Doctor loses license in live birth abortion case

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

kanoe

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
Warning, this is pretty intense.


MIAMI, Florida (CNN) -- A doctor's license was revoked Friday in the case of a teenager who planned to have an abortion but instead gave birth to a baby she says was killed when clinic staffers put it into a plastic bag and threw it in the trash.
The doctor, Pierre Jean-Jacques Renelique, was not present when the baby was born, but the Florida Medical Board upheld Department of Health allegations that he falsified medical records, inappropriately delegated tasks to unlicensed personnel and committed malpractice.
Joseph Harrison, the attorney representing Renelique at the license revocation hearing in Tampa, said Renelique has not decided whether to appeal.
The state attorney's office, meanwhile, said its criminal investigation into the incident is ongoing and no charges have been filed. A fetus born alive cannot be put to death even if its mother intended to have an abortion, police said when the incident occurred in 2006.
The baby's mother, Sycloria Williams, sued Renelique, the clinic and its staff in January, seeking damages.
She alleges in her suit that "she witnessed the murder of her daughter" and said she "sustained severe emotional distress, shock and psychic trauma which have resulted in discernible bodily injury."
"This is not about a pot of gold," said Tom Pennekamp, her attorney. "What this is about is right and wrong and making a statement, making sure it doesn't happen to other young women."
According to the suit, Williams, then 18, discovered while being treated for a fall that she was 23 weeks pregnant. She went to a clinic to get an abortion on the morning of July 20, 2006, after receiving medication and instructions the previous day.
Renelique was not at the clinic, however, and Williams was told to wait for him. She was given two pills and told they would make her ill. When she complained of feeling ill, clinic staff members gave her a robe and told her to lie down in a patient room, the suit says.
Renelique was still not present when Williams "felt a large pain" and delivered a baby girl, according to the suit.
"The staff began screaming and pandemonium ensued. Sycloria watched in horror and shock as her baby writhed with her chest rising and falling as she breathed."
Don't Miss



A clinic co-owner entered the room and used a pair of shears to cut the baby's umbilical cord, the suit said. She "then scooped up the baby and placed the live baby, placenta and afterbirth in a red plastic biohazard bag, which she sealed, and then threw bag and the baby in a trash can."
Staff at the clinic did not call 911 or seek medical assistance for Williams or the baby, the suit said.
Renelique arrived at the clinic about an hour later and gave Williams a shot to put her to sleep. "She awoke after the procedure and was sent home still in complete shock," the suit said.
Police were notified of the incident by an anonymous caller who told them the baby was born alive and disposed of.
"The complainant [Williams] observed the baby moving and gasping for air for approximately five minutes," according to a police affidavit requesting a search warrant for the clinic.
Two search warrants found nothing, but officers executing a third warrant "found the decomposing body of a baby in a cardboard box in a closet," the suit said.
The baby was linked to Williams through DNA testing, the lawsuit said. An autopsy showed it had filled its lungs with air prior to death. Documents from the state Department of Health said its cause of death was determined to be "extreme prematurity."
Fewer than 1 percent of babies are born at less than 28 weeks, according to the March of Dimes, a nonprofit organization aimed at reducing premature births, birth defects and infant mortality.
Infants born at that stage may survive, but require treatment with oxygen, other medical help and mechanical assistance to help them breathe. They are too immature to suck or swallow and so must be fed intravenously.
Babies born before about 32 weeks of gestation face the highest risk of health problems, the March of Dimes said.
Williams' lawsuit seeks damages from Renelique, the clinic and its staff. It claims that clinic records were falsified to say only that Williams underwent an abortion. Williams filed the suit individually and "as personal representative of the estate of Shanice Denise Osbourne, deceased," the suit said.
The medical board's action Friday came at the request of the Florida Department of Health, which filed an order in February 2007 seeking emergency restrictions on Renelique's license. Department documents list many of the same allegations as Williams' lawsuit.
"Dr. Renelique's failure to practice medicine with that level of care, skill and treatment that is recognized as being acceptable, as well as his willingness to falsify medical records, poses a serious and immediate danger to the public," the health department said.
Renelique did not respond to the health department or dispute the facts it alleged, department spokeswoman Eulinda Jackson said Friday.
Williams has declined to speak publicly about the case, said Pennekamp, her attorney. She suffers from post-traumatic stress because of the experience, he said.

