Sarah,
Besides poor bedside manner, it sounds as if this sonographer wasn't properly trained or qualified in ultrasonography. First of all, she should of sought a second opinion from her superior in the case of uncertain or conflicting results. And second of all, from what I understand, ultrasound technicians record the images, but are not qualified to read and diagnosis conditions from the sonoghraph, this is best left up to an ob/gyn physician. Fortuantly you were wise enough to ask questions and sought second opinion and a correct diagnosis. I wish you quick healing and recovery.
Rachael S. | Homepage | 03.16.07 - 1:40 am | #

I'm so glad you were able to get competent medical help. May God speed your healing.
Dennis | Homepage | 03.16.07 - 1:56 am | #

How awful. I`m sorry you had to suffer. You got very bad treatment. I`m sorry to hear it, because I`ve been a major donor to Planned Parenthood over the years, as my own experiences with them as a patient were very different. That doesn`t excuse the way they treated you.
L. | Homepage | 03.16.07 - 2:21 am | #

I am truly sorry (and unsurprised) about her experience, but there's a lot about it that bothers me, as a doctor's spouse.

I'd be interested in knowing why she went to Planned Parenthood first, rather than her own OB/GYN. I deduce from her story that she HAD an OB/GYN, unlike many who go to a PP storefront. Going to her own OB/GYN should've been her first visit when a pregnancy was suspected and, as the story confirms, it would have been the correct move. I don't know why she made the decision she did, when a better alternative was readily available.

While she is in my prayers for her experience, I hope this will serve as a lesson to see a doctor FIRST if you suspect you're pregnant.
Tragic Christian | Homepage | 03.16.07 - 3:11 am | #

Dawn did you fully investigate the authenticity of this woman's story? I'm not trying to call her a liar but is sounds odd that she begins her story by admitting that she went to Planned Parenthood for an abortion and that a friend of hers went there for an abortion also, but now she is referring to them as a "butcher of babies and they could care less about a woman's health"?

Apparently she didn't consider them a butcher of babies before she went there to have them butcher her baby.

Did the author of this post go to PP for an abortion because of an unviable fetus? Or was she there because she didn't want to continue a pregnancy and later discovered that it was a tubal pregnancy?
Jamila Akil | Homepage | 03.16.07 - 5:08 am | #

Back when I was a kid, one of my best friends would go to PP for pregnancy tests, where 75% they would tell her she was indeed pregnant - odd thing was she was a virgin. A good pro-life Catholic gal, who did this as research for a journalism class.
Her notso prolife teacher gave her an "D" for making up the story.
framermike | Homepage | 03.16.07 - 6:49 am | #

Sarah, I would recommend that you call Life Dynamics 940-380-8800 I think, or go to their web site at ldi.org and seek a legal referral. Failure to diagnose an ectopic pregnancy at an abortion facility is absolutely inexcusable. The National Abortion Federation held a mock trial at a Risk Management Seminar, and their "jury" of twelve abortionists all agreed that they would judge with the plaintiff on a failure to diagnose an ectopic.

This is so appallingly below the standard of care!

And I believe you about the bedside manner. I first started to suspect that PP was not all they were cracked up to be when my babysitter told me about how she'd been treated at a PP. And Vicki Conroy said she got a call once from a woman who had gone to the PP in San Diego (the same place where my babysitter was so mistreated), and like my babysitter she had asked about "the baby" during counseling only to be told there was no baby, just tissue "like a blood clot."

She expelled a mangled fetus after leaving the clinic! When she went back with it, demanding to know why they'd lied to her, the receptionist snatched the baby from her hands, threw it in the trash, and sneered, "Of course it's a baby! If you'd wanted to know that, you would have gone to one of those anti-choice places."

My sympathy. And don't let them get away with this. Report them to the authorities and contact a lawyer.
Christina | Homepage | 03.16.07 - 8:16 am | #

Jamila Akil, her story certainly rings true given confirmed events at Planned Parenthood facilities. It's as credible as a teenager saying that a convenience store clerk sold him cigarettes. It's known to happen enough that it doesn't ring false.

As to the sudden turn around to "butchers of babies," a lot of women become quick converts after their experiences at an abortion mill. They go in thinking that everybody there is desperate, only to meet women in the lobby casually saying, "Oh, it's nothing to cry about. I've had four abortions and it's no big deal," and so forth. They go in thinking abortion staff are noble crusaders for women only to be treated like animals. And there's no fury like that of the recent convert.
Christina | Homepage | 03.16.07 - 8:20 am | #

Jamila, my communications with Sarah have led me to believe that her story is true, otherwise I would not publish it. If you reread the post, you should have the answers to your questions. Not every woman in an abortion clinic's waiting room believes that an unborn child is only tissue, or believes that every reason for an abortion is morally justifiable.
Dawn Eden | Homepage | 03.16.07 - 8:23 am | #

I was not far along enough to have an abortion at that time so they sent me on my way.

March 13th I went back this time to attempt to have a medical abortion instead of a surgical one.

Sarah -- I am unsure of what you mean here. Could you clarify? I would think that, if it is a suction abortion, one would not need to be very far along at all, only a few days. Also, do you mean a "medical" abortion to be one that is drug-induced? (Otherwise, I would think that medical and surgical are the same thing.)
Bender | 03.16.07 - 11:54 am | #

I think perhaps she meant "chemical" abortion...(vs. surgical).
sean | 03.16.07 - 12:14 pm | #

I agree with jamil.

Sarah's story is just sad, really sad.

When you lay down with the dogs, you are going to get fleas.
Potamiaena | 03.16.07 - 1:13 pm | #

After taking 4 home pregnancy tests and one at Planned Parenthood along with all the usual symptoms of pregnancy that I had with my daughter, I was appalled that they wouldn't look into this any further to see what was going on with me.

Ultrasounds are the gold standard. The problem with ectopic pregnancies is that you really can't diagnose them before eight to ten weeks -- and by then, your fallopian tube has probably already ruptured. The only red flag possible is stabbing abdominal pain, but the patient didn't report that.

Contrary to what some posters think, failure to catch an ectopic pregnancy does not necessarily constitute substandard care. In fact, even the best OB/GYNs can't catch it if the patient only reports "usual symptoms of pregnancy." Moreover, methotrexate (one of the primary drugs used in medical abortions) is proper treatment for early ectopic pregnancies.

As for hiring a lawyer, I saw a very similar case where the judge not only threw out the plaintiff's case, but also slapped her with Rule 11 sanctions for filing frivolous claims.
Mackenzie | 03.16.07 - 1:30 pm | #

I'm so completely unsurprised. Sarah, you are in my prayers.
Julie | Homepage | 03.16.07 - 1:57 pm | #

When you lay down with the dogs, you are going to get fleas.

If you are attempting to show God's love to a woman who has been through a terrible ordeal, I believe there are better ways to do it. I can understand why a woman would not wish to hear a pro-life message if this is the best compassion a pro-lifer has to offer -- "tough luck, lady, you knew what you were getting into."
Dawn Eden | 03.16.07 - 2:03 pm | #

Sarah's story is quite dreadful.

However, some details sound extremely strange.

The 'no pain relief' rule she mentions for the D & C procedure, in particular. It appears strikingly unusual as an across-the-board policy, and is surely actionable?

Also, many PP centers bill separately for pain medication. In their patient billing - it is clearly listed in detail as a charge on top of the charge for the procedure. So Sarah's conclusion "My only answer for the lack of compassion is that they are making more money from not using any type of sedation"...doesn't appear to make sense either ethically, or in practice?
jody tresidder | 03.16.07 - 2:14 pm | #

Jamila, I think that there's lots of ambivalence among many women who get abortions.
Eileen R | 03.16.07 - 2:16 pm | #

Our prayers are with you.

The sacredness of life has not only been dismissed, but it's dismissal has become a financial boon for so many called "medical professionals". When abortions become means of financial gain vs. medical procedures, this is bound to happen. These doctors and nurses have had to detach themselves so much from what is actually going on that they also detach themselves from the needs of their patients. Each patient walking through the door looks more like a dollar sign than a person. Your medical situation, Sarah, became one that would require thought and care vs. simply churning out another abortion, therefore they had no further need of you.

I am a veterinarian. The standards of practice are ever so much higher for animals than what you experienced at PP. Even in centers where spays, neuters and vaccinations are done on a massive scale, certain standards must be upheld, physical examinations must be done, underlying problems must be dealt with or at least referred to the appropriate authority. And these are mere animals -- without emotions, without families, without immortal souls!

