Sunday, July 10, 2011

Planned Parenthood: mandatory waiting period and medical information prior to abortion is an infringement on "free speech"

South Dakota abortion lobby Planned Parenthood is upset with a new law requiring a waiting period as well as discussion of information and options prior to an abortion. Pro-life physician (shouldn't that be redundant?) Dr. Allen Unruh understands that the Planned Parenthood protest is more the consequence of concerns about workflow than about rights:

Physician sees profit motive behind Planned Parenthood's S. Dakota lawsuit
By Benjamin Mann
Sioux Falls, S.D., Jun 2, 2011 / 03:34 am (CNA).- Planned Parenthood is suing the state of South Dakota, saying its new abortion law threatens women's privacy and free speech... The statute requires women to wait three days before having an abortion, and to receive medical information about the procedure along with information about alternatives... [a] doctor must also certify that the woman is seeking an abortion voluntarily, rather than being coerced by someone else.
Sounds like a reasonable law. After all, if you want to purchase a pistol, you have a waiting period and you're required to have a permit, which generally requires that you have some kind of training (information) about gun ownership. And owning a pistol rarely means that you will actually kill someone with it. Abortion always kills someone.  What's wrong with a short waiting period and a little information?

South Dakota even has a 72-hour waiting period for the purchase of real estate, for goodness sake.
The co-founder of a South Dakota crisis pregnancy center says the real threat is to abortion provider's business model, which relies on women being coerced into abortion.
Yep. Laws like this scare away customers.

“A woman who's being asked to destroy her unborn child with a 72-hour waiting period – a time to learn all about what this procedure is, to think about it, and to get as much information as possible – is a major threat to Planned Parenthood, because it's going to affect their bottom line,” said Dr. Allen Unruh, a physician who founded the Alpha Center with his wife Leslee in 1984.
So Planned Parenthood is going to the legislature to try to get the law changed, right?

Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit on May 27 with the U.S. District Court in Sioux Falls, seeking to block the July 1 implementation of the abortion bill that was signed into law on March 22.
Oh. They're going to do what all leftist thugs do: circumvent the democratic process by going to court to get some moonbat judge to declare that the Constitution specifically protects abortionists' business models.

Dr. Unruh, who studied abortion for a state task force in 2005, said that Planned Parenthood maintains willful ignorance about the majority of women who have abortions against their will.
The threats often come from a boyfriend, husband, parent, or other party.
“The task force revealed it was 65 percent,” Dr. Unruh told CNA in a May 31 interview. “Planned Parenthood admitted under oath that they don't have anybody who has any training, of any kind, in counseling to determine when a woman's being coerced.”
Hmmm.. Why would Planned Parenthood not have anybody trained in determining coercion in having an abortion? Could it be because the money they get from a coerced abortion is the same as the money they get from an uncoerced abortion?  Does Starbucks care if someone forced you to buy that cup of coffee?

Sarah Stoesz, president and CEO for Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota said that South Dakota's new law “goes farther than any other in the country in intruding on the doctor-patient relationship and putting women and families at risk".
Actually,  the new Obamacare legislation specifically requires all sorts of counseling and information-provision (on end of life issues, preventative medicine, etc).  I don't recall any PP lawsuits there. 

Since when is legislation that helps ensure that patients are informed an interference in the doctor-patient relationship? Isn't one of the most important aspects of the doctor-patient relationship to ensure that the patient is informed and makes medical decisions without coercion?

And in what universe does Planned Parenthood complain about "putting families at risk" when every 'termination' they commit kills a member of someone's family?

Planned Parenthood maintains that the law violates women's freedom of speech, by forcing them to discuss medical issues with crisis pregnancy counselors. Mimi Liu, a lawyer for Planned Parenthood, said the law wouldn't bar pregnancy centers from “disseminating false and misleading information.”
Women in abortion clinics are free to speak as they please. The law requires that 'health care' providers provide them with information relevant to the decision they are making. 

