Today's abortion Nazis and their selective breeding

nazi.jpg
I linked to this story last week. Didn't know the details. And the Vatican is absolutely right. If you don't think so, explain.

From the Herald Sun, today:

A botched abortion of a fetus instead of its Down syndrome twin has prompted the Vatican to compare abortion to the Nazis' selective breeding practices....
Italy was embroiled in a bitter ethical dispute yesterday after it emerged that a surgeon had accidentally terminated the wrong fetus while trying to abort its Down syndrome twin.

The operation on a 38-year-old woman 18 weeks into her pregnancy was performed at the San Paolo hospital in Milan in June but has only just come to light.

The fetus who had Down syndrome was also subsequently aborted.

Weighing into the controversy, the Vatican said aborting a Down syndrome child was the result of a culture of perfection resembling Nazi eugenics....

The gynaecologist who performed the Milan abortion, said the woman, who has not been named, requested the abortion after an amniocentesis test.

The doctor, Prof Anna Maria Marconi, said her conscience was clear.

She said the identical fetuses had moved in the womb between the last scan and the operation.

Hospital authorities backed Prof Marconi, calling the botched abortion a "misfortune".

The mother, who has a small son, said that her life had been ruined.

She told Corriere della Sera: "Neither my husband nor I can sleep at night."...

Her husband said they were truly desperate over the terrible mistake and were consulting lawyers....

The Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano said: "No one has the right to suppress another life and take the place of God for any motive whatever."

The newspaper said selective abortion amounted to eugenics that stemmed from a culture of perfection....

The mistaken abortion was the latest error to prompt debate about the standards of Italy's hospitals as well as its abortion law.

In March, a fetus aborted in the 22nd week of pregnancy at a Florence hospital because of suspected deformities was found to be physically sound.

t4.jpgCirca 1938, this poster reads: "60,000 Reichsmarks is what this person suffering from hereditary defects costs the community during his lifetime. Fellow German, that is your money, too," according to Wikipedia.

It promoted the Nazi T4 program, first a voluntary then forced euthanasia program targeting the mentally and physically disabled. The gas chambers at Tiergartenstrasse 4, the villa in Berlin where this eugenics program was carried out, became models for the Jewish death camps.

Death camps. Pro-aborts hate it when we call abortion mills death camps.


Comments:

*sigh* No one is forcing or even SUGGESTING to any pregnant woman that she should abort a handicapped fetus. It's an option. With a surgical procedure comes a risk. It's sad, yes, but I'm sure that the woman can concieve again. The woman decided to have the procedure. Unless there is obvious proof of some kind of malpractice or reckless neglect, there is no reason for the doctor to be blamed. I'm sure she feels bad enough as it is.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 9:05 AM


Of course they hate when we call abortion clinics death camps. That's harder to rationalize. Just like calling it a fetus instead of a baby saves them from facing the truth. Just like calling it "choice" instead of extermination saves them from facing the truth. Just like our posters are hated because they make them face the truth. Just like calling abortionists, "doctors" keeps them from facing the truth. Just like throwing in pregnancy tests as a service to skew the statistics on what percentage of Planned Parenthoods services are abortion keeps them from facing the truth. Just like denying PAS exists keeps them from facing the truth. Just like saying they didn't consent to pregnancy but did consent to sex keeps them from facing the truth. Just like not looking at the uncomfortable videos, pictures and articles we post keeps them from looking at the truth. Just like comparing dentist offices to abortion clinics keeps them from facing the truth. Just like clinging to the coat hanger myth keeps them from facing the truth. Just like clinging to the falsified numbers of "back alley" abortions keeps them from facing the truth. Just like claiming a woman is 10 times more likely to die in childbirth than from having an abortion even when Val has clearly shown that this is a lie, keeps them from facing the truth....

I could go on, but it would be pointless. They see no evil, hear no evil and speak nothing but evil...

The truth is they have been played like fiddles but don't want to see it, because their entire worlds will be rocked. So they cling to the lies, and misconceptions, and illogical arguments and keep sinking deeper and deeper in the mire...

Wake up people. The alarm is going off and you've hit snooze one too many times!

Posted by: mk at August 30, 2007 9:07 AM


Erin,

I'm sure she feels bad enough as it is.

The doctor, Prof Anna Maria Marconi, said her conscience was clear.

Face the truth, Erin.

Posted by: mk at August 30, 2007 9:08 AM


A conscience being clear doesn't mean someone doesn't feel bad. She followed correct medical practice to a tee, something went inherently wrong. It is not her fault. I have a clear conscience on a lot of things that I feel bad about. They're different issues. Guilt and feeling bad are different.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 9:13 AM


No one is forcing or even SUGGESTING to any pregnant woman that she should abort a handicapped fetus.

Erin- there is immense societal pressure to abort the handicapped! Those that don't are accused of draining resources and "forcing the child to endure pain and suffering." There is a duty to abort any child that isn't "perfect" and even a duty to abort a "perfect" child is the circumstances of the parents aren't ideal (mother in poverty, for instance).

It's sad, yes, but I'm sure that the woman can concieve again.