Members don't see this ad.
 
That is horrid. I don't even know what to say.
 
There a lot of details missing, but it generally sounds like the abortion clinic was definitely making a lot of mistakes and was poorly supervised/run. Is it even legal to abort that late? Why would the clinic give one to her that late and ignore its status....

One line stood out for me though:
She alleges in her suit that "she witnessed the murder of her daughter" and said she "sustained severe emotional distress, shock and psychic trauma which have resulted in discernible bodily injury."

Emotional distress I understand, but what is "shock and psychic trauma" and how do they manifest as physical injuries?? These sound like buzzwords created to get more $$.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
[QUOTE Emotional distress I understand, but what is "shock and psychic trauma" and how do they manifest as physical injuries?? These sound like buzzwords created to get more $$.[/QUOTE]

They probably are buzzwords, however, shock and psychic trauma, they mean emotional distress as well, if not PTSD. All of the above (stress, trauma, distress, PTSD, can absolutely, positively manifest as physical symptoms (injuries).

I'm not going to argue the mother's case, or stand on an attorney's soapbox, but what I will say is something about what used to be called psychogenic symptoms. (the genesis being psychological) Then they was called Psychosomatic symptoms. Now they're called psychophysiologic instead of all the above.

It's mainstream, accepted, understood as physical symptoms (physiologic) that arise from psychologic stressors/disorders.

For example, have you ever heard of a child vomiting, or peeing in his/her pants when his abuser steps into the room? That's a physiologic response to a (mental) stressor. Or a panic attack, when someone believes he/she is going to die from, say a heart attack, and hyperventilates, gets tight in the chest, "can't breathe". Same situation.

There is an entire aspect of Psychology/Psychiatry called Anxiety Disorders. The gold reference standard for all this is called the DSM-IV. You'll find it on the shelf of any mental health professional. You can go to your school library and hopefully find a copy too. (med school library for sure). DSM stands for Diagnostic Statistic Manual, and it is used to help treat all the varieties of mental health disorders. In it, you will not only find a section on Anxiety Disorders, but, I think, there will be a subsection on SOMATOFORM disorders, which either encompass or part of Anxiety Disorders. It's all widely accepted.

While physicians don't know A LOT about the mind, they do know the connection between mind and body, psyche and physical. It's really a fascinating topic to read about. And anything but Fringe any longer.

As an anecdote, look up the cases of women who think they are pregnant and go through the entire pregnancy (including child birth) yet, have no child inside them.

Here's to both mental and physical health,
D712
 
(computer glitch)
 
Last edited:
23 Weeks is way too later I would think....

Man that's just full of fail and heartache.
 
Warning, this is pretty intense.


MIAMI, Florida (CNN) -- A doctor's license was revoked Friday...


I am trying to understand what I should be warned away from. Don't murder babies? Check.

On another note, this case seems strikingly similar to the case in Illinois that sparked the Born Alive Infant Protection Law that then Senator Obama voted to overturn. At least Florida knows what to do with people like that.
 
How do you go 23 weeks w/o knowing you're pregnant? There has to be more to this story. While there are sick people in this world, I just can't see people who work in a clinic dumping a live baby into a plastic bag.

Shame what happened to that baby.
 
How do you go 23 weeks w/o knowing you're pregnant?

Denial ain't just a river in egypt...

I've worked with multiple patients who didn't realize they were pregnant until 30 weeks and beyond. Some have irregular periods to begin with so they didn't notice the difference when they stopped having them (and they may have had some spotting too); some were obese so they didn't notice the weight gain; some were just dumb; some had very troubling psych issues.

One of my patients realized that she was pregnant at 27 weeks; then PPROMed and delivered only a week later (fortunately her baby did well in the nicu).
 