Sarah, I pray that you will be a light to others regarding the truths about abortion and the abortion industry!
Knight Errant | 03.16.07 - 2:37 pm | #

Sarah,

Your story is not at all unusual. Thank you for having the courage to come forward. Like others said, get a good lawyer and pursue thus further.

You are in my prayers.
DefundAbortionGuy | Homepage | 03.16.07 - 3:04 pm | #

Some of her story reminds me of what happened to a friend of mine. Her doctor, the infamous Jane Hodgson, now deceased, also didn't use anethesia and when she started the suction abortion the pain was unbearable and my friend cried out. This fine defender of women's rights told her to shut up or she would tie her down and gag her.

Performing daily abortions brings out the finest behavior in people, doesn't it?
Judith M. | 03.16.07 - 3:22 pm | #

Planned Parenthood is the pits. I've been a patient at PP in two different states (VA, TN) and the vibe there is horrific.

There was no sense of compassion amongst the staff at either place I went but I didn't have the money to see a legitimate doctor at the time.
t-hype | Homepage | 03.16.07 - 4:35 pm | #

What they failed to tell her was that they do not administer any kind of pain medication during the abortion

As a scared 15-year-old, I had an abortion at PP in St. Louis. This was 30 years ago. The only thing they gave me was a Valium prior to the abortion. No pain meds before or after. It was awful.

I have suffered from Bipolar type I since I was a teenager and I believe that at least part of the reason for my mental illness was the abortion. I wish to this day that someone had told me the truth of what I was doing before it was too late.
Maripat | Homepage | 03.16.07 - 6:18 pm | #

I think this story rings of the pervasive distrust that many practitioners of "women's care" have. They trust medical tools and technology over, and to the exclusion of, the instincts of women who are familiar with their own unique body systems and history.

I have found that it is not only male doctors who are to blame for this, but both men and women. Women doctors can be even worse than men! The medical model which values data, and machines and drugs as the solution to problems, will inevitably discount the human beings it is supposed to serve.
corita | 03.16.07 - 10:38 pm | #

It is true, if you are not "far enough along" they will not perform a surgical abortion on you. I was "just far enough", and the "Doctor" actually admitted that if the baby is not big enough, it is too difficult for them to account for all of the parts being removed.

Also, in regards to the pain relief comment. They do not offer pain relief for early abortions; or at least the did not for me. The pain was EXCRUCIATING, near that of unmedicated childbirth. I was so scared, and so far under the misconception that what I was doing was "normal", that I was able to hold back my tears and screams.

I pray more women, even if by these sad events, come to know PP for what it is, evil.

An unfortunate former number/easy-money/patient
Amy | 03.16.07 - 11:54 pm | #

if the baby is not big enough, it is too difficult for them to account for all of the parts being removed.

Ah, OK, thank you. That makes sense (even if perverse).

And for all of you who have been so grieviously wounded in this way, many prayers that the One who makes all things new will comfort you and heal you.
Bender | 03.17.07 - 12:50 am | #

Sarah, praise God you are okay. The heart of a woman, of each woman, is like no other, and mine goes out to yours, with all of its wounds. You have been one of many to experience what it is like to have your human dignity stripped away from you like the garments of Christ that were put to lots. In Christ we share in solidarity with your suffering and those of all the women who leave abortion clinics feeling literally empty.

Another tragedy I think we have only hinted at is of those men and women working at these clinics. One commenter pointed out that "Performing daily abortions brings out the finest behavior in people, doesn't it?" I think this speaks to the trouble in their hearts, which are in dire need of forgiveness and compassion and of course respect for their dignity as persons. With every offense there are always two sides, and God pines for the souls of both.

Every person - whether young or old, man or woman, victim or offender - who is involved is in my prayers, including a prayer that Christ will grant me the grace to love each one without condition.
Mary-Grace | 03.17.07 - 1:27 am | #

Contrary to what some posters think, failure to catch an ectopic pregnancy does not necessarily constitute substandard care. In fact, even the best OB/GYNs can't catch it if the patient only reports "usual symptoms of pregnancy." Moreover, methotrexate (one of the primary drugs used in medical abortions) is proper treatment for early ectopic pregnancies.

I would certainly call it substandard care because an ectopic pregnancy will become a life-threating condition in almost all cases if left undiagnosed. And in fact, if it is left undiagnosed until the woman reports to the local ER or doctors office with a vaginal bleeding or a sharp pain on her side, the tube has already ruptured and it's a medical emergency requring immediate surgery.

As another poster above had mentioned, all too often, doctors rely on technology alone, rather than in addition listening closely to their patient explain their symotoms and medical history. Furthermore, many women know their bodies better than doctors give them credit. As I've said before, the ultrasound technician should of sought a second opinion from her superior in the case of uncertain or conflicting results. Which in this case, the patient (being Sarah) was having pregnancy symtoms (and possibly positive tests?) while nothing was visible on the ultrasound.
No, there was no guarantee the medical abortion would of been with Methotrexate. And evenso, Methotrexate or laproscopic surgery is the proper protocol of diagnosed ectopic pregnancy. And it'd seem proper procedure and important to treat with a definite diagnosis for an ectopic pregnacy rather than as terminating a normal pregnancy with the possibility of an ectopic because of the nature of the intradominal pregnancy and treatment procedures are quite different.

Any professional opinions from medical professionals out there, RNs, LPNs, or M.D.s?
Rachael S. | Homepage | 03.17.07 - 1:31 am | #

"A sensitive pregnancy test (HCG) can determine whether a pregnancy is "healthy" or not. Women with risk factors for, symptoms of, or previous history of ectopic pregnancy should be closely monitored with HCG blood tests (approximately 12 days after conception and up to 5-6 weeks after conception). In a healthy pregnancy, these levels rise in a definite pattern (doubling about 66% every two days). An ectopic pregnancy may be suspected when levels do not rise appropriately....Approximately 5-6 weeks after the last menstrual period, the use of ultrasound can determine if there is a gestational sac in the uterus. The ultrasound may even detect an enlarged fallopian tube or the presence of a pelvic mass, representing an ectopic pregnancy."
http://www.ectopicpregnancy.com/...y.com/ facts.htm
Rachael | Homepage | 03.17.07 - 1:38 am | #

It is true that a doctor needs to account for all of the parts. After abortions, they reassemble the baby, as any body parts left in the uterus can cause some pretty horrific infections.

Sarah,

My deepest sympathies for having had to endure that. Please take comfort in the fact that your story (and courage to say it) will prevent many, many other women from the same (or worse) misery.
theobromophile | Homepage | 03.17.07 - 5:41 am | #

This prayer from Pope John Paul II for Sarah and all who suffer from this great evil:

O Mary, bright dawn of the new world, Mother of the living, to you do we entrust the cause of life: Look down, O Mother, upon the vast number of babies not allowed to be born, of the poor whose lives are made difficult, of men and women who are victims of brutal violence, of the elderly and sick killed in indifference or out of misguided mercy. Grant that all who believe in your Son may proclaim the Gospel of life with honesty and love to people of our time. Obtain for them the grace to accept that Gospel as a gift ever new, the joy of celebrating it with gratitude throughout their lives and the courage to bear witness to it resolutely, in order to build, together with all people of good will, the civilization of truth and love, to praise the glory of God, the Creator and lover of life. Amen.

Evangelium Vitae, 1995
Brian | 03.17.07 - 1:46 pm | #

Thanks, Rachael, for putting that up. I thought of that last night after I went to bed. I am not a doctor or RN, but I know enough about pregnancy and complications to recognize that when a woman is feeling pregnant, but Hcg levels aren't high enough to tip off the pregnancy test, there is something going on. It's irresponsible to assume that this is just a paranoid/emotional woman.

Remember where we got the word "hysterical"? It's related to the word for the uterus. This is not far off from the way women continue to be treated --including by other women-- in medicine.
corita | 03.17.07 - 8:59 pm | #

Dear Ms. Eden:

I looked up your weblog when I read an article about your new book, which appeared in our local paper because I believe you are in the Dallas area this weekend. I was interested in reading more about your point of view. I do not consider myself someone in full agreement with your outlooks (as is so often the way among different people in life), but I think it is important that all people of good will create a culture in which choices outside the tabloid mainstream not only are "permitted" but are actively advanced. I think it is an important message that voluntary celibacy, particularly that infused with a sense of the "bigger picture" of religious faith, is not only "acceptable" and "permissible" but also for you and others you have met a liberating and fully workable solution. One need not share your religious views on your choices to recognize the value of the debate (it is irrelevant to my point, but I would class as "liberal christian bordering on universalist" under the pigeon-hole letterboxing folks so often do these days). If we are to reach a freer, sharing culture, then the adult choice not to seek out a particular form of intimacy must be accorded the dignity so often accorded to the decision to seek out a particular form of intimacy.

