Remembering Edrica: Killed by Planned Parenthood
Posted by Eric Scheidler, February 15th, 2008
One night last February, a 21-year-old college student named Edrica Goode fell severely ill. Her mother and her sister, a registered nurse, couldn't figure out what was wrong with her. Nor could the hospital where they took her.
The girl was so incoherent the hospital even sent her for exam at a nearby mental facility, only to have her sent back. On Valentines Day 2007, Edrica died of a massive septic infection.
Her mother Aletheia later learned that on the morning of her illness, Edrica had gone to Planned Parenthood of Riverside, CA, where laminaria were inserted for a late term abortion procedure—despite her having a vaginal infection at the time. The laminaria acted as conductors of the local infection into Edrica's entire bloodstream, killing her.
Aletheia, who is suing Panned Parenthood for malpractice with help from the Thomas More Society (our attorneys), published the above memorial for Edrica in the paper yesterday. Please remember Edrica and her family in your prayers.
Wow, if that can happen at clean modern facility, just imagine what the numbers would be if abortion were illegal. Who knows what kind of facility she would have to go to and the cleanliness level. What about the person’s credentials posing as the doctor. Scary!
I’m glad I’m male
February 15th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
> Scary!
Hard to imagine anything more scary than what PP just did that that poor girl and her baby. Hopefully her story will educate people that PP victimizes unborn children AND the women who go there.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
If medical malpractice occurred (and it does happen in EVERY medical field), the family should sue. However, Tom makes a very valid point that, it appears, people would like to ignore.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
The pro-life community has been trying for years here in Illinois to have all abortion facilities abide by the same standards/regulations as do regular ambulatory out-patient medical facilities.
Trying to get this legislation passed in a Democratic controlled legislature is an exercise in futility. The Democrats are so beholden to the pro-choice lobby they cannot bring themselves to take even this one small step to improve standards of medical care for abortion bound women.
That PP is building clean modern facilities does not mean that the care will be any better. Until we have strictly enforced standards we will be relying on them to self-police. From across the country there are multiple reports of PP involved in lawsuits for injuries and deaths of their clients so it would seem unlikely we can count on them to do a credible job of reporting their negligence and culpability in these matters.
February 15th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Jerry N,
If PP is "negligible and culpable" it is irrelevant whether or not they report it. At that point, it becomes a matter of public record.
How does PP not abide by the "same rules" as other medical facilities? What rules are you referring to?
February 15th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
Student,
Abortion facilities are not regulated like other medical/surgical clinics. In states like MO, that are trying to regulate abortion clinics ie: connected to a hospital in case of an emergency, PP is trying to stop this bc it costs to much.
February 15th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
Tara,
In what way are they not regulated the same?
February 15th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Tara,
You stated "In states like MO, that are trying to regulate abortion clinics ie: connected to a hospital in case of an emergency, PP is trying to stop this bc it costs to much."
Of course they object due to cost. I had out patient surgery last year at my gynecologist's office and they were not connected to a hospital. If that doesn't apply to my gynecologist's office, why should it apply to PP or any other out patient facility?
February 15th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
Hi everyone -
I watched the verdict of Bobby Cutts in Ohio, who killed Jessie Davis and her unborn baby, Chloe.
He was found guilty of both Jessie Davis and her unborn child Chloe. As they read the verdict the law called Chloe the "unborn human baby".
He was convicted of murder for Jessie Davis (not aggrevated) and Aggrevated Murder for Chloe. He was convicted on all counts for Chloe. He is facing the death penalty for the death of Chloe, not Jessie. Aggrevated murder is a more serious charge then just murder.
I think this is the first time I've read that someone was convicted and facing the death penalty for the unborn child and not the mother.
February 15th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
> Tom makes a very valid point
Student,
What is the "valid point"? Are you saying that it is acceptable for PP to injure and kill people, as long as we can theoretically conceive of an option that might be worse?
Statistics also show the number of women who die annually from abortion has not decreased due to legalization… legal abortions haven't afforded any greater safety to women than illegal ones.
February 15th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
Tom (and Student who agreed with Tom's point),
To say that it's great that abortions is legal on the grounds that if it was illegal people would have abortions in much less enjoyable circumstances completely skirts the issue.
It's either infanticide or it's not, and if it's not, all us pro-life whack jobs should just get real jobs, as pro-choicers so often tell us.
If it is the taking of an innocent human life, it doesn't matter if people would do it anyway, and it doesn't matter if people would hurt themselves doing it anyway.
Methamphetamine is illegal in this country because it ruins peoples lives and often kills them. But people continue to abuse the drug. In fact, people most often abuse meth in dark alleys or dirty homes using dirty gear and cooking it in incredibly dangerous home labs that endanger not only the user but everyone around him.
Just imagine if we legalized meth. People could buy their meth over the counter at prices that would be vastly below the black market prices they currently pay, so they wouldn't have to break the bank to keep up their habit. Let's face it, they're often already poor.
Not only that, they could afford clean needles or pipes thus reducing infections and other medical problems. We could also quit spending the piles and piles of taxpayer funds we are currently spending in an attempt to stamp out the meth epidemic.
Just think how wonderful it would be if meth were only legal.