Members don't see this ad :)
irony alert

I don't know...I can see the irony, but I can also see how distressing this whole thing was for the woman. She didn't realize she was pregnant, then rushed into a huge decision (b/c she was so close to the legal limit of 24 wks), then had the whole thing go horribly horribly wrong, and she watched a living, crying child get thrown into a biohazard bag.
 
Besides all the legal and ethical rambling being discussed here about abortion, the main point of the article is that the doctor lost his license

What did he do wrong?

1- He was not in the clinic when a patient that he had never seen before, showed up.
2- He is an employee of the clinic, not the owner.
3- Employees of the clinic went ahead without the doctor being there and gave the patient medications to begin to induce the abortion without the doctor's orders.
4- The doctor gets called, after the event, and shows up an hour later. Performs a dilatation & curettage and finds that there is no fetus.

Then.... he screws up. Instead of documenting that fact in the medical record, he falsifies the information, trying to protect what the clinic employees had done previously. He should have called 911 and whatever investigation ensued, he should have explained what he knew.

The defendant 's lawsuit is about money, nothing else. She intended to kill the fetus in the first place, so I guess she is just suing because she did not like the way the murder took place nor the fact that she was not sedated, therefore becoming an unwilling witness of the killing herself.

Doubt she will get any money though. The clinic closed immediately and most doctors in Florida do not carry malpractice insurance anyway, so there will be no settlement offered from an insurance company. Now because the guy has no job, (he probably already declared bankruptcy) he wont' have money to pay anything back to the defendant either for all her "trauma" (remember OJ ?).

Ahhhh.... the irony of it all....
 
Last edited:
So wait a minute. Am I understanding this correctly. It would have been legal to kill this baby on the date in question, provided the baby was terminated while it was inside the mother's womb. But it became illegal because the baby was killed after it came out of the mother's womb. What is the difference? You have a dead baby on the same day under either scenario. Throwing it in the trash was a little cruel and showed a certain lack of sensitivity.

Personally, I would not give the sorrowful mother one dime. She went to the clinic to get an abortion and she ended up with a dead kid. As the lawyers like to say when discussing contract law, Mom received the benefit of her bargain, in this case, a deceased human being.
 
So wait a minute. Am I understanding this correctly. It would have been legal to kill this baby on the date in question, provided the baby was terminated while it was inside the mother's womb. But it became illegal because the baby was killed after it came out of the mother's womb. What is the difference? You have a dead baby on the same day under either scenario. Throwing it in the trash was a little cruel and showed a certain lack of sensitivity.

Personally, I would not give the sorrowful mother one dime. She went to the clinic to get an abortion and she ended up with a dead kid. As the lawyers like to say when discussing contract law, Mom received the benefit of her bargain, in this case, a deceased human being.

Exactly what I was going to say. If she tries to go through with suing the doctor, then she should be forcibly sterilized.
 
So wait a minute. Am I understanding this correctly. It would have been legal to kill this baby on the date in question, provided the baby was terminated while it was inside the mother's womb. But it became illegal because the baby was killed after it came out of the mother's womb. What is the difference? You have a dead baby on the same day under either scenario. Throwing it in the trash was a little cruel and showed a certain lack of sensitivity.

Personally, I would not give the sorrowful mother one dime. She went to the clinic to get an abortion and she ended up with a dead kid. As the lawyers like to day when discussing contract law, Mom received the benefit of her bargain.

I think it is a clear case of negligence on the clinic. There was a contractual obligation to perform a procedure, not to produce a certain outcome. It is a shame the doctor didn't do the right tihng. There was a lot of fail in this scenario.
 
You can abort legally in Georgia up to 26 weeks. Viability is usually 23 weeks according to the NICU I've spent five semesters volunteering with. Abortion limits vary state-by-state,so what is legal in one state may have different limitations in another. People will agonize over their tiny babies that are born at 24 weeks and stay in teh NICU for forever, but people regularly abort babies past this age through surgical abortion procedures that include crushing the skull and observing the leakage of the gray matter of the brain as part of the procedure. It's easy to say "let's just abort it," but when you think about what that means and what it looks like at its legal limits - many people have a different perspective on the matter. Fact is, at the legal limits (and before them), the babies would cry and squirm and hold your fingers given the chance to. Doesn't seem to matter to some people.
 