I was struck when I read on the internet about you how many people engaged in strawperson attacks on your views, creating a "Dawnbot" who was a bit easier to "take down" than the more complex views you atually hold on your advocacy of chastity.
I noticed that a time or two that in response you called this particular club a club.

In light of your own appreciation of strawperson dynamics, I was disappointed to see this particular post in your weblog. It's not my lack of sympathy with Sarah that leads me to say this, to me Sarah sounds as if she had a thoroughly negative experience with a group she had consulted about a health care concern. My concern instead is that the post itself and this anecdotal
approach also runs the risk of strawperson methodology.

One type of argument that I see often levied against Christians, and in particular Catholic Christians,
starts from the conduct of one particular Christian or set of Christians and then extrapolates that incident or anecdote into a conclusion about all Christians or
even about God.

One could imagine (and with routine Google searching locate) similar arguments that people in Catholic hospitals, for instance, gave imperfect care or advice, and then seeking (in my view unfairly) to extrapolate these arguments into a global conclusion about whether the Catholic Church really serves the interest of babies. Such an extrapolation would be unfair, and would fairly be considered an extension of the strawperson debate strategy. I believe this post also suffers from this flaw of taking one anecdote and drawing a universal conclusion from that anecdote.

I am not in this comment trying to critique or even address the pro-life position you adopt. That's a different issue. I am certainly not trying to restrict your freedom of speech to say in substance "Planned Parenthood is bad for families because they advocate....". I may not agree with your viewpoint, but this comment is not intended to convince you to refrain from expressing your views on this topic.

I instead want to tell you merely that as a person who came to your weblog hoping to read an analysis of your views, including, without limitation, even your views on social matters, I found this post disquieting. It's not that folks like Sarah should not express their experience. Of course they should have that right. It's that when you post her experience at one Planned Parenthood center with a closing paragraph which seeks to extrapolate to all centers a set of conclusions not warranted by this individual anecdote, then I am concerned that this weblog does what you would take to task others for doing.

I'm a firm believer that "it's your weblog", and of course you can post anything you wish to post. I just thought I'd mention that at least one person who read this found it
flawed as an approach, and an impediment to thoughtful dialogue.

I hope that you have a very good time here in Dallas, at which you arrive in a time of particularly good weather. I think that your viewpoint is interesting (and I share your fondness for music, though I am more on the ambient side of the ledger). I hope that folks here give you a warm Texas welcome, and perhaps help you find some good BBQ.
gurdonark | Homepage | 03.18.07 - 8:06 am | #

Gurdonark

It sounds like maybe you think this website presents a very biased perspective – like maybe they should present objective, rational information instead of content that seems to be manipulated, prejudiced and un-factual.

There is an implication that Dawn tries to support her claim that Planned Parenthood is not all it is cracked up to be – not by using facts to support her claims – but rather she uses personal testimonials from women who have been there done that – instead of sound scientific evidence.

I personally think – from my own experience with abortion – that all abortion clinics lie to and hurt women – be it a Planned Parenthood or any other independent abortion clinic. I also personally think my story is factual. I was told what all other women are told.

That abortion will make your problems go away and your lives will go back to normal. There is no such thing as post-abortion syndrome.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org...ide- effects.htm
Planned Parenthood tells us that our feelings after an abortion will be of relief while some will feel anger, regret, guilt, or sadness for a little while – because of the sudden hormonal changes that may intensify these feelings.

Planned Parenthood tells us not to listen to those people who oppose a woman's right to make her own reproductive decisions because they claim that abortion often causes long-lasting emotional problems, or "post-abortion syndrome." There is no scientific proof for these claims.

http://www.prochoice.org/ about_a...n_syndrome.html
The National Abortion Federation, which is over most of the independent abortion clinics, say many people are interested in learning about the possible effects of abortion on women's emotional well-being, and several hundred studies have been conducted on this issue since the late 1970s. Unfortunately, much of the research on women's psychological responses to abortion can be confusing. Nonetheless, mainstream medical opinions, like that of the American Psychological Association, agree there is no such thing as "post-abortion syndrome."


What does the scientist use to come up with their sound scientific evidence in their research?

www.afterabortion.org
The Christchurch team, led by a self-professed "pro-choice atheist," Prof. David M. Fergusson, based their research…

Abortion in young women and subsequent mental health
http://www.blackwell- synergy.com...10.2005.01538.x

…on the study of the collection of data from birth to adulthood of 1,265 children born in Christchurch. This is one of the most long-running and valuable longitudinal studies in the world.

It sounds like scientists that want to know how abortion has effected women need to talk to a number of women and ask about their life story - which sounds very anecdotal.

What Prof. David M. Fergusson expected to find was that any mental health problems occurring after abortion would be fully explainable by prior mental health problems Instead, the New Zealand research team found the opposite. Even after the researchers controlled for this and numerous other alternative explanations, abortion was clearly linked to elevated rates of depression, anxiety, substance abuse, and suicidal behavior.

Fergusson stated: "I remain pro-choice. I am not religious. I am an atheist and a rationalist. The findings surprise me, but the results appear to be very robust because they persist across a series of disorders and a series of ages. . . . Abortion is a traumatic life event; that is, it involves loss, it involves grief, it involves difficulties. And the trauma may, in fact, predispose people to having mental illness."

Fergusson believes women and doctors should not blindly accept the unsupported claim that abortion is generally harmless or beneficial to women. He appears particularly upset by the false assurances of abortion's safety given by the American Psychological Association (APA).

Following Fergusson's complaints about the selective and misleading nature of the 2005 APA statement, the APA removed the page from their Internet site.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/art...22- 2423358.html
Fergusson’s research has prompted the American Psychological Association to withdraw an official statement denying a link between abortion and psychological harm.
Since women having abortions can no longer be said to have a low risk of suffering from psychiatric conditions such as depression, doctors have a duty to advise about long-term adverse psychological consequences of abortion.
------
As a post-abortive woman – I am sick of having my abortion experience dismissed as anedotal – thus not something to be considered as fact. To me there is no difference in the value of facts taken from the hundreds of thousands of “individual” abortion stories over those gathered into a “group” to be studied by scientists such as an avowed pro-choice atheist such as Dr. Fergusson. Do we really need his pronouncement to report on what happens to women after abortion? Why can’t we just accept women’s stories as they tell them and not dismiss them.

The fact that Planned Parenthood and their likes refuse to acknowledge that many women suffer terribly after an abortion and refuse to inform their consent with the “facts” – well that makes all abortion providers negligent toward women – across the board – all of them.
SusanG | Homepage | 03.18.07 - 4:31 pm | #

Yeah, it seems everything people would rather dismiss or disagree with is thus "anecdotal". If you're pro-choice, it's the same as being a smoker. Your ideology makes you so blind that you think it's only other people's ideologies that make them blind. Or you can call it "Confirmation Bias".

Warren
warren | Homepage | 03.18.07 - 5:07 pm | #

Sadly, as a nonprofit organization often suffering from budget problems, Planned Parenthood sadly is unable to hire the best physicians and nurses with good bedside manner...or, evidently, even competence--dosage problems with sedatives or pain medication could be the problem here. PP has notoriously high turnover among both medical and support staff.

Sadly, I think that the standard of care depends on how wealthy the local PP affiliates are, and how well-run it is. People here in New York have nothing but kind things to say about the staff there.

This is a shame for everyone, especially women who are only there for routine health care since they are unable to afford other places.
Laura | Homepage | 03.18.07 - 8:58 pm | #

I was a PP patient in Hartford, CT for more than 10 years. I encountered only one nurse-practioner who I would say was less than friendly (a bit grumpy, and rough).

I never had an abortion, so I can`t speak of how they handled such cases, but when it came to routine OB/GYN care, prescribing various forms of contraception, and also doing some non-routine bloodwork for me (since I had no U.S. health insurance), I found their services to be first-rate, and comparable to the private doctors I am now fortunate enough to be able to afford.

My positive experience with PP does not cancel out all the negative experiences other women have had with them -- all of our stories can be equally true.