But obviously, we keep it illegal despite how much easier it would make meth addicts lives if it were legal. Why? Because meth is a life-destroying scourge on our society. It is a clear evil and it doesn't matter how much people want it. It doesn't matter if they will skirt the law and hurt themselves to get it. It must remain illegal for everyone's good.
So it is with abortion. It is the destruction of an innocent unique member of the human species and it doesn't matter if people like it, it doesn't matter if people want to do it, and it doesn't matter if people will continue to do it if it is illegal. It is an objective evil and must be outlawed once again for the sake of children, for the sake of the mothers who often don't know the pain they're headed for, and for the good of our nation.
All the best,
Matt
February 15th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
Tom & Student,
This is NOT a valid point. It had NOTHING to do with the "cleaniness standards" of a legal or non-legal facility. This had to do with negligance on behalf of Planned Parenthood for going on with the "procedure" regardless of the fact that this beautiful, young lady had a vaginal infection. The infection should have been treated BEFORE the "procedure" was done.
It's malpractice, at it's finest, by your "beloved" PP. My goodness, when will you finally see the truth and stop defending this truly evil organization?
Aletheia, if you're reading this, you and your family are all in my prayers. I pray for your strength, courage, healing and comfort. I also pray that God will use your tragic experience for something good. God bless you & your family.
February 15th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
So much for "safe,legal" abortions.
February 16th, 2008 at 12:45 am
Matt: "It's either infanticide or it's not, and if it's not, all us pro-life whack jobs should just get real jobs, as pro-choicers so often tell us."
I don't believe it's infanticide. And, for the record, I don't believe I've ever referred to any of you as "whack jobs," nor do I have any clue whether or not you have a "real job" or not.
I do find it disturbing that many (not all) of you have difficulty having a discussion about any of this without a load of anger, vitriole and personal attacks.
Your argument re meth is a comparison of apples and oranges.
****************************
Laura: "It's malpractice, at it's finest, by your "beloved" PP. My goodness, when will you finally see the truth and stop defending this truly evil organization?"
If you read my earlier post I stated that if malpractice occurred, there should be a lawsuit and I would very much favor a judgment in favor of the family. I don't consider PP "beloved" any more than I consider my gynecologist, my general practitioner or my dentist "beloved."
**************************
Jeff: "What is the "valid point"? Are you saying that it is acceptable for PP to injure and kill people, as long as we can theoretically conceive of an option that might be worse?"
No, that's not what I'm saying. Either I'm not speaking well or there is a comprehension problem. If someone was injured at PP (or ANY other medical provider), they should sue. Do you want to outlaw obstetricians because every once in a while one of them screws up. It seems like a better idea to bring a malpractice charge against the bad ones as opposed to getting rid of every obstetrician.
***********************
Elizabeth: "So much for "safe,legal" abortions."
Can you name any other medical procedure that has NEVER experienced a problem with malpractice?
February 16th, 2008 at 9:28 am
Student,
Sorry if I came off vitriolic, I had no intention of doing so. And I don't think I was attacking you in any way.
When we protest abortion, we have lots of people yell out their windows from passing cars that we're whack jobs or morons or worse and that we ought to get "real jobs" instead of protesting (or we should go hand out contraceptives, or protest the war, or any number of other things).
My only point in that section of my comment was that the issue at stake is whether the baby in the womb is a human person or not. If it is, then it's infanticide to kill it and our protest is most justified. If it's not, then we are a bunch of morons and we should just go home.
I was not trying to be angry, merely to crystallize the subject. It has nothing to do with whether abortions would happen if it were illegal, it has nothing to do with the conditions under which they would happen, and it has nothing to do with anything other than whether or not the baby in the womb is a human person.
When we get off track from that question, we lose the substance of the debate.
Now, that said, I can't let you just throw out a cliche and win the argument with it. How are my example and the abortion issue different? Both are things that are bad for the people who do them, bad for children, and bad for society. Yet people still want to do them. On what legal or moral grounds would you argue that we should allow a grievously harmful practice simply on the grounds that people want it?
Matt
February 16th, 2008 at 11:20 am
But, there I go continuing to engage you on a side issue.
So let's bring the debate back where it belongs.
Student,
If I brought out my 15 month old son Ambrose and told you that he's an inconvenience to my life, he takes up too many of my resources, and I'm just not ready to have a baby right now, and told you I was going to kill him, you would, I hope, be duly outraged.
If, on the other hand, I told you that I wanted to kill the eight month old baby currently residing in my wife's womb for the same reason, you would find that acceptable(please do correct me if that's not your view, I'm assuming the Roe v. Wade "abortions at any time up to birth for any reason" standard).
What makes the baby in my wife's womb and the baby outside of her womb so different that one enjoys the status of "human person" under the law and the other does not?
Matt
February 16th, 2008 at 11:26 am
Student,
Your OB/GYN is connected to a hospital and that means so is his office. If you had an emergency at your OB/GYN he/she would call an ambulence and get you to a hospital for treatment.
This does not happen at abortion clinics like PP. Many of the abortionists are not affiliated with hospitals and many hospitals don't want to take the risk of treating injuries from abortion clinics. In many cases the hospital tells them to go back to PP or the abortion clinic to get help. They don't call ambulences or if they do, they tell them to pick the girls up in a different location.
