New Stanek WND column, "Those onerous barriers to abortion"

wnd_logo.gif

Until last week, podiatrists cutting out ingrown toenails were more regulated in Missouri than abortionists cutting out preborn babies....

But on July 6, Gov. Matt Blunt signed legislation into law mandating that facilities where babies are scrapped will have to meet the same criteria as facilities where teeth are scraped.

That's tough to argue against, but Planned Parenthood, which owns two of the four affected abortion mills, may sue to block it.

According to the Associated Press, PP "claimed the law could force it to spend up to $2 million to remodel one of its clinics and halt medical abortions at another site."

Just how shoddy can a mill be if it will cost $2 million to make it as safe and clean as a facility where pink eye is treated?

But PP strenuously objected, saying....

Continue reading my column today, "Those onerous barriers to abortion" on WorldNetDaily.com.


Comments:

As usual, great article, Jill!

Methinks that PP protests too much. Again.

Posted by: Dr. Lyn at July 12, 2007 11:12 AM


I LOVE MISSOURI!

Posted by: MK Author Profile Page at July 12, 2007 11:36 AM


I agree that basic safety standards need to be met.

But it's absurd to claim that every PP is in disrepair and has hazardous conditions. There are going to be anomalies like those clinics in any situation. I was in the wing of a public hospital after being shot in the leg and that place was disgusting. Inner city hospitals are pretty stingy places.

Posted by: Erin at July 12, 2007 11:39 AM


Gee,
With $326,000,000 in profits last year, a mere $2,000,000 seems nominal. They probably make at least that amount on interest every month.

This is another example of how PP is only out for money to fill their own pockets. Obviously they don't care about patient saftety.
But what's new?

I guess if the state mandated a new retail space be added to their facility so PP could sell their cheap crap junk jewelry and scented candles they would be on board.

Posted by: Sandy at July 12, 2007 12:48 PM


There's the good ol' Jill smarminess and missrepresentation we all know and love to make fun of...

FYI to the ignorant... Dentists are specifically excluded from the ASC regulations. Podiatrists do not have to meet these regulations unless they want a particular clinic/establishment to be liscenced to perform surgery. Licensing is about procedures performed, not area of expertise.

The required changes, in order to comply with the regulations, don't really seem to suggest that the clinics were "shoddy." Only that they're not built like a hospital.

Finaly, the bill redefines ambulatory surgical center to include centers which do 5 or more abortions per month now including "induced abortions." The Kansas City clinic does not actually do any surgical procedures, they just examine and give pills, however they are now suppose to be staffed and outfitted like a glorified ER.

Mostly, this bill is a gag order banning anyone affiated with abortion from providing any sexual education materials to public schools, and making public schools go with abstinence only education.

the actual bill can be found here

http://www.house.mo.gov/bills071/biltxt/perf/HB1055P.HTM

Posted by: Cameron at July 12, 2007 12:50 PM


2 million? Is that all? hmm....

Posted by: Rosie at July 12, 2007 1:03 PM


Erin, you were shot in the leg? You poor thing! Didn't a ton of Hollywood celebs. just have a fundraiser for PP? Well, here ya go. I personally think that all of them could have donated that money to a Pregnancy Crisis center. I just never could understand how all of these wealthy women could have fundraisers for such a heinous cause. They could all afford to adopt children.

Posted by: Heather4life at July 12, 2007 3:49 PM


Ah, going with the misinformation again, Jill?

If the primary cost is *remodeling* a clinic, then that tells you that these regulations don't have much to do with whether an abortion clinic is *safe.*

For example: ambulatory surgical centers have certain restrictions on hallway size and doorway size -- so that you can get a person on a stretcher into the operating room, and, were there a fire, get them out. But if your clinic just does a couple of things (e.g. counseling, offering medication abortions, and physical checkups, like one of the clinics being discussed), it can be run out of a building that doesn't accommodate wide hospital stretchers. The hallway-width requirements, then, require massive remodeling just to continue operations.

The point? If a clinic needs to be *remodeled*, then that's a statement of its *architectural* qualities -- not its cleanliness or so.

The abortion clinics in Missouri that we're discussing have been held to the same standards as normal medical centers--just not those centers which do surgery. To suggest that a clinic which only offers medication abortions counts as an "ambulatory surgical center" and should be regulated as one is disingenuous, dishonest, and underhanded.

Because lets face it: this legislation isn't about making abortion clinics safer. It's about finding a way to put unnecessary costs on Planned Parenthood, as a manner of imposing your religious beliefs against abortion upon them.

