Democrat.  So they could have all the consequence-free sex they so desired.  As if that was the only thing important in their lives.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Canadian Doctors state that Human Life Begins at Birth and the Thing in the Womb before that is not Human

Posted by PITHOCRATES - August 25th, 2012

Week in Review

The Canadians aren’t redefining when life begins.  They’re just putting medical science behind the 400 year-old English common law that defines it.  Yes, the Canadian doctors are inserting themselves into one of the most contentious debates ever to consume mankind since the Protestant Reformation (see Opinion: doctors dodge hot-button life debate by Paul Schratz posted 8/20/2012 on The Vancouver Sun).

Canada’s doctors voted last week to take a political rather than medical position that human life begins at birth, in the process closing their eyes to science and the evidence of their own senses.

In a spectacular act of bio-redefinition that has many observers scratching their heads, the Canadian Medical Association voted to support the maintaining of a section of the Criminal Code of Canada that declares a child becomes a human being at the moment of birth…

So they’ve chosen the intellectually indefensible position that an unborn child, moments away from birth, is not human, which essentially means scores of medical textbooks, not to mention the entire field of fetal medicine, now need to be retired. After all, if doctors who are removing tumours or repairing spinal cords on unborn babies aren’t working on humans, one wonders why they would spend years training to be doctors rather than veterinarians.

If a life is only human at birth it does raise some questions.  A mother could smoke and drink during pregnancy as she wouldn’t be harming a human life.  Bad doctoring that results in birth defects would not cause harm to a human.  A new drug that has a dangerous side effect on an unborn life would not harm a human life.  Physical abuse that results in a miscarriage would not harm a human life (in the womb).  Such an act would only rise to the level of battery against the mother.  Not homicide of the unborn non-human life.  Sad as these events may be we would not be able to redress them through the courts.  As the courts are for people.  Humans.  Not things that aren’t human.  There are penalties for people found guilty of cruelty to animals.  But usually that’s because people consciously do these things.  They’re not accidents.  Or things that result un-expectantly from other actions.

But the current debate is not about changing the definition of when life begins.  It’s about leaving the definition as it is now.  Life begins at birth.  So it is confusing because we do act as if the preborn life within the womb is human.  So why do these doctors come out giving medical sanction to a 400 year-old English common law definition of life?  From an era some will say we weren’t all that smart?  Especially those who like to point to all that warfare between Protestants and Catholics around that time.  So it would appear that the Canadians are opening the door for a lot more prenatal harm in the womb.  Why?  Is it because they don’t respect human life?  That depends where you are in the span of human life.

It’s par for the CMA, however, which has been developing a habit recently of wading into political issues. At their annual meeting in Yellowknife, the MDs also passed a motion calling for a public debate that would lead to a free vote in the House of Commons on the issue of end-of-life care.

That echoes an editorial in their CMA Journal last month which called for a national debate on death and dying. The country’s leading medical journal said it’s time for Canadians to debate whether we are prepared to embrace “therapeutic homicide…”

So why is it that the same doctors who, when it comes to euthanasia, are in favour of debate and open to rethinking when life ends, are at the same time opposed to discussion that might lead to a rethinking of when life begins?

It’s especially curious since the issue of end-of-life care in Canada has been studied and voted on countless times — as recently as last November’s parliamentary committee on compassionate and palliative care, which called for improvements to palliative care and a commitment to a national suicide prevention strategy. The CMA welcomed that report, saying “End-of-life care is an area that requires urgent attention.”

Indeed, through the years and all the many debates, reports and votes on euthanasia and palliative care, there has been one consistent conclusion: Parliamentarians and Canadians want more and better end-of-life care, not euthanasia.

So if you’re sick and dying they do respect human life.  It’s just in the womb where they can take it or leave it.  So the in-the-womb life belief is more of a political belief than a medical belief.  So what are the politics behind it?  Ontario Conservative MP Stephen Woodworth’s Motion 312.  Which seeks to redefine when life begins.  In the womb.  Or out of the womb.  The fear of Motion 312 is, of course, what will happen to abortion?  As the law is right now you can do anything you want to the life in the womb.  Because it’s not human.  Which includes having an abortion.  However, if they redefine the beginning of human life as occurring at a time earlier than when exiting the womb it could make abortion murder.  Like an assault and battery that results in a miscarriage.  Which could really complicate the abortion debate.

So those who are old, sick and in pain have no choice in ending their life.  They must live and suffer even if they want to die.  As doctors will protect these lives to the bitter end.  But a baby in the womb?  You’re on your own, kid.  The best we can offer you is to wish you good luck.  And this coming from the doctors we entrust our lives to.  It makes you wonder what’s next.  Limited use of euthanasia?  As determined by the state for political reasons.  Such as the growing cost of health care can’t justify treating people that can’t fully recover and live a normal life again?  Without continuing expensive medical treatments?  Anything is possible when you play fast and loose with defining the beginning and ending points of human life.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,