February 16th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Tara,
I assumed when you said "connected to" you means physically. I didn't realize you meant "affiliated." My mistake.
I don't know why you believe that a hospital wouldn't treat an "injury" from an abortion clinic. Are you referring to a malpractice injury? Hospitals must, by law, treat anyone needing immediate medical care. An ambulance will just as easily pick me up at PP, the grocery store, church or my home.
February 16th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Sorry, that should be "meant" — not "means." Honest, I really can spell and speak coherently. LOL
February 16th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Matt: "When we protest abortion, we have lots of people yell out their windows from passing cars that we're whack jobs or morons or worse and that we ought to get "real jobs" instead of protesting (or we should go hand out contraceptives, or protest the war, or any number of other things)."
I'm sorry that people are rude — it happens on both sides of the aisle. I just objected to what I felt was someone putting words in my mouth. If that was not your intent, I apologize. If people can't engage in a civil dialogue (again, on both sides) then nothing will ever change.
*****************
Matt: "It has nothing to do with whether abortions would happen if it were illegal, it has nothing to do with the conditions under which they would happen…"
I was responding to Elizabeth's comment re 'safe and legal abortions.' I believe there would be many, many more women dying if abortion were illegal due to unsanitary conditions and negligence.
*****************
Matt: "How are my example and the abortion issue different? Both are things that are bad for the people who do them, bad for children, and bad for society. Yet people still want to do them. On what legal or moral grounds would you argue that we should allow a grievously harmful practice simply on the grounds that people want it?"
I don't view abortion as necessarily "bad" in every circumstance and the same cannot be said for taking meth. Even if I go with your premise that abortion is "a grievously harmful practice" (and I don't agree with that statement, there are MANY things society allows that most people would agree would fall into that category (ex., smoking). It's legal because many people still want to smoke.
February 16th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
Matt: "If I brought out my 15 month old son Ambrose and told you that he's an inconvenience to my life, he takes up too many of my resources, and I'm just not ready to have a baby right now, and told you I was going to kill him, you would, I hope, be duly outraged."
Yes, absolutely. Furthermore, I would contact DCFS and the police department as it would be illegal!
********************
Matt: "If, on the other hand, I told you that I wanted to kill the eight month old baby currently residing in my wife's womb for the same reason, you would find that acceptable(please do correct me if that's not your view, I'm assuming the Roe v. Wade "abortions at any time up to birth for any reason" standard)."
Congratulations to you, your wife and soon-to-be big brother, Ambrose.
I would have an objection to your wife (or anyone) terminating a pregnancy at 8 months. I DO NOT favor "abortion at any time up to birth for any reason." I find that stance ridiculous and extreme (my personal view…..I'm not attempting to speak for anyone else). The only time I would condone a post-viability abortion is for serious risk of health to the mother — and then if it's the only option available (usualy, IMHO, that's not the case). My views are such that I probably upset both PL and PC people as I see no good reason to be at the extreme end of either camp.
**************
Matt: "What makes the baby in my wife's womb and the baby outside of her womb so different that one enjoys the status of "human person" under the law and the other does not?"
If we're talking about "under the law" you are not a person (legally) until you are born. Again, that's not to say I personally condone abortion at any time. I think it's a lousy, but necessary, option for some people. Ideally, I think we should educate people so that abortion becomes unnecessary.
February 16th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Student,
I actually know of cases where hospitals have turned away patients from abortion clinics bc of the fear of malpractice.
An,d no ambulences do not pick up patients at PP bc then they would have to explain that an abortion went wrong. It's not good for their PR.
February 16th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
Tara,
Any hospital that would turn away a patient in a life threatening situation because of an abortion had better have really good insurance as they're apt to get sued.
The majority of abortions at PP do not "go wrong" and, thus, no ambulance is needed. You clearly already have your mind made up and nothing I, or anyone else, can say will likely ever change that. I've seen first-hand (both as patient and volunteer) what goes on at PP and, regardless of your personal opinion, they really do care about the people they serve.
February 16th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
Student: "Do you want to outlaw obstetricians because every once in a while one of them screws up."
Student: "Tom makes a very valid point that, it appears, people would like to ignore."
———
I think a key disagreement is with the "every once in a while" statement. Sadly, deaths and injury to women through supposedly "safe and legal" abortions are not that uncommon… this is a systemic issue in the abortion industry. I have done sidewalk counseling in front of clinics for years, and it is surprising to see how often ambulances are called.
The pro-abortion industry likes to make statements about "cleanliness levels" or "doctor credentials" to scare the public into supporting legalized abortion. However, the reality of legal abortions does not match their rhetoric… legalized abortions have not reduced the dangers to women seeking one.
Personally, I find THAT to be a very valid point that, it appears, pro-choicers would like to ignore.
February 16th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
they really do care about the people they serve.
If they really cared about the people they serve and want to provide reproductive health care at low cost to women, where's the prenatal care? Ultrasounds? Prenatal vitamins? Any of that? THOSE are pretty expensive and I'm sure plenty of women would be glad to go to PP if they offered that at low-cost prices. But I just don't think PP cares enough about women to actually help them CONTINUE a pregnancy. Many women would like to continue the pregnancy, but prenatal care IS expensive..so if they could get it at low-cost from PP, I'm sure they'd be glad to continue the pregnancy. So why would PP not offer this?
