June 27, 2008
South Dakota wins the right to tell abortion-bound women the truth
The US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in St. Louis ruled today that "abortion terminated the life of a whole, separate, unique living human being and that abortion doctors have to disclose that scientific fact to women prior to performing an abortion. Sure Planned Parenthood can now appeal that ruling to the Supreme Court, and we hope they do. That would even more chip away at Roe v. Wade's false foundation that no one but philosophers and theologians can answer the question of when life begins. The court has now accepted the scientific fact that a separate and distinct human life begins at conception and this is an important legal foundation that paves the way for what South Dakota will do this November in directly challenging Roe v. Wade.
The Eight Circuit majority (7 judges) found that Planned Parenthood had "submitted no evidence" that the life begins at conception statement above was false, misleading or irrelevant. Good luck then at getting the higher court to change todays ruling. I also learned today that South Dakota pro-abortion Dr. Maria Bell's brother was one of the lawyers that unsuccessfully argued this case in St. Louis for Planned Parenthood. Isn't THAT interesting?
How much longer do you think Planned Parenthood will continue to try to make people believe they actually care about women? All the ruling today does is make abortion doctors have to act like doctors which means they now have to take the time to meet with their patientS (the ruling today acknowledges doctors are treating two patients), and go over the details of the procedure, what exactly is being removed and the side and long-term effects that they risk. Is that too much to ask of your doctor? Would you have any other medical procedure without that basic information?
The Court was presented evidence that there is absolutely NO doctor-patient relationship when a woman gets an abortion in South Dakota. This is from today's press release;
What the public record in this case reveals is that South Dakota women receive no protection of their most important rights under the law, existing before the new Informed Concent Statue and the practices of the abortion facility in Sioux Falls. If a woman calls Planned Parenthood in Sioux Falls inquiring about an abortion, an employee with no medical training schedules the surgical procedure. When the woman arrives, she is required to sign a consent to an abortion and pay for it before receiving any counseling. When she sees a "patient educator" she receives no information about the child, no information about fetal development, or what is being removed. The "educators" all admit they know nothing (or little) about human embryology, human genetics or molecular biology. Some of them do not know when an embryo's heart first starts to beat or how many chromosomes the human embryo has. In many cases, the women cry during the session with the "educator", but the doctors do the abortion anyway. There is no true patient-physician relationship and the out-of-state doctor who flies into Sioux Falls for six hours most often only sees the woman for the four to seven minutes it takes to perform the surgery scheduled by the lay person who takes the womans call.
And we know there is no ongoing relationship, no follow up and Planned Parenthood keeps no records on the subsequent well-being of the women. How long will the respectability facade over Planned Parenthood remain? Fortunately for women, this Planned-Parenthood-is-a-legitimate-health-care-provider facade is lifting. Enough with the deception.
Do you want to guess who, in their deposition, was the one who didn't know when an embryo's heart started beating and who it was who guessed "13" when asked how many pairs of chromosomes humans have???? Kate Looby!
And WOW, the Argus Leader sure sent over an unhappy reporter to the press conference?! This gal interviewed me with one obvious aim in mind… to get me to say what we really wanted was for a woman to be given information that would lead her to decide not to have an abortion. Uh, yes ma'm, don't we all want fewer abortions? And, yes I do suppose with more information more women will choose life. But don't they see it… this let's the CHOICE be the woman's. No longer will women in South Dakota be misinformed and misled by a pro-abortion doctor's ideology. She can decide for herself. Imagine that.
Filed under Abortion - national debate, Abortion Hurts Women, Dr. Maria Bell, Informed Consent, Kate Looby, Legislation, Personhood, Planned Parenthood, SD Abortion Ban, Sarah Stoesz, The Supreme Court, Women, abortion south dakota by Steve
Comments on South Dakota wins the right to tell abortion-bound women the truth »
William @ 2:39 pm
This is a MAJOR victory for the prolife movement! The entire ruling can be found here: http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/08/06/053093P.pdf
Particularly of note is that the court found Dr. Wolpe’s affidavit, submitted by Planned Parenthood actually SUPPORTS the States case!!
Some key points in the decision:
"§ 8(4) of the Act amended S.D.C.L. § 34-23A-1 to define “Human being” for the purposes of the informed-consent-to-abortion statute as “an individual living member of the species of Homo sapiens, including the unborn human being during the entire embryonic and fetal ages from fertilization to full gestation”
"the district court rested its conclusion on an error of law when it ignored the statutory definition of “human being” in § 8(4) of the Act"
"Planned Parenthood cannot succeed on the merits of its claim that § 7(1)(b) violates a physician’s right not to
speak unless it can show that the disclosure is either untruthful, misleading or not relevant to the patient’s decision to have an abortion"
"the evidence submitted by the parties regarding the
truthfulness and relevance of the disclosure in § 7(1)(b) generates little dispute"
"By common understanding and scientific terminology, a fetus is a living organism while within the womb, whether or not it is viable outside the womb.”), and Planned Parenthood submitted no evidence to oppose that conclusion. Indeed, Dr. Wolpe’s affidavit, submitted by Planned Parenthood, states that “to describe an embryo or fetus scientifically and factually, one would say that a living embryo or fetus in utero is a developing organism of the species Homo Sapiens which may become a self-sustaining member of the species if no organic or environmental incident interrupts its gestation.” Wolpe Aff. ¶ 6. This statement appears to support the State’s evidence on the biological underpinnings of § 7(1)(b) and the associated statutory definition"