I think it`s important for women who have bad experiences to speak out, becuase I believe all women deserve the exception care I received.
L. | Homepage | 03.18.07 - 11:21 pm | #

Sadly, as a nonprofit organization often suffering from budget problems, Planned Parenthood sadly is unable to hire the best physicians and nurses with good bedside manner...or, evidently, even competence

Sadly, Planned Parenthood makes millions upon millions of dollars each year and, sadly, much of that, sadly too much of that, is government money that has, sadly, been taken from taxpayers.
Bender | 03.18.07 - 11:52 pm | #

Total revenue for PP in 2004-05 was $882 million, of which $272 million were tax dollars, while total expenses were $819 million. Net assets at the end of the fiscal year ending June 30, 2005 were $937.1 million.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org...A/report- 05.pdf

The poor quality of care dispensed by PP has nothing to do with money.
Bender | 03.19.07 - 12:04 am | #

Bender,

Personally, I'm offended that my tax money is used to fund abstinence-only sex ed programs in public schools, so it cuts both ways.

I analyzed that report last year. The net "assets" of PP are largely buildings in large urban areas where real estate is at a premium. If my memory serves, the increase in the value of their real estate during the housing bubble at that time was counted as revenue, and caused the immense "profit." It's imaginary money, since they probably don't intend to sell the buildings.

Nonprofit organizations have no shareholders to answer to or dividends to pay, and while they can be ineptly and corruptly run, the real reason to have extra income in reserve is the very real threat that that federal money will be taken away.
Laura | Homepage | 03.19.07 - 1:25 am | #

I think the poor quality of care dispensed by PP has nothing to do with "lack of" money or so called tight budgetary contraints.

Unless, of course, they're channeling the millions given them in good faith by taxpayers for women's health care into their pockets or into political campaigns.
janet marie | 03.19.07 - 1:32 am | #

Marie,

You are welcome to think whatever you like. However, the issue of money is a straw man. Performing abortions is the real immoral act; the money is secondary.
Laura | Homepage | 03.19.07 - 1:37 am | #

Laura,

You're the one who brought up the "strawman" money issue:

Sadly, as a nonprofit organization often suffering from budget problems, Planned Parenthood sadly is unable to hire the best physicians and nurses with good bedside manner...or, evidently, even competence

Just making some necessary corrections!

looking for some stats on clinic workers now...
janet marie | 03.19.07 - 1:47 am | #

The reason that I originally decided to comment here came from the original post, actually. Sarah herself started the money issue, by claiming that the organization is trying to increase their profits by not giving their abortion patients painkillers. The accusation was more likely due to medical error than greed. Sedation and painkillers are standard procedure.

In fact, I stand corrected...I discussed the makeup of a typlical clinic's staff with a friend in the medical field, and she informed me that clinic physicians tend to be private-practice doctors who spend a few days a week working there.

I must have taken something that I read some time ago about the terrible turnover and inconsistent customer treatment seen in receptionists and other support staff in PP and other low-income clinics, and extrapolated it to the medical staff; for that I apologize to the commenters here and to any physicians and nurses who might be reading this!
Laura | Homepage | 03.19.07 - 2:29 am | #

I've found myself thinking a lot about Sarah's wretched testimony and I agree with part of SusanG's argument that pro-choicers - and I am one - tend to downplay evidence of PP's flaws as "anecdotal".

However, this is not because we are blinded by our ideology.

I don't blame Sarah for condemning all PPs because of her lousy experience.

But I am often struck by how women who find themselves bitterly making use of PP's services immediately assume their need is different to other people's. Sarah wrote: "It amazed me how many people would go in there and kill a life without an extremely good reason other than selfishness."

The lack of anything like objectivity is often a problem with these anecdotes.
jody tresidder | 03.19.07 - 11:12 am | #

As a volunteer who has worked with post abortive women through a local pregnancy center,I can only relate what I have heard over and over again during the past six years. Not one of these women had a pleasant experience at PP or any other abortion clinic. Many of these women had their abortions in different parts of the country, but the same theme reoccurs throughout they were treated very badly. Some of the same comments that I read in some of the posts are the same ones I heard in counseling sessions or on our retreats. So, I guess that in my case after hearing the same comments over and over again I have begun the make general statements about PP and other abortion clinics. I now advise anyone asking to absolutely stay away from PP because they will not give you all the facts, which in my mind is a travesty. Even though I work in a pro-life center I know that I cannot make that final decision for anyone. All I ever want to do is let someone get ALL the facts. Then they can make an informed decision.
Peggy
Peggy Feirstine | 03.19.07 - 12:06 pm | #

Excuse me for mentioning this, but abortion involves someone's death. If anyone's looking for a kinder, gentler abortion, you might travel out to see Tiller the Killer in Wisconsin -- he hosts services, lays out the fetus in satin, roses, banners, et al.

We were not raised to think killing someone is actually a choice, were we?
Lily | Homepage | 03.19.07 - 5:30 pm | #

Of course killing someone is a choice, Lily. Not everyone chooses it, however.

And there are plenty of reasons besides abortion to seek the services of PP. I went there for health services at times when I was not even sexually active.
L. | Homepage | 03.19.07 - 5:35 pm | #

Lily,
Tiller the Killer is from Kansas - not Wisconsin. And his services are sick and twisted and do more damage than they assauge anyone from killing their own child.

Lily - it sounds as if you think everyone is in their right mind when they choose abortion.

Nothing could be further from the truth. No one is in their right mind. For me - I was out of my mind with fear and desperation and was not thinking clearly and before I myself was in a crisis - I had little mercy on anyone who could make such a choice.

For me it wasn't until the shock wore off that reality set in - then comes the hell of trying to live with the truth that I killed my own child.

Sometimes I think people actually think those choosing abortion watch their own personal silent scream and chear for joy as the doctor rips the child in shreds out of the womb.

My abortion was an act of desperation but sometimes I think pro-choice women who choose abortion as an act of empowerment and celebration as woman - suffer more. They are not desperate but rather choose abortion much like it is just another form of contraception - they feel so smart for being responsible for "planning their families"

I have a friend such as the above and the reality of the situation even sets in with them and they don't have the excuse of desperation to use as their choice was one of supposed empowerment - healing for these women seems to be more painful and they feel even more lied to. They fully thought they were being liberated and empowered and believed the child was just a blob or just a potential. The reality even sets in for these women and they hurt probably more than those women who were coerced, forced or just plain dispaired.

I know that many supporters of Planned Parenthood think this organization is provided valuable service to women and even the workers of Planned Parenthood even think they are doing good.

The problem is that many women who have been wounded by abortion won't even go back for their post-abortion exam to see if they are healing.

I too work in a post-abortion healing ministry and have had to help hysterical woman find a gentle loving doctor to check and see if they are ok. They are so traumatized by abortion - many of them not really wanting abortion - they can't even go back for the exam that is part of the price of abortion services.

I myself couldn't stomache going back for my post-op exam and I was bleeding pretty heavily. To be honest I have a panic attack if I even get close to the building that ruined my life.

Planned Parenthood is evil and so are all the other abortion clinics - I wouldn't go there for anything - even if its free or reduced in price. I feel scuzzy just thinking about it. Slimey, scuzzy, dirty, bloody ooooooooo!
SusanG | Homepage | 03.19.07 - 6:22 pm | #

Slimey, scuzzy, dirty, bloody ooooooooo!

Sorry for your very obvious pain. I hope you find peace.
L. | Homepage | 03.19.07 - 7:04 pm | #

How much of a "choice" is it really?

The most common comment for a woman to make about her abortion is that she felt she had "no other choice".

No Doubt! read the comments below of abortion providers/sales people about how they manipulate and lie to the mother just to "make the sale", remember they're talking about mothers who are frightened, whose hormones are bouncing all over the place, and are very very vulnerable:


"They [the women] are never allowed to look at the ultrasound because we knew that if they so much as heard the heart beat, they wouldn't want to have an abortion." -Dr. Randall 'Pro-Choice 1990: Skeletons in the Closet" by David Kuperlain and Mark Masters in Oct "New Dimensions" magazine

-----------------------------------------

"Every woman has these same two questions: First, "Is it a baby?" "No" the counselor assures her. "It is a product of conception (or a blood clot, or a piece of tissue). . .How many women would have an abortion, if they told them the truth?"

--Carol Everett, former owner of two clinics and director of four "A Walk Through an Abortion Clinic" by Carol Everett ALL About Issues magazine Aug-Sept 1991, p 117

--------------------------

"Sometimes we lied. A girl might ask what her baby was like at a certain point in the pregnancy: Was it a baby yet? Even as early as 12 weeks a baby is totally formed, he has fingerprints, turns his head, fans his toes, feels pain. But we would say 'It's not a baby yet. It's just tissue, like a clot.'"