First of all, why is it sad? This was the equivilent of a apendectomy in your eyes, right? Secondly, if someone were to kill you when you were a baby, I doubt your mother would have shrugged her shoulders and said, "Oh well, I'm sure I can concieve again." Your mother would have lost Erin. You, Erin, would have lost your life. Nothing can replace Erin. Likewise, that baby who was killed- no one can replace him/her. People are unique and once they die, they are gone. This is why death is so hard to accept.

Unless there is obvious proof of some kind of malpractice or reckless neglect, there is no reason for the doctor to be blamed.

Well, killing a disabled baby and killing a non-handicapped baby are equally evil (if not more so, because the more vulverable deserves extra protection). I don't blame the doctor for killing the baby that the parents wanted to keep, but killing babies, period. If anything, targeting the disabled for destruction makes that doctor even more of a monster.

I'm sure she feels bad enough as it is.

Why should she feel bad, Erin? It's not like she killed an innocent baby, right?

Posted by: Jacqueline at August 30, 2007 9:31 AM


Interesting how "distraught" that their downs syndrome baby wasn't the one killed. What does this say about our society? Unless I read this wrong and they were distraught on the decision they made in the first place.

You know, part of the reason I switched sides on this issue is the confrontation of the pro-choice semantics and philosophy to the reality of what abortion is in our society. I think this is a good example.

As a side note, the older the woman having the child, the more likely she is to produce a down's syndrome kid. Anybody like to add thoughts to this statement?

Posted by: prettyinpink at August 30, 2007 9:43 AM


What are pro-aborts saying when the killing of a genetically perfect child is a horrible tragedy and the killing of a disabled child is a non-issue?

They're implying:

1. Genetically perfect unborn children have more value than disabled ones.

2. Perfect unborn children have some value, or the loss of this perfect child wouldn't be newsworthy.

So make up your mind, pro-aborts! Are you eugenic bigots or not? And if so, shouldn't we extend some protection to those "perfect" babies we need to populate our brave new world?


This raises another issue:
I ask you, what's worse? Throwing a healthy man into the ocean to drown or throwing a quadraplegic man into the ocean to drown? Throwing a adult in the ocean to drown, or throwing an infant?

While they're all equally horrendous, I, personally, have a greater level of disgust for those that would prey upon the weak and defenseless. To be cliche: Pick on some one your own size!

Those that are weak are entitled to our care and protection- their weakness is not a license to exploit and destroy them. I often hear this from women, "But this baby can't even survive without me! So it's okay to abort it." when I should be hearing, "This baby can't even survive without me! That means I better take good care of her, because she has no one else."

Posted by: Jacqueline at August 30, 2007 9:45 AM


*sigh* Okay...here we go. CDC. Unbiased source. Direct quotes.

"In 1972, 24 women died from causes known to be associated with legal abortions and 39 died as a result of known illegal abortions."

"Overall, abortion ratios and abortion rates have declined over time"

"In the 41 areas for which race was adequately reported, approximately 55% of women who obtained legal induced abortions were known to be white, 35% were black, and 7% were of other races; for 3% of the women, race was unknown."

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5212a1.htm


"The highest percentages of reported abortions were for women who were unmarried (82%), white (55%), and aged

"Overall, the annual number of legal induced abortions in the United States increased gradually from 1973 until it peaked in 1990, and it generally declined thereafter"

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5407a1.htm

"Since 1982, maternal mortality has not declined"

"black infants are more than twice as likely to die as white infants"

"the United States has higher maternal and infant mortality rates than other developed countries"

http://www.jstor.org/view/00987921/ap010004/01a00310/0?frame=noframe&userID=83609949@gsu.edu/01cce440610050e6450&dpi=3&config=jstor

From the JAMA:

"As determined by the Center for Disease Control's epidemiologic surveillance of abortion mortality, the death-to-case rate for legal abortion in the United States for the three years 1972 to 1974 was 3.9/100,000 procedures. This mortality compares favorably with that from other commonly performed surgical procedures." (That's .000039%, according to my handy dandy calculator)

http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/237/5/452

"The risk of death from complications of pregnancy has decreased approximately 99% during the twentieth century, from approximately 850 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births in 1900 to 7.5 in 1982. However, since 1982, no further decrease has occurred in maternal mortality in the United States. In addition, racial disparity in pregnancy-related mortality ratios persists; since 1940, mortality ratios among blacks have been at least three to four times higher than those for whites." (My calculator says that that is .000075%)

Whew!

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 9:47 AM


Hey, Jacqueline, do you know how much it costs to raise a handicapped child, and how low a rate of adoption they have?

I'm not suggesting that it's 'right' to abort a child based on their handicaps, but if you're a first time mother preparing to have a child for the first time, that throws a massive amount of new expendatures you never figured into the equation.

MK- I have a super-long post of linkage coming once Jill approves it.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 9:50 AM


As a side note, the older the woman having the child, the more likely she is to produce a down's syndrome kid. Anybody like to add thoughts to this statement?

Lauren has written at length about how women are lied to that they can have kids on their terms- "Sure! Finish college, build a career for 15-20 years and then you can have babies" only to discover that they are now infertile or their biological clock is breaking down.