Maybe because they're only concerned with their agenda: profiting from the ending of unborn children's lives.
February 17th, 2008 at 1:01 am
FROM STUDENT:
"… I've seen first-hand (both as patient and volunteer) what goes on at PP and, regardless of your personal opinion, they really do care about the people they serve."
+++
TO STUDENT (and others):
Planned Parenthood (in regard to abortion) cares about ONLY money. Lots and lots of money given to them to rid mothers of babies they feel they do not want (or cannot care for) at that time. MANY of these women now, thousands and thousands of them, are currently hurting and have lived in a shame-filled silence that has lasted sometimes for decades due to their abortion(s). What is PP doing for these women? Women they've raped with their tools of destruction and doctors who have murdered their young, tossing them in a dumpster. See: 'It was Horrible, Horrible! Abortion is murder, Student. Why should it be legal? Here is a page from the "mother" site of FAPP, Pro-Life Action League. It features aborted children. What could possibly be positive about this? Aborted Children
If you think Planned Parenthood "cares about the people they serve," do you think these babies look cared for? And their mothers are sadly in the same horrid shape, if only you could see their souls.
Silent Souls for Huckabee
P.S. Here's an article about Obama (whose wife feels "death to children" is fine as well, as long as it's done before the baby peeks out) written by a woman named "Hope."
Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. Defends Partial-birth Abortion
February 17th, 2008 at 9:25 am
Jeff: "I have done sidewalk counseling in front of clinics for years, and it is surprising to see how often ambulances are called."
Tara: "An,d no ambulences do not pick up patients at PP"
Ok, so which is it????
February 17th, 2008 at 11:22 am
Elizabeth,
PP makes referals for women who want to continue their pregnancies. Perhaps you'd be happier if PP offered dental care too? The truth of the matter is that as long as they offer any abortive services at all (regardless of anything else they do) you will demonize them.
February 17th, 2008 at 11:23 am
Studen: The truth of the matter is that as long as they offer any abortive services at all (regardless of anything else they do) you will demonize them.
I'd say they've demonized themselves.
February 17th, 2008 at 11:29 am
Really?
Got any numbers on how many they ACTUALLY make?
February 17th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
And really, Student, you know dental care has nothing to do with reproductive health or continuing a pregnancy. All the things I stated do. Prenatal care, ultrasounds, vitamins…those all have to do with CONTINUING a pregnancy. Dental care, not so much. But good job dodging the question. I'll ask it again: WHY does PP not offer reproductive services that have to do with CONTINUING pregnancies at a low-cost price? I'm sure the women of America would come a-running if they did, and you all would SURE have a better case on your hands.
February 17th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
PP simply isn't set up to handle EVERY reproductive issue. They don't manage cervical cancer cases (to the best of my knowledge) or do invitro fertilization either. I don't think you have a case here.
Now, let me flip it around and ask you this…..suppose PP did offer low cost pregnancy services. Would that make them acceptable in your view?
February 17th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
PP simply isn't set up to handle EVERY reproductive issue.
So they really aren't a comprehensive reproductive health care clinic like they claim to be.
Would that make them acceptable in your view?
Hmm…acceptable is a little bit of a stretch but at least I could feel like they aren't a bunch of propagandist liars. Maybe if they did that, they could REALLY lower the number of abortions like they claim they want to do. I think it would help their cause a lot..at least they wouldn't be associated strictly with abortions like they are now.
But there are some things in this life I know will never happen, because it doesn't really suit them. Then they might actually have to look into the heart of what they do, which is ending life rather than helping women in need who WANT to keep their baby, but feel backed into a corner as far as circumstances are concerned.
February 17th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
I have no financial connection and/or ties to PP. I don't sit on their Board nor do I make any executive decisions. I volunteer there because I honestly believe in what they are doing and in their desire to help women. Now, if that makes me an evil whatever in your mind that's fine by me.
February 17th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
The death of Edrice Goode from the hands of PP is
alarming.
I wonder how the two 13 year olds are doing from their
Saturday abortions…one had to be wheelchaired out of
the clinic…the other could hardly walk.
Also, two other ladies came out having trouble walking to their cars.
How come none of ladies were happy and smiling?
FYI: WE WILL NEVER GIVE UP THE FIGHT!
February 17th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Margo,
Why would you think anyone who had an abortion would be "happy and smiling?" These ladies were likely experiencing a very difficult time or their lives. And the deal I offered to Elizabeth is extended to you as well.
February 17th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
I volunteer there because I honestly believe in what they are doing and in their desire to help women. Now, if that makes me an evil whatever in your mind that's fine by me.
Student,
I never called you an evil whatever, nor did I even think it. I think you are projecting. Maybe you should examine that. We shouldn't ignore our conscience when it's trying to talk to us.
These ladies were likely experiencing a very difficult time or their lives.
Yep, I used to be one of them…luckily I chose to respect my baby's life.