--Kathy Sparks told in "The Conversion of Kathy Sparks" by Gloria Williamson, Christian Herald Jan 1986 p 28

http://www.freerepublic.com/ foru...934865f12e3.htm
Hislittlelamb | Homepage | 03.19.07 - 10:19 pm | #

I agree, for many women who choose abortion, it's out of desperation and not really a "choice" This can be seen in the stories of women on message boards seeking support and all over the web. Even those who claim to have no regrets express that there was a lack of other viable choices due to their circumstances. And I agree, "pro-choice women who choose abortion as an act of empowerment and celebration as woman - suffer more." When they have a change of heart and the euphemisms and catchy rhetoric wears off, it will hit hard. And yet these women expecially need our compassion and for us to be there when they need and want to seek healing and peace.

And BTW, those quotes from abortion clinic workers were originally compiled by Sarah Terzo and her page can be found at:
http://clinicquotes.com
Rachael
http://rsnider.livejournal.com
Anonymous | 03.20.07 - 11:04 am | #

Nobody chooses abortion as an act of empowerment, they choose it to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.

Not everyone spends the rest of their lives desperate and guilt-ridden, of course there should be help for those suffering with their choices, but equally, when a woman just moves on with her life after an abortion without regrets (which happens much more often than some pro-lifers want to admit) they shouldn't be told how evil and heartless they are or how they're just in denial and any day soon they'll have a breakdown, anyone would think pro-lifers want to see these women suffering for something which they hitherto felt comfortable with.
Sarah (a different one) | 03.20.07 - 9:36 pm | #

Sarah (a different one),
In the early years of Roe vs Wade and the Radical Feminist movement - having an abortion was very much seen as a positive thing - a non-thing - a right of passage. I think it was Frederica Matthewes-Green who said she wished she could get pregnant to have an abortion to be a "real" feminist.

My good friend cut her teath on the pro-choice feminist movement - having aunts who were sort of underground helping women get abortions before Roe and this friend when she found she was pregnant - felt great empowerment at having an abortion - walking into the clinic - the staff was nice - the clinic was clean - her abortion experience was positive - she and her boyfriend went out for a celebration dinner afterward.

So, it is not true that some women especially in the past - have thought abortion was a liberating empowering thing.

It is only with the passage of time and the reality of what "abortion" is and the huge mass of women who have been harmed emotionally from having their empowering abortions - that the attitude of abortion is changing.

What's the new pro-choice mantra - Prevention not Prohibition - because nobody wants to need an abortion.

Well we've come a long way baby - to get to where even the pro-choice side is starting to frame abortion in a more negative light.

Abortion is no longer sold as the liberating empowering freeing thing for women - its tragic for most all women - if not EXHALE would not have come out with their most compassionate (sarcasm) post-abortion e-cards.

http://www.4exhale.org/images/ca...s/ card3_big.jpg

Sarah - maybe you should quit marginalizing women who hurt after abortion saying we are the minority and not to be triffled with - it is such marginalization that has switched the polls in Favor for a more pro-life country. Women being marginalized in their pain are crossing over in great numbers.

I see abortion being sold by pro-choices as something that can be sad at times as a way to try and keep these women from becomeing disgruntled comsumers of abortion.

By the way - my friend who found her abortion to be empowering and celebrated it afterward - went on to become very troubled and became distant to the other children she went on to have - she eventually sought out healing and has since abandoned the lie of abortion being good for women.
SusanG | Homepage | 03.21.07 - 10:09 am | #

"Sarah - maybe you should quit marginalizing women who hurt after abortion saying we are the minority and not to be triffled with..."

With respect, SusanG, Sarah made no such claims.

She was simply offering a balanced response.



I also don't understand this. You wrote: "I think it was Frederica Matthewes-Green who said she wished she could get pregnant to have an abortion to be a "real" feminist."

Google tells us that Matthews-Green is a vocal anti-abortion activist.

Is your quote, then, meant to be doubly sarcastic? (i.e. you are quoting Matthews-Green sarcastically pretending to be a real feminist??).

I admit to being confused!
jody tresidder | 03.21.07 - 12:40 pm | #

"Sarah - maybe you should quit marginalizing women who hurt after abortion saying we are the minority and not to be triffled with..."

With respect, SusanG, Sarah made no such claims.

She was simply offering a balanced response.



I also don't understand this. You wrote: "I think it was Frederica Matthewes-Green who said she wished she could get pregnant to have an abortion to be a "real" feminist."

Google tells us that Matthews-Green is a vocal anti-abortion activist.

Is your quote, then, meant to be doubly sarcastic? (i.e. you are quoting Matthews-Green sarcastically pretending to be a real feminist??).

I admit to being confused!
jody tresidder | 03.21.07 - 12:40 pm | #

Jody writes:“Google tells us that Matthews-Green is a vocal anti-abortion activist.

Is your quote, then, meant to be doubly sarcastic? (i.e. you are quoting Matthews-Green sarcastically pretending to be a real feminist??).”

Forgive me for not researching for the quote and for providing an “I think” someone said – instead of what was actually said.

But for the record – Frederica has not always been pro-life and I quote one of her articles below – link to full article provided.

http://www.frederica.com/writing...o-pro- life.html
“I have a personal interest in conversation between the opposing sides: I myself have championed both positions. Back in my college days I was your basic bad-tempered, male-bashing, hairy-legged women’s libber, actively pro-abortion. Abortion, I believed, was essential to liberation. Women would not be able to enjoy the same success as their male counterparts unless they, too, could be unhampered by pregnancy and childrearing.”

I sent an e-mail to Frederica asking if she had ever said such a thing as I posted above and if she could provide me with the article – she was unable to locate the article – remembers writing something to that effect and also to saying such a thing in speeches.

Frederica has given me permission to quote her e-mail back to me which follows:

“Hi, Susan. I thought I had written about that, but can't find it by searching on my website. What I used to say in speeches was that, by the grace of God, I never had an unplanned pregnancy, but that if I had I would have been proud to have an abortion because I thought of it as a sign of liberation. YOur point is correct; in the early days, abortion was really celebrated. By the late 80s if not earlier, a new tactic was being tried. I used to have a tape of a pollster speaking at a NARAL convention in 1989, explaining that the new emphasis was going to be on "choice," and that they got the idea in a focus group where a racist restaurant owner was saying, "the government can't tell me who to let in my restaurant, it's my choice."