Welcome to America, where state lawmakers habitually forget that the Bill of Rights was written for a reason...

Posted by: Chris Drost at July 12, 2007 5:02 PM


Where are the issues of clinic regulations and abortion addressed in the Bill of Rights?

Posted by: Mary at July 12, 2007 5:11 PM


Mary, A clinic in my state closed approximately 2 years ago. The abortionist didn't have any emergency transfer agreements with any surrounding hospitals. He botched an abortion on a 30 year old obese patient. In a panic, he called 911. In the call he screams to the dispatcher, "I can't stop her bleeding!" "I cannot see what I'm doing, and I want her OUT of my clinic NOW!" A state investigation followed, and Dr. Ruddock's clinic was closed. The nursing staff wasn't even recording vital signs prior to the abortion procedures. This clinic was performing PBA's. No wonder women are dying in these places.

Posted by: Heather4life at July 12, 2007 5:21 PM


Where were NOW and NARAL? Beats the heck out of me. The only time they rear their ugly heads is when abortion rights are threatened. Keep abortion safe, legal, and rare? I think not. It is legal, but it shouldn't be. Rare? Not with 4000 abortions being performed every day. Safe? Absolutely not!

Posted by: Heather4life at July 12, 2007 5:27 PM


Heather4life,

Where else but in an abortion clinic would this kind of practice be tolerated? You're right Heather, where is NARAL and NOW? Wouldn't they be the first to demand only the highest standards of patient care in abortion clinics?

Chris Drost,

I'm still waiting to hear where clinic regulations and abortion are mentioned in the Bill of Rights, or for that matter, what any of this has to do with the Bill of Rights.

Posted by: Mary at July 12, 2007 8:56 PM


Say what you like about the Bill of Rights, but Chris Drost is absolutely correct when he writes: "this legislation isn't about making abortion clinics safer. It's about finding a way to put unnecessary costs on Planned Parenthood, as a manner of imposing your religious beliefs against abortion upon them."

Posted by: SoMG at July 12, 2007 10:20 PM


Well Smaug,

I'm not even going to disagree with you because you are absolutely correct. The object is most definitely to close as many clincs as we can. I think this is sheer genius myself.

And it's no different than you trying to save money by cutting corners. Your goal is to open as many clinics as you can and you'll do whatever you can to see that it's done cheaply...

You cheat and lie to open clinics...we go through the back door to close them.

You try to find a way to kill babies. We try to find a way to save them.

I can live with our choices. Can you?

Posted by: MK Author Profile Page at July 12, 2007 11:06 PM


Amen MK and Heather,

I'm glad Missouri did this, however, no amount of remodeling or money can make these filty places clean. They will always be dirty and disgusting.

Posted by: jasper at July 12, 2007 11:29 PM


SoMG,

I do believe you are being baited on the "Hot Water..." post.

You kind of look like a wimp for not taking up their challenge. But I give you the benefit of the doubt and accept that you just haven't checked that post in awhile.

Anyway, the gloves have been thrown down, and the duel awaits...your move.

Posted by: MK Author Profile Page at July 12, 2007 11:34 PM


wow... all this talk about width of doorways and junk.. i just wish the free clinic i went to even LOOKED sanitary. i mean hell, you go there for a checkup and you wipe yourself down with hand sanitizer after because if you didnt have anything when you got there you sure as hell caught something nasty in the waiting room. im pretty sure those tongue depressors are pre-used and even though its non-communicable, im pretty sure you spend enough time there it would give you cancer.

Posted by: michael at July 13, 2007 12:14 AM


Mary, my best guess is that it would interfere with their political agenda, as you have so truthfully stated so many times before.

Posted by: Heather4life at July 13, 2007 12:39 AM


I am curious where Christina got David Grimes' name from. (He's on her list of good abortionists.)

Posted by: SoMG at July 13, 2007 4:03 AM


SOMG,

I said nothing at all about the Bill of Rights. Chris Drost did and I'm waiting to hear what the connection is.

Michael,

Did you or anyone report this free clinic to the Health Dept? Who was running it? Some of these "free clinics" have been nothing more than storefront jobs set up by unqualified people who think they're doing people a favor. I've seen and heard of a few of these.

Posted by: Mary at July 13, 2007 7:50 AM


That's a fitting last name for an abortionist- GRIMES. LOL!

Posted by: Heather4life at July 13, 2007 9:37 AM


Jill, terrific article! You were right on the money with this one.

Posted by: Bethany at July 13, 2007 5:30 PM