The mother is a dumb b*tch; first for having an unwanted pregnant, second for not knowing she was pregnant until 23 weeks, third for saying she witnessed the murder of her daughter (irony). The clinic staff were idiots and the doctor made a big mistake for trying to play it off. Where's the common sense from either side...
 
Just a few facts (1) Partial-birth abortion is not a medical term (the medical term is Late-term abortion); it was something coined by the same people who coined the term "pro-life" (2) Severe medical conditions are not always noticeable until late into the pregnancy (such as ancephaly) (3) It is thought (although by no means proven) that a fetus cannot feel pain until the 26th week (4) There has been one child ever to have been recorded to survive from 20 weeks, somewhere worse than the odds of winning the lottery twice. None of this is meant to be inflammatory but rather to give information. I would hope that as people who would like to become physicians everyone here, while completely entitled to their own opinions, would understand that a newspaper article does not present a clear medical history and that every patient is different. I think it does seem fairly obvious that there is some medical misconduct but that leaves a huge range of possibilities.
 
most doctors in Florida do not carry malpractice insurance anyway,

I highly doubt that's true. Where's your source?
 
Just a few facts (1) Partial-birth abortion is not a medical term (the medical term is Late-term abortion); it was something coined by the same people who coined the term "pro-life" (2) Severe medical conditions are not always noticeable until late into the pregnancy (such as ancephaly) (3) It is thought (although by no means proven) that a fetus cannot feel pain until the 26th week (4) There has been one child ever to have been recorded to survive from 20 weeks, somewhere worse than the odds of winning the lottery twice. None of this is meant to be inflammatory but rather to give information. I would hope that as people who would like to become physicians everyone here, while completely entitled to their own opinions, would understand that a newspaper article does not present a clear medical history and that every patient is different. I think it does seem fairly obvious that there is some medical misconduct but that leaves a huge range of possibilities.

uh...what? Thats not even in question here. So what if the fetus can/cannot feel pain uptil that point?

So wait a minute. Am I understanding this correctly. It would have been legal to kill this baby on the date in question, provided the baby was terminated while it was inside the mother's womb. But it became illegal because the baby was killed after it came out of the mother's womb. What is the difference? You have a dead baby on the same day under either scenario. Throwing it in the trash was a little cruel and showed a certain lack of sensitivity.

Personally, I would not give the sorrowful mother one dime. She went to the clinic to get an abortion and she ended up with a dead kid. As the lawyers like to say when discussing contract law, Mom received the benefit of her bargain, in this case, a deceased human being.

So true. The irony of it all makes me what to cry. Emotional trauma of seeing her dead kid? are you kidding me?!

I think it is a clear case of negligence on the clinic. There was a contractual obligation to perform a procedure, not to produce a certain outcome. It is a shame the doctor didn't do the right tihng. There was a lot of fail in this scenario.

I think the obligation was to produce a certain outcome ie. death of the kid right? And you're right, this whole scenario has a big FAIL written all over it.
 
I think the obligation was to produce a certain outcome ie. death of the kid right? And you're right, this whole scenario has a big FAIL written all over it.

This is my view, and I am by no means a JD....

The clinic was contracted to perform an abortion... To terminate a pregnancy. Once she delivered, she no longer was pregnant and there a standard of care should be given to the child.

So once the girl gave birth, the contract was null and void.
 
Legal action should certainly be taken against the physician and clinic for the falsification of medical records. That's just unacceptable.

Since the baby was able to breathe on its own and was actually delivered (thus 'viable' I assume), I wonder if clinic staff actually had a right to kill it. Although I am pro-choice, I think after a certain stage when the fetus becomes viable on its own, then it should no longer be allowed to be aborted. However, I don't know the policies in this case.