********
Frederica Mathewes-Green
www.frederica.com”
~~~~~~~~
Frederica is a real feminist.

As to my thoughts of being marginalized – I admit I’m a bit sensitive to that – and marginialization of women who regret their abortions is rampant in pro-choice circles. Re-reading the other Sarah’s post I can see she is just trying to let us know that there are some women who are not sorry and have no regrets and I know this is true.

I do believe that the day will come when abortion becomes unthinkable – especially in light of some pro-choice groups comeing up with the slogan – Prevention not Prohibition because no one wants to need an abortion. Boy to me that paints abortion as something unthinkable which is the www.silentnomoreawareness.com mission as well.

Abortion is on a slippery sloap – from being openly celebrated just as abortion – then moving from the word abortion to the word choice and now that “choice” has lost its beauty and newness – we are getting down to the safe, legal but rare or Prevention not Prohibition.

How is this happening? Women and their stories.
SusanG | Homepage | 03.21.07 - 3:10 pm | #

SusanG,
That was an awesome bit of quote checking!! Hats off to you - truly!

(Though I reserve the right to have the most profound doubts about whether the slogan of "choice" can be linked to the self-serving blather of a racist restaurant owner! That sounds rather too convenient, if one has become vehemently anti-abortion.)

I sincerely hope legal abortion remains available.

But that doesn't stop me feeling aghast at the original Sarah's experience.


Women who feel appalling after electing to abort should never feel powerless about demanding better treatment.

(Again, cracking quote checking!)
jody tresidder | 03.21.07 - 4:26 pm | #

I think it`s important for women who have bad experiences to speak out, becuase (sic) I believe all women deserve the exception care I received.

L, did you mean exceptional care, or did you really mean exception care, as in the care you received was the exception to the rule?
Tony | Homepage | 03.21.07 - 4:44 pm | #

Typo, Tony -- NOT Freudian slip! ;)
L. | Homepage | 03.21.07 - 7:16 pm | #

Mackenzie, ultraouns and serial HCGs can indeed diagnose an ectopic before it ruptures. I got this from both the CDC and from listening to tapes from National Abortion Federation risk management seminars. A jury of abortionists would give a plaintiff verdict on a failure to diagnose ectopic pregnancy.
Christina | Homepage | 03.22.07 - 1:41 am | #

((((Maripat ))))
Christina | Homepage | 03.22.07 - 1:43 am | #

Amy, when I had my endometrial biopsy, they only used a tiny tube, like the one they use to do the test before you give blood, where they drop the blood in a tube and see how long it takes to drop to the bottom. It HURT! All I could think was, "Anybody who says abortion is painless is full of it, if this hurts this much." And I felt sick the rest of the day. The nurse told me that when you invade the uterus at all, the body pumps out prostaglandins in response and it makes you weak and lightheaded and nausesous, which I certainly was. And I must have been white as a sheet when I got back to work becaues everybody wanted to know if I was okay.

How then can then present abortion as a "lunch hour procedure" where you can go about your business without anybody guessing anything was up is beyond me.
Christina | Homepage | 03.22.07 - 1:46 am | #

Susan G., NAF says what it profits them to say.

You can go here to see the contrast between what they say and what they do.
Christina | Homepage | 03.22.07 - 1:49 am | #

Oh -- more here contrasting what they say and what they do. NAF indeed. That seedy abortion mill that just got shut down in New Jersey was a NAF member. Half of the six mills disciplined last year in Alabama were NAF members.
Christina | Homepage | 03.22.07 - 1:51 am | #

Laura, PP sucks up so much money from the public trough -- if any particular affilliate "can't afford" to hire anybody but a quack, whose fault is that? How much do they pay the high mucky-mucks and lobbiests? How much a year do they spend on things like full-page ads in the New York Times?

PP should be totally defunded and left to rely on the donations of people deluded enough to think that there's any excuse for what they do and how they treat women. Like that poor woman in DC who was just there for an exam for birth control pills, and the doctor walked into the wrong room and over her screams just did an abortion on her! Imagine if she'd just been there to verify a wanted pregnancy so she could get WIC!

PP is a crime against humanity.
Christina | Homepage | 03.22.07 - 1:53 am | #

The Other Sarah -- Death Row is packed with people who killed without regret. That's a reflection on them, not on the acts they committed. Ditto for abortion. Just because Woman A never looks back, never has a moment of pity for the embryo who was put to death on her behalf, never knows a moment of regret, that doesn't mean that abortion didn't kill anybody. It just means that Woman A lacks the capacity to feel remorse for it.
Christina | Homepage | 03.22.07 - 1:57 am | #

Jody, Frederica started out as a card-carrying pro-choice feminist. She went through college with a bumper sticker that said, "Don't labor under a misconception: Legalize abortion." She had an ephphany and has been a prolife activist ever since.
Christina | Homepage | 03.22.07 - 2:00 am | #

"Not everyone spends the rest of their lives desperate and guilt-ridden, of course there should be help for those suffering with their choices, but equally, when a woman just moves on with her life after an abortion without regrets (which happens much more often than some pro-lifers want to admit) they shouldn't be told how evil and heartless they are or how they're just in denial and any day soon they'll have a breakdown, anyone would think pro-lifers want to see these women suffering for something which they hitherto felt comfortable with."

No, and I certainly would hope not. And I don't know where I was saying "how evil and heartless they are or in denial"? I do think you're projecting stereotypes and prejudices. However, anyways I would hope that those who are hurting or in pain are able to reach a point in their lives and reach out to someone and reach peace and healing with their decisions. For many women looking to heal and move past their pain, they encounter hostilities and burdens to healing from both sides of the abortion debate. From some pro-lifers she may receive condemntion and/or judgement. But especially from the pro-choice side, where she may be told reasonings along the lines of, "There's no reason to grieve, you did nothing wrong," "emotional problems resulting from abortion are rare," "women only have emotional problems after an abortion if she already had emotional problems," and other statements which are intended to offer reassurance and support, but in fact marginalize, shame, and belittle her for her feelings. I would hope pro-choicers will someday be able to look past political motivations (much like Jilly's PASS site) to listen to the experiences of women who've had a negative experience as well and listen to what they are saying. And I do hope that some pro-lifers have a softening of hearts and come to understand the pain those women have been through.

And for many individuals who've had a change of heart from pro-choice to pro-life, it was heartache which motivated their change. Just check out the testimonies of former clinic workers and abortion providers, as well as former pro-choice activists.
Rachael | Homepage | 03.22.07 - 3:52 am | #

I am wondering the same things as Jamila...

I'm not about to call Sarah a liar, but rather to question her motivation here. She calls PP "butchers" but truly seems the most shaken up/upset about them not making abortions more 'comfortable' by offering sedation. Hmm...

Frankly, I'm grateful they don't make them more comfortable. They shouldn't be pain-free. EVER. For, really? In the long run, they never are. One dead. One wounded.

God bless Sarah, AND her friend, who seem a bit misguided on when life truly begins. May their eyes be opened and their hearts be healed.
Nicole Prentice | 03.22.07 - 12:29 pm | #

"Frankly, I'm grateful they don't make them more comfortable. They shouldn't be pain-free. EVER"

Nicole,
This sounds, I think, brutal in a way you didn't intend?

There can be no justification for accepting shabby medical care for women receiving abortions as somehow a deserved extra physical punishment. Surely?
jody tresidder | 03.22.07 - 2:31 pm | #

christina: do you have a link or source for the story you mention about the Planned Parenthood in DC? i used to live in maryland, and i can't imagine not having heard such a thing in the news, if it happened recently.

(to be honest, i can't imagine such a thing happening at all. if she wasn't pregnant -- as i'd guess she wasn't, being there strictly for pills, how would an abortion even be performed? if she was there for an exam, also, she wouldn't have been in a surgical room, and she wouldn't have been prepped for surgery, so even if the doctor had made a mistake and gone to the wrong room, or grabbed the wrong chart, i can't see how the mixup would have got to the AND THEN SHE GOT AN ABORTION!!! phase.)
kidlacan | 03.22.07 - 4:21 pm | #

also, sorry: long post follows.

for whatever it may be worth, i just got back from a Planned Parenthood -- they're currently my primary gyncare provider. i was at their surgical site; in my state, at least, only some PP locations are surgical (ultrasound-equipped, able to perform tubals, full-on exams, abortions, and so on), and others just provide yearly exams, pap smears, and other routine tests. i was having an IUD put in, which, though it does involve a tenaculum and cervical expansion, doesn't hurt much more than moderate/severe menstrual cramping.

i wasn't having a surgical procedure; i just needed an ultrasound available because my uterus is positioned oddly. still, i was well-attended: one doctor, two assistants, both of whom asked me twice if i needed anything for pain. during the procedure, one assistant stayed by my side, chatted with me, and held my hand when i flinched a bit. afterward, even though the cramping passed fairly quickly, they whisked me off to a recovery room, settled me in a recliner, brought me gingerale and a heating pad, reviewed all of the IUD information with me, and basically just made sure i felt perfectly well before leaving -- even when i insisted that i was fine.

i've seen two private-practice gynecologists, and this PP visit was honestly the nicest experience i've ever had. the doctor was more forthcoming and open for questions than any i've had previously, even taking the time to talk to me about possible causes and solutions for menstrual irregularity i've had in the past -- something the gynecologist who i actually *saw* for said irregularities, and who set me up for $300 worth of blood tests, was unwilling to ever do.

i haven't had a more intensive surgical procedure at Planned Parenthood, but i have no reason to think they'd treat other women differently. (and yes, my Planned Parenthood gives sedation and pain relief to women having abortions; i happened to see both a patient's information outline and a doctor's procedural practice outline while waiting in the office prior to my insertion.)