February 17th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Student-
In what capacity to you volunteer at PP? I have a lot of questions about what they do and do not do, and I don't know how to get them answered. For example, what does PP say to a woman who wants to keep her baby? Do they provide her with information on where to get low cost pre-natal vitamins and medical care, where to find necessary transportation, where to find doula's, where to find help for childcare for their other children, where to find emotional and financial support during pregnancy, birth and afterward? Those services can be found at PICs (and in Aurora also at the VNA). Do they refer women for that help, or do they leave them on their own. On their website, they specifically encourage women to avoid Crisis Pregnancy Centers, so I hardly think they would recommend them to women, even though they could explain the resources available in choosing to raise a child. Do they refer to other adoption agencies, for example the agency that I have used for my adoption, that will provide ongoing counseling and material support regardless of a woman's decision to place for adoption, or parent? My agency is about an hour closer to our Aurora PP than is the Cradle in Chicago, which I know is their "official" contact agency. Do they arrange meetings between adoption social workers and expectant mothers? Or do they say–hey if you want to adopt, you're on your own. These are honest-to-goodness questions–I don't want to make any assumptions.
Erin
February 17th, 2008 at 6:48 pm
Elizabeth,
Thanks for the psychoanalysis….much appreciated. While we're examining things, why not look at your desire to control the actions of other women, all the while not wanting your tax dollars spent to help others less fortunate. I hate labels. I truly do. However, my impression of you is that you are very much pro-birth and to h*ll with the poor once they're here.
February 17th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
Erin,
I'm happy to answer your questions to the best of my ability but, admittedly, I don't know the answer to all of them. However, I have some studying to do this evening and also need to spend some time with my SO. He teaches at NIU and, suffice to say, it's been a tough week. Regardless, I promise to get back to you sometime tomorrow (likely around lunch time).
By the way, we may disagree, but you certainly have my respect for many of the choices you've made. You clearly put your values/beliefs into action and I find that admirable.
February 17th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
I find it interesting that Student believes that if you believe it is wrong to kill a child in utero, you are obligated to support high tax rates. Talk about a non-sequitor.
February 17th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
Student,
You are projecting again. I never called you evil anything nor did I think it. I have no desire to control the actions of other women. I am very much for helping women who feel trapped between what they WANT to do and what they feel they HAVE to do. I'm sure you feel that way too..we just have different ways of going about it. Your way seems to lean more towards shirking the responsibility..and mine leans more toward helping them take on that responsibility.
However, my impression of you is that you are very much pro-birth and to h*ll with the poor once they're here.
Well, I don't consider being pro-birth as a bad thing, so okay I'll take that. Only the to hell with the poor once they're here..no, no dear. Not at all. Quite a few of my friends are single mothers who are far less fortunate than myself as far as help is concerned and I do EVERYTHING in my power to help them. Which means…if they need me to..I watch their babies when they go to work on top of taking care of my 2-year old..I have given them huge bags of clothes, diapers my daughter doesn't fit into anymore, baby food, baby gear like the car seat, stroller, swing, bouncer seat..all of it. I've thrown them baby showers so they can get everything ready for the baby and I have also taken them out once in a while and I pay so that they can do something nice once in a while.
I believe whole-heartedly in helping those less fortunate…I DO NOT believe in, however, the ridiculous raising of taxes for MORE programs when the ones we have don't even work. FIX WHAT WE HAVE SO THAT IT WORKS, but don't take more of our money for more stuff that WON'T WORK. I guess that makes me a selfish person who doesn't care about the poor. yeah. RIGHT.
Please, do not twist my words for your own liking..because I do more than my fair share to help women in need.
February 17th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Erin,
I’ve done media watch, escorting, limited general office work and a bit of legal research on a volunteer basis for PP. Please understand that I do not speak for PP, however, my understanding of your questions is as follows:
They make referrals to OB/GYNs for those who want to continue a pregnancy. As to vitamins, transportation, doula’s, etc., I simply don’t know.
I don’t know what a PIC is, thus, I can’t answer that question. I am aware that they suggest women avoid CPCs, primarily (IMO) because many provide inaccurate information. I don’t know what adoption agency you used so, again, I have no sound information to answer that question. I know they do refer to The Cradle. I doubt they arrange meetings between social workers and expectant mothers. My guess is they leave that up to The Cradle or whatever adoption agency is handling the adoption.
February 18th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Jeff said: "I have done sidewalk counseling in front of clinics for years, and it is surprising to see how often ambulances are called."
Tara said: "An,d no ambulences do not pick up patients at PP"
I was just wondering which of these statements is truthful.
Anyone??
February 18th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Jane A. says:
Jeff said: "I have done sidewalk counseling in front of clinics for years, and it is surprising to see how often ambulances are called."
Tara said: "An,d no ambulences do not pick up patients at PP"
I was just wondering which of these statements is truthful.
Anyone??
Actually, both, Jane. When you spend a lot of time outside of abortion clinics, it gets to be a little creepy just how many ambulances do come to pick up patients there.
On the other hand, there are well documented cases of abortionists ordering their staff not to call an ambulance in cases where they know their malpractice would be revealed.
If you follow this link you'll find a story of a former abortion facility employee (who herself performed abortions without any formal medical training!) that documents just this sort of problem.
You'll also find many other stories there from former abortionists who realized what they were doing and got out of that brutal business.
All the best!
Matt
February 18th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Student,
Finally replying to your reply to my comments from way back up to comment 21.
Thanks for the explanation. I agree, cooler heads need to prevail on both sides and I hope we can all continue to be those cooler heads on this board. I appreciate your continuing willingness to dialog here.