As for the mother suing, I think it would be wrong to award her any money for emotional distress etc. After all, she went in to have an abortion in the first place. So basically she wanted to abort/kill the fetus, but she didn't want to have to witness it with her own eyes (if I understand correctly). She went in to have an abortion, and the baby was aborted... what more does she want? Going on about her daughter being killed is ridiculous, as she went in the clinic for that purpose. So she has no real basis to sue.
 
This is wrong on so many levels. I won't even begin to comment on the fact that at 24 weeks this girl wanted an abortion (and then actually calls it her daughter...what??) but what kind of sick people take a breathing baby and stick it in a biohazard bag and call it a job done?? I think I just vomited inside my mouth. People make me sick. How's that for a physiologic response to emotional stress.
 
Legal action should certainly be taken against the physician and clinic for the falsification of medical records. That's just unacceptable.

Since the baby was able to breathe on its own and was actually delivered (thus 'viable' I assume), I wonder if clinic staff actually had a right to kill it. Although I am pro-choice, I think after a certain stage when the fetus becomes viable on its own, then it should no longer be allowed to be aborted. However, I don't know the policies in this case.

As for the mother suing, I think it would be wrong to award her any money for emotional distress etc. After all, she went in to have an abortion in the first place. So basically she wanted to abort/kill the fetus, but she didn't want to have to witness it with her own eyes (if I understand correctly). She went in to have an abortion, and the baby was aborted... what more does she want? Going on about her daughter being killed is ridiculous, as she went in the clinic for that purpose. So she has no real basis to sue.

The whole thing is wrong, but you must admit there is a world of difference between an abortion and giving birth then watching someone stuff your newborn baby in a bag and throw it in the trash.
 
The whole thing is wrong, but you must admit there is a world of difference between an abortion and giving birth then watching someone stuff your newborn baby in a bag and throw it in the trash.

What exactly i the world of difference you speak of? Is it because you can see an actual human outside of the womb? See no evil speak no evil? There is only a difference between the two events if you are a hypocrite in denial also know as a pro-choicer.

If you consider yourself supportive of a woman's right to choose to murder her unborn human and find yourself disturbed by this story you are a HYPOCRITE.
 
What exactly i the world of difference you speak of? Is it because you can see an actual human outside of the womb? See no evil speak no evil? There is only a difference between the two events if you are a hypocrite in denial also know as a pro-choicer.

If you consider yourself supportive of a woman's right to choose to murder her unborn human and find yourself disturbed by this story you are a HYPOCRITE.
Stop pretending you have some sort of foolproof logic or a moral high ground and take your preaching elsewhere.

I agree wholeheartedly that the mother is an idiot and doesn't deserve anything. We don't know enough about the doc to say that he was negligent in terms of care (though I don't think the same can be said of the clinic/staff); but falsification of records is definitely something he should be prosecuted for, unless there's something extenuating about the story we have not been told.
 
What exactly i the world of difference you speak of? Is it because you can see an actual human outside of the womb? See no evil speak no evil? There is only a difference between the two events if you are a hypocrite in denial also know as a pro-choicer.

If you consider yourself supportive of a woman's right to choose to murder her unborn human and find yourself disturbed by this story you are a HYPOCRITE.

I'm a high risk pregnant mother of a 3 year old who COMPLETELY supports a woman's right to chose, because I know what gestating, having and raising a child actually entails. And I am disturbed by this story because of the callousness shown to both the fetus and the mother by the support staff. How does that make me a hypocrite?
 
These are dark times. Its really ridiculous the "lengths" people will go to "cut corners" in life. I hate this story, its so damn depressing. I give it three thumbs down👎thumbdown👎
 
What I hate is how people in this thread are making judgments already because CNN said they threw a baby in the trash, oh, wait, if CNN said it that means it is fact...

Sorry...
 
Maybe next time the staff will carryout the murder of this 23 week old person less calously

Your first hand experience as a mother does not make your opinion on this issue more defensible.

If preserving the life of an unborn person is not the moral highground what is?
 
The whole thing is wrong, but you must admit there is a world of difference between an abortion and giving birth then watching someone stuff your newborn baby in a bag and throw it in the trash.