i know an anecdote is hardly data. still, my experience was so shockingly different that, after following this thread since its posting, i wanted to share it. i am truly sorry if others have had poor treatment or care at their local PP clinics. i'd advise contacting either the administrators of the clinics or Planned Parenthood itself. certainly there is no across-the-board edict to treat women shabbily or to somehow cut corners by withholding proper care -- why, i even got a snack! (just graham crackers, to go with the gingerale, but still!)
kidlacan | 03.22.07 - 4:22 pm | #

"Like that poor woman in DC who was just there for an exam for birth control pills, and the doctor walked into the wrong room and over her screams just did an abortion on her!"

Christina, do you have a link to this story? I tried google and couldn't find it. I'd like to send it to some friends.

THanks,
Lisa
LisaM | 03.22.07 - 5:07 pm | #

Excuse me, but using an IUD is just another way of aborting a baby, as it pushes that baby out of the uterus and you will never know you were pregnant. My best friend happened to be born with her mother's IUD wrapped around her. Prematurely, and her mother bled throughout the enitre pregnancy.
heather | 03.22.07 - 10:44 pm | #

delurking...needing to rant...

I've going the other way...from very pro-life to pro-choice. To be honest, everyone I every knew who had an experience with pro-choice organizations, including PP, found them compassionate and focused not on "completing the sale" etc, but on giving women their options, facts, and letting them choose what was best, in regards to all aspects of reproductive care. PP was founded to give women control over their fertility so they wouldn't have to get abortions; before birth control was readily available abortion (usually illegal) was the main form of birth control and was rediculously common (as it still is in places where good contraception is unavailable). Margaret Sanger herself was against abortion as a birth control, and the first PP clinics didn't even offer it. The pro-choice, pro-comprehensive sex ed people are some of the most honest, affirming people I have ever met and seem to actually have what is best for individuals, and respect for their personal agency, at heart.

I became pro-choice because my experience of the pro-life movement (and also the abstinence movement) was not only that it was often hysterical, but also dishonest, and cared nothing for women except as wives/mothers. I spent four years at one of the "conservative" Catholic colleges, and the dysfunction that was hidden in so many of those "pro-life families" you could breath in the air it was so thick. I had a friend that worked for the local NFP doctor and she said it turned her into a fire=breathing feminist; there were women who had had 6 C-sections, major physical and mental breakdowns, and the doctor (and their "loving" husbands) only care was that they could incubate more babies. Women as vessels. I cringe everytime I hear a young girl say she's "saving herself" just for a man...what about respecting YOURSELF! The whole obsession with "modesty" and "virginity" led so many young women I knew to hate their bodies and fear their own sexuality and was totally oriented towards being "pure" for MEN and not causing MEN to desire too much. I knew nearly 10 people who got pregnant or an STD because chastity pledged don;t keep people from still having sex, but lack of education and options does keep them from doing so safely. I've heard so many pro-life lies: the Pill causes cancer, Terri Schiavo's gaze was following the bouncing balloon, scare tactics about STDs, sex outside of marraige is always psychologically damaging, the cruel manipulations of "CPCs", etc etc etc...ahh!

Four years after graduating from my conservative Catholic college and participating in the March with my shiny chastity ring, I am Pro-Choice. I just couldn't take the crazy anymore, or the disrespect for women as moral agents, their personal dignity as individuals (regardless of their relationship or lack therof to a man or babies), and the hatred of women's bodies and sexuality disguised as "reverance".

The big kicker for me though was when I encounted the hypocricy. I had sex for the first time within the past couple of years. We were dating, I was curious, horney, and I frankly just wanted to wash out from my brain the whole residual fear I had that not being a virgin anymore would make me a bad, dirty, undesireable woman. Nothing about it fit all the stupid abstinence propaganda about women being pressured or hurt or "having sex to feel loved" and then getting their hearts broken; it was my idea, and the man was the one that got super attached afterward and became more romantic. Even though we were careful and pregnancy wasn't an issue, I had a conversation that made me actually have to think about abortion concretely rather than as an abstract thing that is just for "other" women. I confided to a fellow co-worker (both me and my BF are teachers at a Catholic School) about our sexual activity, and she let me know that if I ever got pregnant, definately me, and probably him, would lose our jobs. Because its more important to punish people for sex and send a message to our students that premarital sex is the most absolutely worst scandalous thing EVER than to support two young adults during the most trying time in their life and affirm that every life has value.

LOVELY.

Maybe they would direct me to a "Crisis Pregnancy Center" so I could have gotten some free diapers and a baby blanket. Because that really matters when you've had your car repossed, been evicted from your apartment, and had your human and professional dignity ripped from you because you have LOST YOUR JOB.

Experience cuts both ways, people.

I would never want to get an abortion. I think it would be awful, horrible thing to do. I never ever want to have to make that choice. But that conversation made me really how utterly personal a choice it is for a woman, even in the abstract, and how devestating the consequeces of pregnancy can be...how ironic is it that the consequences are made WORSE by working for the Catholic Church. HYPOCRISY. I love so much about Catholic Christianity, and I'm hardly a perfect person and certainly in need of moral guidance, but that day the Church as an institution lost ALL of it's moral authority for me. We keep pedophile preists, but pregant bachellorettes are such a scandal to the children that they must be fired. Pro-Life my ass...its all about power and punishing women's sexuality.

rant over
Anon | 03.22.07 - 11:43 pm | #

Anon, not sure where you were going with that rant, especially throwing Schiavo in there. Kind of all over the place.

God has given us free will. If you want to mosey on over and graze on the grass on the other side of the fence, no one is going to stop you.

The only thing that puzzles me is why you're surprised that a Catholic school wouldn't be okay with two unrepentent fornicators as teachers. Because the Catholic Church has been lax about purging their ranks of pedophile priests doesn't then make every sin acceptable.

Pro-Life my ass...its all about power and punishing women's sexuality.

Um, right. No other reason someone might despise abortion. Like maybe the dead babies. But you've got us all pegged. Long live the patriarchy!
Amy K. | 03.23.07 - 5:12 am | #

Anon--

Check your contract. If you're working for a Catholic school, chances are there's a clause in your contract that states that you can be fired for violating Catholic teaching--it's been in the contract of every Catholic school employee I know. So if you want to keep your job, you don't want to discuss your sex life at work. Since, you know, you're possibly violating the contract you signed. Pregnancy is akin to a public admission of wrongdoing, in this case. And if the clause is there, then pregnancy is a violation of your contract. The Catholic Church is well within its bounds to fire someone who violates his/her contract, whether they find out about it publicly (pregnancy) or through private channels (confiding to coworkers).
Kate B. | Homepage | 03.23.07 - 9:15 am | #

KateB,
There is no heat in my words at all. But you can appreciate, I imagine, how those of us on the pro-choice side might view with dismay the implications of the legal interpretation of Catholic tenets (in your example of schoolteachers and their contracts).

Sex outside marriage IS punished, because you may lose your job.

The evidence of sex outside marriage (pregnancy) is always going to be self-evidently the woman's visible sign of guilt.

Therefore the link between sex and punishment is upheld with one-sided consequences.

Which is why people like me get so very troubled at hints - as there have been in this thread - that abortion should remain a physically painful procedure as an appropriate punishment, as though it's all part of the same cool logic.

As a pro-choicer, I do try to condemn potentially cruel statements from my side.(And I have some perfectly warm and brilliant Catholic friends!)
jody tresidder | 03.23.07 - 11:14 am | #

Jody--

Signing a contract is still signing a contract. If you sign a contract that says, in effect, "I will not have sex outside marriage," you are liable to bear the penalty of breaking that contract. Nobody forced you to sign (and please--nobody works at a Catholic school for the money, because there usually isn't much of it).

Sex outside marriage would be punished in this case because it's breaking a contract. Since both partners in the above-cited case work under the same contract, the punishment can only be one-sided if Anon refuses to turn in her boyfriend, in which case, it's on her head, not on the head of the Catholic Church, that she bore the punishment alone. If the case were such that the boyfriend worked elsewhere and the woman was the only one to lose her job, that still wouldn't be a case of hypocrisy: the woman would be the only one violating her contract, then.

It's not a question of "the legal interpretations of Catholic tenets." It's a question of an employer being allowed to write contracts and expecting them to be fulfilled by the signing parties. The only law involved is the law of contracts. And there are plenty of non-Catholic companies with clauses regarding sex and relationships in their contracts and company policies (sexual harassment policies, employee dating policies, and the like).

Without the contract, there is no question of punishing anybody for sex outside marriage (although the debate moves to the issue of whether the parties involved are already punishing themselves). The issue of making abortions painful as a form of punishment is a different issue--punishment for abortion rather than penalty for violation of contract.
Kate B. | Homepage | 03.23.07 - 11:34 am | #

A courteous response,
Thank you, Kate B.
jody tresidder | 03.23.07 - 11:43 am | #

No prob, Jody. I gave up screaming for Lent. ;)
Kate B. | Homepage | 03.23.07 - 12:03 pm | #

Dear Anon,

After reading your post I have a few thoughts.

1)I am so sorry you lost your faith.
2)I am sorry you got to the point of having other people's lack of faith affect your own beliefs. I had that happen to me so I understand how it can. But, trust me, you will have to learn at some point that people will say and do many things that are outside of your control. If you change your beliefs merely because of what others are doing or saying, you are going to be changing who you are non-stop.