As to your comments, I'm glad to hear that you do see a problem with late term abortions. But that just pushes the issue back a little bit.
Why is viability a magic bullet? Viable how? A baby in the womb isn't viable outside the womb, but you're not viable in outer space. That's a question of location, not personhood. You wouldn't become less of a person just because I put you in an environment where you couldn't survive, and you're not less of a person because you have a set of requirements for your survival.
If that baby is a unique member of the human species, the amount of help it needs to survive is completely irrelevant to whether or not we have the moral authority to kill it. If it's a human person, we cannot kill it. End of story.
In reference to the difference between my born and unborn children you said:
If we're talking about "under the law" you are not a person (legally) until you are born. Again, that's not to say I personally condone abortion at any time. I think it's a lousy, but necessary, option for some people. Ideally, I think we should educate people so that abortion becomes unnecessary.
Well that's just the issue, isn't it? We're saying that it's absurd for these babies to not be regarded as persons(legally). We want them to have the right to not be killed for other people's convenience (a right afforded to persons).
Again, I'm glad we agree that something is wrong with at least some abortion, but the question is, where and how do we tell what is and is not a person?
Is it self-awareness? Infants aren't self-aware in any meaningful sense (some experts think humans aren't self-aware in any meaningful sense till as old as two years).
Is it development? That seems unlikely. If that's the case why don't we favor adults over children, who are far less developed?
By what standard, then, would we distinguish a member of the human species we can kill for convenience and a member of the human species we cannot kill for convenience?
I would argue that we can't. A member of the human species must be regarded as a person protected by law for the entirety of its existence. Otherwise we start the deadly game of deciding ourselves who gets to live and who gets to die.
All the best!
Matt
February 18th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
They make referrals to OB/GYNs for those who want to continue a pregnancy
How many did they make last year?
February 18th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
Primarily (IMO) because many provide inaccurate information.
How do you KNOW this? Have you been to many CPC's? Or is it just your assumption from what you've been told by PP?
February 18th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
Elizabeth,
I have no idea how many referals PP makes to private OB/GYNs and won't pretend that I do.
As to CPCs giving out misleading information, I've never been told anything of the sort by PP. I believe Erin said it is on their website, but I really don't know. My information comes from a former high school teacher (granted, that's been some time ago now….more than I'd probably care to admit), from my OB/GYN and from a brochure I was handed by someone outside of PP. Some of the "facts" were just laughable.
February 18th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
I have no idea how many referals PP makes to private OB/GYNs and won't pretend that I do.
Well, you volunteer/work for them..I'm sure if they did ACTUALLY refer people, it would be pretty easy to find out.
You seem to have a lot of connections, I'm sure this number should be rather easy for you to uncover.
I won't hold my breath, though.
February 18th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
Elizabeth,
I volunteer there. And no, information about patients is privileged so I wouldn't have access to it. Just what "connections" do you think I have? Sounds like another assumption on your part.
February 19th, 2008 at 8:20 am
Well, they let the number of abortions per year known so why would the number of referrals be any different?
February 19th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Elizabeth and Student:
It is not easy to have a healthy conversation on a blog. We ask questions in soundbites, we answer them in soundbites, criticism and sarcasm can come across as extremely harsh, even when they were not meant to be. Let's cut each other some slack, ok?
Probably Student does not have numbers or particulars–I don't think many volunteers would. Student, in what capacity do you volunteer? As I mentioned before, I have a lot of questions and no idea how to get them answered. If we knew your volunteer experience, Elizabeth and I might be able to ask more appropriate questions.
Personally, I am particularly concerned that PP would seem to leave women on their own if they do not choose an abortion. That would seem manipulative to me, not in any way an "informed choice." In a website article updated as recently as Feb. 14 2008, they describe CPCs as "dangerous" and say, "clients are harassed, intimidated, and shown photographs of dismembered fetuses. Adoption is presented as “always the more courageous, noble, and ethical decision.”" Given that hostile reaction, I do not think that PP would encourage women to get the loving financial, emotional, and physical help that CPCs can offer pregnant women and new Moms. Since they don't offer that kind of help themselves, what exactly do they say to women during their counselling sessions? What I imagine is that the conversation would involve a statement like, "Can you do it on your own? Are you 100% ready? If not, you should have an abortion." I had an unplanned pregnancy, I could not have done it on my own, and I was about 2% ready, but I had great support and a knowledge that God provided this life for my family, and I now have a bundle of sunshine in the form of a little boy.
So, Student, if you don't know through your volunteer experience how the options for continuing pregnancy and parenting are explained, I really hope you could find out. This is huge to me. I hope it would be for you too, as you are dedicating your valuable time to this institution.
Erin
February 19th, 2008 at 11:14 am
Erin,
I think I answered your questions regarding my volunteer efforts in Post #43 above. If there's something you believe I missed with that response, I'm happy to discuss further.
As to the specifics of what is said during a counseling session, all I can do is ask and get back to you, but I won't be at PP for at least a week. My SO is a professor at NIU and we're pretty tied up with memorial services, funerals and staff training this week.
February 19th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Student:
I'm so sorry! I did miss your response to my earlier questions! I'm so embarrassed! I'll read through it and probably get back to you with some ideas and questions. Thanks!