Dr. Unruh – whose Alpha Center has filed to provide women with counseling under the law – said the legislation was a necessary legal response to the problem of women forced into abortion.
“No woman should be forced to kill her unborn child against her will. That's why the legislature responded,” he explained. “The law requires them to get the counseling at a pregnancy care center, because we know Planned Parenthood will not police themselves.”
Nor, he said, does Planned Parenthood offer the authentic “doctor-patient relationship” they claim to be protecting.
“There's zero 'doctor-patient relationship' in an abortion procedure,” Dr. Unruh stated. Often, he said, “the first time a woman meets the doctor is when she's unclothed in an operating room, and the machine is so loud she doesn't have a chance to talk to him.”
"Nice to meet you, Ms. ... Smith or whatever your name is. My name is Dr. Williams. I hope you can hear me over this suction sound. You did pay your $2000 before you came in here, right?"

Unlike PP, crisis pregnancy counseling is free:

“Our services are free,” he said. “We don't charge anything. We don't have a conflict of interest.”
“At Planned Parenthood, women have to pay cash up front before they even see the doctor. They've had no history, no examination, no consultation by a qualified person. They call this 'free speech rights.'”
'Congress shall make no law restricting an abortion mill...'

He pointed out that Planned Parenthood does not present the truth about fetal development, or the risks associated with abortion.
“They testified to the task force, that when a woman says 'Is it a baby yet?', they will never, ever admit the humanity of a unborn child. They say it's nothing but 'tissue' and 'cells,' it's 'protoplasm.'”
“If anything's false and misleading, it's that.”

Dr. Unruh also noted the irony of Planned Parenthood boasting of its medical credentials, while attempting to keep women from learning more about its most profitable procedure.
He cited the Hippocratic Oath – which, in its original form forbids abortion – to explain the physician's duty to inform patients about facts and risks.
“All medical doctors take an oath: 'First, do no harm.' That's the oath above every medical procedure,” he explained. “Doctors have an ethical obligation to provide information, and to answer all questions a patient has.”
Crisis pregnancy centers, he explained, should be seen as performing a service in the interest of both personal and public health.
“I don't care if you're just removing a wart – you want to know what the biopsy says, what the risks are of the surgery. You should have the right, as a patient, to learn all about the surgery.”
The doctor also found some irony in comparing the new abortion law with another South Dakota statute that imposes a decision-making period. 
South Dakota legislators aren't surprised by Planned Parenthood's end run around the law:

State Representative Roger Hunt, who sponsored the new law, saw Planned Parenthood's challenge coming.
“I don't think it's a surprise to anyone that they've filed a lawsuit,” Hunt told the Sioux Falls Argus Leader. “We've been expecting this and preparing for it.”
The state's Life Defense Fund, which defends South Dakota's abortion laws with the help of private donations, has more than doubled since the passage of the waiting-period and counseling law. Hunt says the state will only have to pay legal fees if Planned Parenthood's challenge succeeds.


  1. You're a physician. If you think Planned Parenthood is out there to make a profit, I don't know what world you're practicing in, let alone living in. You should know better. You disagree with abortion and what Planned Parenthood does, fine. But your lobby wastes no time distorting facts to suit your cause.

    2: Going to the courts is not antithetical to democracy. The court system is essential to democracy. I shouldn't even have to point this out.

    3: The 72-hour waiting period is a canard, and you and everybody in your lobby knows it as well as the rest of the country does. It is as disingenous as saying, "Uh, sure, the intelligent designer COULD be an extraterrestrial!"

  2. you think Planned Parenthood is out there to make a profit, I don't know what world you're practicing in, let alone living in.


  3. I am noticing a very interesting pattern here in these posts and comments...
    I would like to ask a question to those of you who read/browse the Egnorance blog, if I may.
    Is there any Atheist / materialist type thinkers on here that are opposed to abortion on demand? Do any of you find yourself siding with the Pro-Life side of the debate here?
    If so, I would be fascinated to know why.