Radical Catholic Mom | Homepage | 03.23.07 - 6:34 pm | #

heather:

i do appreciate where you are coming from, and as a semiregular lurker, i am very aware of the objections many here have toward IUDs, and toward contraception in general. i wasn't looking to pick a fight over contraceptive methods, or to announce the moral awesomeness of my method in particular. i only wanted to offer a counterexample to the one given in the original post, and to point out that Planned Parenthood does not, in fact, have an economic model based on denying pain medications to their patients. and that, at least in my experience, they were both professional and compassionate. that's all.
kidlacan | 03.23.07 - 6:45 pm | #

Anon,

I am wondering why you would want to be teaching at a Catholic school? I only hope that you don`t allow your anger to come between you and God. That`s all.
L. | Homepage | 03.23.07 - 9:10 pm | #

Anon.,
I too wonder why you would choose to work in a CAtholic school with your feelings. It can't be good for you or the students!

My husband and I have both worked in them and his experiences have led him to swear to never work in one again. Mine differ.

In fact, I WAS pregnant, unmarried, and working in one. My boss's response when I told him that I was ready to leave:
"Stay. We are your family and we will take care of you."

So, you know, you raise some VERY good questions about how well the Church (like any other institution run by human beings) carries out the difficult task of setting up standards and carrying them out. Some times, not as well as others.

BTW re: sex, etc: I hear you. You might be interested in JPII's Theology of the Body. Anytime you've got the leader of the supposed center-of- misogyny-on-earth telling his audience that it is the man's duty to ensure his wife has orgasms.... well. It turns many of those easy ideas we have about religion and sex right on their heads.

Here is some Christopher West stuff that summarizes it:
http://www.victorclaveau.com/ htm...of_marriage.htm

http://www.victorclaveau.com/htm...xuality/ god.htm



Here is the whole text: all of the speeches and writings that comprise TOB: (llooooonnnng)

http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPA...OC/ JP2TBIND.HTM


I hope that you will find something interesting. Please email Dawn and give her your contact info (she knows where to find me) if you are interested in talking with me about my experiences in the EXACT areas you are ranting about.

Peace,sister!
Corita
corita | 03.23.07 - 10:47 pm | #

Returning back to the original PP story at the start, I'm sorry but there are too many inconsistencies in Sarah's original story to ring true. Dawn says she will be reading these comments, but so far she hasn't come back to fill in the details and make this more credible. Sarah says she wasn't far enough along for an abortion? Not credible. Exactly how far along was she, and what did they tell her the limits were? She saw the ultrasound and could tell that her uterus looked pregnant? Not credible. She says the ultimate diagnosis was failed tubal pregnancy, and was treated by a D&C? Not credible. If the failed pregnancy was tubal, there would be nothing to remove from the uterus via D&C. And if she truly went there for an abortion in the first place, why would she be so judgemental about the other women there, without knowing their situations. Sorry, unless some of these blanks are filled in, I don't buy it.
Mary | 03.24.07 - 4:36 pm | #

And also, heather's comment regarding IUDs is also completely inaccurate. An IUD does not "push anything out", it prevents implantation, and before implanation a "pregnancy" does not exist. Ask someone who has gone through fertility treatments whether their pregnancy began at the time an egg was fertilized in a lab, or when an embryo was successfully implanted in their uterus.
Mary | 03.24.07 - 4:48 pm | #

And anyone who believes that a baby can be born "with an IUD wrapped around her" is asking us to believe a physical impossibility. It is possible to become pregnant with a IUD in place, and yes the pregnancy is somewhat more risky in this case. But it is impossible for the IUD to be "INSIDE" the amniotic sac!!. When the embryo implants in the uterus, it differentiates into separate layers, the outer layer becomes the placenta, amnion, and chorion, and the inner layer becomes the fetus. If an IUD was present in the uterus, the only place it can possibly be is between the uterine wall and the amniotic sac. It cannot possibly work its way into a place where it is wrapped around the fetus, or where the baby can be born holding it, or sucking on it, or having swallowed it, these are all impossible situations. Consult a good medical encyclopedia or a legitimate OB/GYN. Do not spread fake scare stories that defy physical reality.
Mary | 03.24.07 - 4:56 pm | #

Dawn says she will be reading these comments, but so far she hasn't come back to fill in the details and make this more credible.

I don't believe that a woman who has been through trauma has any responsibility to explain the details of her trauma to somebody out in the Internet ether who lacks the courage to provide her last name or an e-mail address. You want to know the personal details of Sarah's experience, Mary? Print your e-mail address, like I do and like other commenters do, so that if she had the desire to share her story with a highly critical stranger, she may do so out of the public eye.

Dawn Eden | Homepage | 03.24.07 - 6:53 pm | #

i'm interested in further details, sarah, if you are still reading. i can be reached at trachwolf@aol.com
kidlacan | 03.24.07 - 7:18 pm | #

Jodi,

I think you are right that women are often the ones to bear the burden of punishment for extramarital sex. They get pregnant; men do not.

Nevertheless, in the day and age of genetic testing, it should NOT be hard to determine who the father is. In the day and age of child support and adoption records, it should not be difficult to determine if a man has gotten a woman pregnant.

To me, this says that women need to be more proactive in ensuring that men are punished equally. Such will uphold principles of equality in spite of physical differences, and, more importantly, provide a deterrence for men.
theobromophile | Homepage | 03.24.07 - 8:05 pm | #

OK, I think that I have solved the mystery of the Semi-Truthful Sarah, this scenario makes all the loose ends suddenly fall into place:

I don't believe Sarah ever intended to have an abortion. I believe she was pregnant by choice, and volunteered to "go undercover" to visit Planned Parenthood and report back the details of her visits as some sort of a research project. This explains why she immediately had a highly negative feelings about all the other women who were there - she wasn't really "like them" at all. It also explains why she was so quick to label PP as "butchers".

Unfortunately, Sarah suffered a spontaneous abortion sometime between her first and second visits. No wonder she was shocked when the ultrasound showed she was no longer pregnant. But if she was there under false pretenses, it's also no wonder that the clinic workers responded to this fact in a way she found unsympathetic. They didn't understand what she was going through, because she didn't give them honest information.

And, if Sarah was indeed carrying a wanted pregnancy, she was presumably seeing another medical professional elsewhere. So any issues regarding a "missed diagnosis" clearly don't lie solely at PP's responsibility.

Now I obviously have no proof that this scenario is correct, but the selected details that were presented simply make better sense in this context. And the story makes even more sense if you add in the parts that were "intentionally left blank": like how she came to be at Planned Parenthood in the first place, why she went back a second time, what thoughts were going through her head as she considered the alternatives, (she didn't).

So, it's entirely possible that none of the individual statements in this story is, strictly speaking, untrue. But telling less than the whole truth in a attempt to deceive is still bearing false witness.
Mary | 03.25.07 - 9:39 am | #

Mary, I have corresponded with Sarah privately, and I believe that her story is completely true in every sense of the word. If you would imagine for one moment that it was, you would see how the assumptions you are making about her are unspeakably cruel. What would you think if I criticized a woman who claimed to have been through such trauma, simply because I, without having known her or spoken to her, thought there were "holes" in her story? Sarah is under no obligation to you or anyone to explain what you believe are "holes." As I said, your refusal to give your last name or e-mail address makes me gravely doubt your own compassion and sincerity.
Dawn Eden | 03.25.07 - 1:26 pm | #

Well to all of you people out there doubting me let me clairfy a few things. First, as soon as I found out that I was pregnant I made an apointment at planned parenthood that week. They failed to inform me over the phone that I would not be far along enough for the baby to be seen on the ultrasound. That is the reason I had to go back a second time. Secondly, I do have a regular OB/GYN whom I did NOT go to until planned parenthood turned me away for the second time. I made a stupid mistake in getting pregnant. Had I made the right choices I would have not been in that situation. However I did make the wrong choices and it is I who will have to answer for them. I did not get an abortion ONLY because I wasn't able to. Had the pregnancy been normal I would have gone through with the abortion. AGAIN that is what I will have to answer for. I have more than one reason and I wish to not disclose them to anyone other than those who I choose. As far as me going into planned parenthood under "false pretenses", that is just obsurd. I'm just a single working mother and I'm surely not any kind of activist. I said what I did about the other women in there because some of them were laughing and cutting up with the people who brought them. It made me sick to my stomach that they were not as sad and ashamed as I was to be killing their baby. Dawn and all the other people who have been behind me in this, thank you from the bottom of my heart.
Sarah | 03.26.07 - 9:59 pm | #

From another perspective, if you never went to Planned Parenthood at all, you would not have realized that something had gone wrong with your pregnancy, until more severe symptoms occurred, and you might not have seen another doctor in time. So even though you were not given a completely correct diagnosis, the ultrasound gave you enough imformation for you to decide to seek more care. You might even say that your visit to PP actually saved your life. I guess She really does work in mysterious ways.
Mary | 03.26.07 - 10:19 pm | #

Mary, I think when it comes to Planned Parenthood, you are a real Little Mary Sunshine. It seems nothing, not even the worst malpractice — for even the National Abortionist Federation agrees it is malpractice to fail to diagnose an ectopic pregnancy — can make you remove those rose-colored glasses.
Dawn Eden | Homepage | 03.26.07 - 10:57 pm | #