Lol really? There is a 'world of difference'? Are you serious?

Maybe next time the staff will carryout the murder of this 23 week old person less calously

Your first hand experience as a mother does not make your opinion on this issue more defensible.
If preserving the life of an unborn person is not the moral highground what is?
Sorry but i'll hav to agree here...being a 'high risk pregnant mother' doesnt really make your point defensible.
 
Maybe next time the staff will carryout the murder of this 23 week old person less calously

Your first hand experience as a mother does not make your opinion on this issue more defensible.

If preserving the life of an unborn person is not the moral highground what is?

Do you advocate stem cell research? Or are you against it? Honest question - not looking for a fight.
 
Stem cells are fine.

Using Totipotent cells as a source or as the object of research is not.

So adult derived cells ok.

Embryonic cells not ok.
 
I highly doubt that's true. Where's your source?

I saw this and wanted to offer my experience with this. I can't make generalizations but I am from Florida and most of the doctors I have been too (including all OB/GYNs I have seen) did not have malpractice insurance and had signs up stating it.

I've heard that for OB/GYNs this is popular because malpractice insurance is out of hand for this specialty. Back when I lived in CT there was lots of talk of there being a future shortage of OBs because no one wants to practice there because of the ridiculous cost of malpractice insurance.
 
Stem cells are fine.

Using Totipotent cells as a source or as the object of research is not.

So adult derived cells ok.

Embryonic cells not ok.

I know a few arguments for and against the use of embryonic stem cell research, but I don't want to hi-jack this thread.

I just wanted to see if you were pro-life but for embryonic stem cell research, which would obviously be contradictory.
 
I completely agree that the doctor did so many things wrong. He was just careless in general.

I think that the woman should not be making the claims she made. It just doesn't make any sense. She went there to get her baby murdered, and that's what happened. This just seems like typical America, trying to sue whenever possible. It's people like her that raise the cost of malpractice insurance in the first place.

The witness said the baby was gasping for breath for 5 minutes if I read correctly. If the mother was so distraught and actually wanted her daughter, why didn't she speak up? It's one thing to panic in that kind of situation but I would think that if I were in that situation I would panic and reverse my choice rather than sit there and watch it happen (since I'd be horrified).

By the way I'm pro-choice so I am in no way against this woman for her initial decision, I am just not okay with what she chose to do after.
 
Re:
Originally Posted by Carlsbad1919
Just a few facts (1) Partial-birth abortion is not a medical term (the medical term is Late-term abortion); it was something coined by the same people who coined the term "pro-life" (2) Severe medical conditions are not always noticeable until late into the pregnancy (such as ancephaly) (3) It is thought (although by no means proven) that a fetus cannot feel pain until the 26th week (4) There has been one child ever to have been recorded to survive from 20 weeks, somewhere worse than the odds of winning the lottery twice. None of this is meant to be inflammatory but rather to give information. I would hope that as people who would like to become physicians everyone here, while completely entitled to their own opinions, would understand that a newspaper article does not present a clear medical history and that every patient is different. I think it does seem fairly obvious that there is some medical misconduct but that leaves a huge range of possibilities.
uh...what? Thats not even in question here. So what if the fetus can/cannot feel pain uptil that point?


The whole point is that this is why some states may have chosen 24-25 weeks as the cutoff (which by the way is generally just an estimate anyway because women frequently make appointments prior to any ultrasound). I thought this was fairly obvious/innocuous statement but as the neural cord is developing sensory input is also developing. Nerve sensations are extremely complicated and the brain's interpretation takes time to fully develop even in full-term infants (why if you work with newborns you will see that they can feel pain but may not know how to coordinate their movements to avoid it). This is a complete tangent and not related to the issue at hand but I found it a bit odd that this would be difficult to understand. Also, you can be pro-life and for embryonic research. I think it's incredibly insulting to insinuate that a hardly-developed sac of cells is equivalent to an infant. Infants are human beings. Embryos can become a human being. The ability to develop is not equivalent to having already done so. That is not to say there aren't plenty of people who find embryos already qualifying as a life but it is not hypocritical to say they do not.
 