Erin
February 19th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
Erin
Very good post and I agree, some things do get lost in translation over the internet. I am somewhat sarcastic in real life but it is easier to interpret it as harmless in person. On here..not so much.
I really am just curious as to the number of referrals..because the number of abortions is released (that would be how we know the statistics and such)..I would assume there would be no problem in letting the number of referrals be known as well. That way they could actually say, "Look, yes we do abortions but this # we have also referred to OB/GYNS to help women keep their babies."
Unless they just haven't made any referrals.
February 19th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Elizabeth-
I'd love to have that information, too, but I have no idea where to get it. I don't think if I called PP that they would give me the time of day about such a question. And, I maintain that if they don't give out information about pregnancy and parental support then they are being manipulative in favor of abortion. Student, what is your perspective on this issue?
Erin
February 19th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
Student
PIC is Pregnancy Information Center.
February 19th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
Erin,
Don't be embarrassed. No harm. No foul. I've enjoyed our conversations.
February 19th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
Student,
How many women have you referred to The Cradle for adoption services? I would like to find out how many mothers PP refered mothers for adoption services? Any idea why they don't release these numbers?
February 19th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
Jane A. says: Jeff said: "I have done sidewalk counseling in front of clinics for years, and it is surprising to see how often ambulances are called."
Tara said: "An,d no ambulences do not pick up patients at PP"
I was just wondering which of these statements is truthful.
Anyone??
———
Sorry for not responding sooner… didn't check the blog for a couple of days.
I can not comment on why "ambulances do not pick up patients at PP". I can only comment on my own experiences, and I have seen a surprising (to me at least) number of ambulances called to clinics where I was doing sidewalk counseling.
Matt's reply on the 18th seems to cover the discrepancy though… I'm sure the last thing a clinic like PP wants is an ambulance to show up, but sometimes they may have no choice.
Peace,
Jeff
February 20th, 2008 at 1:58 am
STUDENT!!!!
The time spent here will not be of waste. I believe you are searching for a clearer answer on this.
February 20th, 2008 at 6:49 am
I have heard that at the Aurora PP clinic that the ambulances do not pull into their parking lot.
The ambulance is sent to the parking lot behind Block Buster store.
I have heard this from a few people from different occasions. I haven't witnessed it myself but have heard it from some reliable sources.
I am usually at the clinic two to three days trying to do some sidewalk counseling but because of my daughter just recently giving birth to a beautiful baby boy, I haven't been there since last Thursday.
February 20th, 2008 at 8:47 am
Okay I'll try for one more go-around… I'm not sure why my last post was removed. This article covers most of what is being debated here and is pretty moving:
http://et-tu.blogspot.com/2008/01/how-i-became-pro-life.html Please take the time to read it and God Bless!
February 20th, 2008 at 9:26 am
Erin: "And, I maintain that if they don't give out information about pregnancy and parental support then they are being manipulative in favor of abortion. Student, what is your perspective on this issue?"
I'd like to see a place where a woman could get everything under one roof: prenatal care, parental support, birth control and, if necessary, abortive services. Unfortunately, I've yet to find such a place. Additionally, I think that would require some taxpayer funds and I doubt many would be willing to pay the tab.
February 21st, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Dan the Methodist: "The time spent here will not be of waste. I believe you are searching for a clearer answer on this."
Thanks. Sometimes it feels like it is, but I'd really like to find a way to bridge the gap and, perhaps, find some answers and compromises.
February 21st, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Matt,
Thanks for your response in Post 46 — I'm not ignoring you…I just want to formulate an appropriate response and have been really busy. I will try to do so by the end of the weekend.
February 21st, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Paul2: "How many women have you referred to The Cradle for adoption services?"
None — I don't refer anyone to anything. That's not part of my volunteer work.
February 21st, 2008 at 6:58 pm
Me: "PIC is Pregnancy Information Center."
Is that different from a pregnancy crisis center or is it the same thing with a different name?
February 21st, 2008 at 6:59 pm
Jeff,
At Aurora PP, I have seen an ambulence come, but it never went to PP. It pulled into the back parking lot of Blockbuster. This girl was in bad shape, white as ash, had a difficult time walking. She had to get into a waiting car, be driven to the Blockbuster parking lot where she was picked up by the ambulence. So no, PP doesn't want ambulences to be called and patients to be picked up there. This is a horrible practice. She has already been through a difficult ordeal, and then PP makes her leave the premise to get help. PP really cares about girls and women. I don't thinks so.
February 21st, 2008 at 7:31 pm
last bost was meant for Jane. Sorry Jeff.
February 21st, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Tara,
You wouldn't happen to have the date and license plate of the car? If your story is true, I would like to provide legal assitance for this young woman to sue. IF it's true, let's really help her.
February 21st, 2008 at 9:10 pm
Student,
It's true. They (her & her friend) were in an orange car. They pulled out of PP Aurora's parking lot, and went over to the Blockbuster parking lot. The ambulance that came in knew exactly where to go. We thought it was strange, because usually there's people standing outside waiting for an ambulance to come and will wave it in. It was very strange, indeed.
How would a plate number help?
Hopefully she will read these posts and ask for help. We would all be more than willing to help her out. That's very kind of you to offer your assistance.