Last edited:
The facts in this story seem really off...
1. They only said the baby breathed for 5 minutes. So the baby was probably dead when it was "put in a garbage bag"
2. It wasn't really a "garbage bag" as in the kind in your kitchen, but actually one of those red biohazard bag, which is where all human tissue is placed during/after surgery
3. That bit about finding the decomposing body in a "cardboard box in the closet" seems highly unlikely... they would have thrown the bag away, not kept it in a BOX in a CLOSET...
such sensational articles shouldn't be trusted until you can confirm from another source...
 
Lol really? There is a 'world of difference'? Are you serious?


Sorry but i'll hav to agree here...being a 'high risk pregnant mother' doesnt really make your point defensible.

My point is that I'm not a hypocrit for being both appauled by this story and pro-choice, but you're right, I didn't make myself crystal clear. When stuff started going wrong with my current pregnancy, and it was made clear to me that my own health and well-being could be at stake, we had to make a decision about continuing this pregnancy. It is not just this baby's life that is at stake - it's my life as well, and the lives of my husband and already here son. There's a good chance that nothing will go wrong, and I'll be fine, but there's a chance that I could end up severely disabled or dead, too. (And no, I'm not going into it more than that, 'cause really, it isn't any of your business.)

Taking this choice out of my hands would be equivalent to slavery, in my opinion. If I had chosen to get an abortion, and the same thing had happened to me, the EXACT same story that was written about this woman could have been written about me. We don't know why she made the decision to have an abortion. It probably wasn't due to a life-threatening situation, it might have been retroactive birth control, but we don't really know. What I do know is if I had gone to get an abortion (which is often a traumatic decision for the woman) and something like this had happened to me, I would have been devastated.

I know you guys are going to say, well, your situation is rare, special, etc. I will argue that any situation where a woman has to choose to make another person or not is pretty special and should be given some amount of reverence and respect.
 
Last edited:
My point is that I'm not a hypocrit for being both appauled by this story and pro-choice, but you're right, I didn't make myself crystal clear. When stuff started going wrong with my current pregnancy, and it was made clear to me that my own health and well-being could be at stake, we had to make a decision about continuing this pregnancy. It is not just this baby's life that is at stake - it's my life as well, and the lives of my husband and already here son. There's a good chance that nothing will go wrong, and I'll be fine, but there's a chance that I could end up severely disabled or dead, too. (And no, I'm not going into it more than that, 'cause really, it isn't any of your business.)

Taking this choice out of my hands would be equivalent to slavery, in my opinion. If I had chosen to get an abortion, and the same thing had happened to me, the EXACT same story that was written about this woman could have been written about me. We don't know why she made the decision to have an abortion. It probably wasn't due to a life-threatening situation, it might have been retroactive birth control, but we don't really know. What I do know is if I had gone to get an abortion (which is often a traumatic decision for the woman) and something like this had happened to me, I would have been devastated.

I know you guys are going to say, well, your situation is rare, special, etc. I will argue that any situation where a woman has to choose to make another person or not is pretty special and should be given some amount of reverence and respect.

👍
 
The facts in this story seem really off...
3. That bit about finding the decomposing body in a "cardboard box in the closet" seems highly unlikely... they would have thrown the bag away, not kept it in a BOX in a CLOSET...
such sensational articles shouldn't be trusted until you can confirm from another source...

This right here was the HUGE red flag in that article for me...
 
So wait a minute. Am I understanding this correctly. It would have been legal to kill this baby on the date in question, provided the baby was terminated while it was inside the mother's womb. But it became illegal because the baby was killed after it came out of the mother's womb. What is the difference? You have a dead baby on the same day under either scenario. Throwing it in the trash was a little cruel and showed a certain lack of sensitivity.

Personally, I would not give the sorrowful mother one dime. She went to the clinic to get an abortion and she ended up with a dead kid. As the lawyers like to say when discussing contract law, Mom received the benefit of her bargain, in this case, a deceased human being.
I'm with this guy.
 
Top