February 21st, 2008 at 10:36 pm
A plate # would allow us to get in touch with her. I assume that's why plates are photographed….is there another reason of which I'm unaware. The offer stands though. If it happened and she wants legal assistance, I'm happy to arrange it. Malpractice is malpractice and should be prosecuted.
February 22nd, 2008 at 8:21 am
Student,
It's not necessarily malpractice. It's the nature of the business. Abortion is risky & the women, hopefully by now, are aware of that. I believe they sign papers, too, stating that they are aware that something "not good" may happen to them as they are having their baby ripped out of their uterus'.
As I state above, if she reads these posts and wants to sue for whatever type of injury she may have sustained, I would encourage her to do so. But that would be her "choice".
Can you really hunt people down by getting their plate number and encourage them to sue?
February 22nd, 2008 at 12:48 pm
Me,
Yes, you CAN hunt people down by their license plate. What other reason would there possibly be to photograph them? I doubt a photo of my plate would be taken simply to hang in one's living room.
Obviously it's her "choice" as to whether or not she wants to sue. I'm just offer legitimate legal services should she so desire or should anyone here want to get in contact with her and advise her of said offer.
I disagree with you as to the safety of first trimester abortion…..as far as medical procedures go, it is one of the safer ones (although ANY medical procedure carries a risk).
February 22nd, 2008 at 7:27 pm
Student,
Where did I say that it was a first-trimester abortion?
However, both I and the baby will disagree with you that its one of the safest medical procedures, though.
:0
February 23rd, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Me,
I'm sorry. I didn't mean to mischaracterize what you said. Most abortions performed in this country are done in the first trimester. I was referring to the safety of a first trimester procedure. It was not my intent to imply that you agree and/or condone same. My apologies if I offended you.
February 23rd, 2008 at 4:31 pm
"I'd like to see a place where a woman could get everything under one roof: prenatal care, parental support, birth control and, if necessary, abortive services…Additionally, I think that would require some taxpayer funds and I doubt many would be willing to pay the tab."
Student–
I'm going way back to #65 for this, but I haven't been on in a while! As you say, it would be better for PP and other "full service women's reproductive health clinics" to provide the means for women to receive counseling and make an adoption plan if they so choose, and the means for them to receive pre/post-natal medical care and well baby care, as well as financial and emotional support. The reason I'm concerned about PP (etc) not providing this type of service and not concerned about CPCs not providing abortion services is simple. PP purports to give women all the choices, explain all the options, and help them make their choice openly. By not providing even a minimum of care for pregnant women or even having a social worker onsite who counsels on adoption information, they are weighting the scale toward abortion. Your responses to my earlier questions have left me at the same place I was before regarding PP's care. I figure all they can say is, "Have an abortion with us or you're on your own. Here's a business card for an OB."
The criticism of CPCs that I have read on PP's website tends to focus on their lack of referrals for abortion. The difference is, CPCs exist because the people who run them are deeply concerned for expectant mothers and the babies they are carrying. The people who are running the centers do not believe that abortion is a moral or healing choice, so they are offering every possible support for every other possible choice.
Now, PP says (and I have heard many PP supporters sporting free PP bright pink t-shirts say as much at several Aurora City Council Meetings) that they do not counsel towards abortion nor do they consider abortion to be the best choice for every person. They lay out all the options, and of a woman CHOOSES abortion, well, then that's her choice. Parenting or adoption are no less moral, and no less good decisions. Yet, PP's money is not where their mouth is. They offer no help. They distribute condoms and BC, but not pre-natal vitamins. They have medical equipment and staff, but do not do ultrasounds. They ignore even a small effort that could be made with existing staff and equipment toward helping women through pregnancy, yet shout out loud and long that they are a "full service women's reproductive health clinic."
PP receives tax funding for "preventative education". Why would they be unable to get public funding for pre-natal vitamins? They recruit volunteers like yourself to escort women past sidewalk counselors, but they make no effort to recruit volunteers to drive women to medical appointments or collect maternity clothes or make visits of encouragement after a new baby is born.
Offering these kinds of services would not give PP pro-life support, nor would it make abortion moral. But by NOT offering them, PP is opening themselves up to accusations of manipulation and collusion to make lucrative abortions more attractive. I think that many people who volunteer and even work at PP are doing so from pure motives, thinking that they are doing the best thing for women. But, given the situation I have described in the above paragraphs, I am left with the conclusion that the leadership of PP is not in fact interested in choices, they are interested in abortions.
What are your thoughts on my ridiculously super-long post?
February 23rd, 2008 at 8:45 pm
Student,
Please don't feel bad. There was no offense taken at all, and absolutely no need to apologize! Thank you so much for your post!
I do believe that abortions are risky, though. Just as any other procedure would be. There is a risk with any abortion that cannot be denied. Although it may be "safer", it isn't considered "safe".
February 25th, 2008 at 11:55 am
http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_fact.htm
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5212a1.htm
Holy hell, 4 deaths from induced abortions in the entire year of 1999 out of nearly 1 million performed. That's a pretty low death rate and I'd call that a pretty safe procedure.
February 28th, 2008 at 1:59 am
I'd call a million dead babies a pretty HIGH death rate.
February 28th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
I bet you would, however that was directed at the smarmy comment towards the beginning about "Oh gee, what a safe procedure."
February 28th, 2008 at 5:48 pm