So these women turn to in-vitro, hormones, amnios and abortions to make sure they have the kind of child they want- and we don't expect this sort of thing to happen? In fact, many couple have multiples "selectively reduced" when the $25,000+ baby-making venture gives them more children than they desire to care for. So they artificially create babies and artifically destroy them at will. No wonder children have no value- they are yours to make and kill at your whim!

And finally, those that do concieve and give birth to children with Downs are the rarity- almost guarenteeing that research/resources won't be available to help these people.

Posted by: Jacqueline at August 30, 2007 9:54 AM


Jacque! I've been running around like a chicken with my head and multiple extremities cut off! I'm home now though...call me!


Erin says "No one is forcing or even SUGGESTING to any pregnant woman that she should abort a handicapped fetus"

Erin, I have a "handicapped" son (who actually is no where near as handicapped as they thought he would be. In reality, he's just tiny). Anyways, when I was pregnant with him I was told MANY times by MANY people to abort. My triplescreen was abnormal, which suggests spinal bifida or DS. I was given "case studies" of adults living with the disorders who hated their lives.

When my water broke at 22 weeks, I was told that I should let "nature take it's course". Thankfully, I had a wonderful doctor (not the PP spokeswoman who was my high-risk doc) who was willing to transfer me to a higher level hospital to stop labor.

After my son was born, I was told by several people that he was a drain on the system and that I was irresponsible for letting him live. Even now I have an intense guilt for the fact that we "drain the system". Allowing a "not perfect" child to live is going to incrue alot of critism.

Even after birth and within the christian community, you will hear things like "Don't you think it's time to pray for God's will in the matter?" This is code for "don't you think it's time to stop the surgery and pull the plugs?"

People most definitely "suggest" you abort disabled children. When it is your doctor doing the "suggesting" it becomes very similar to "forcing". I hope you never have to go through the pain of being told that your child is a drain on society and would be better off dead.

Posted by: lauren at August 30, 2007 9:55 AM


Jacqueline, I wouldn't have care. I wouldn't have had the consciousness to care. Here's an interesting little point- people, generally couples, want to have kids for selfish reasons. They WANT the kids. They COVET children. Sounds like a no-no to me.

Also, I was adopted. My birth mother probably would have been pretty stoked to have a miscarriage at the time. She was 16, I think. I'm Irish and from Wisconsin, so I think she was probably Catholic. Anyhow.

It's sad because she went in for a surgical procedure and something went wrong. There are a few cases a year when a colonoscopy goes wrong and a person's intestine is punctured. Sometimes people have severe reactions to anesthesia. It's surgical risk. When things go wrong, it's too bad. But it does happen.

Finally, she probably feels bad because a patient under her care had something go wrong. It may not be her fault, but the doctor still remains connected with the patient and empathizes with her. If chemo doesn't work on a cancer patient, should their oncologist feel guilty? If a person has a completely unanticipated reaction to a general anesthetic, should the anesthesiologist feel guilty?

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 9:57 AM


Jacqueline- my mother tried from the age of 25 to concieve her own children. She wanted them desperately. She used IVF, anything she could try. I guess my mother is a grand scale baby killer, huh?

Also, Lauren, I have worked with Special Education programs for years. Since the time I was 12 I worked with a program called Great Beginnings with SNP, where I helped supervise handicapped children under the age of three. In middle school I also worked with the other special needs kids my age for one of my exploratories. No one can tell me that I don't know the kind of life that they go through- or the amount of money that they can cost. I would never suggest that they aren't worth just as much as anyone else. But people who deny that taking care of a moderately or severely disabled child is a completely different type of parenting is lying to themselves.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 10:03 AM


PIP,

The parents weren't distraught over the DS child...you'll note that they subsequently aborted that baby too...

I think the whole idea of women "waiting" to conceive until later in life fits right into the "want it all" mindset. There is nothing inherently wrong with having children later in life, heck I had one at forty and another at forty two. It's the idea that you wait to begin a family until your late thirties and then act surprised that things go wrong. I'm all for women having babies later, provided they understand AND ACCEPT the risks and the CHILD no matter what the circumstances.

What I hate is the idea of "being owed" a perfectly healthy child. This feeling of indenture that irks me. A child is a gift, not an object. You don't deserve one and you don't automatically get one just because you want one.

Where did this idea of ownership come from?

Posted by: mk at August 30, 2007 10:13 AM


Hey, Jacqueline, do you know how much it costs to raise a handicapped child, and how low a rate of adoption they have?

My response to this can be easily summed up with a hearty, "So the hell what!?!?" But I'll respond in detail:

Do you hear yourself, Erin? So normal children are worth the money they incur and Down's children are not? So people are only worth a certain amount of expense and people that require more money to care for them are better off dead? By your philosophy, you better never develop a disability and require additional care! In that case, would you suggest we dismember you or poison you and save ourselves the expense? Not just you, how about your siblings, parents, friends? I doubt it. But you'll use this as a rationale to kill disabled infants.

I worked in adoption in 2003 and we had two beautiful, healthy babies in foster care while hundreds of couples still waited for a child. Why was that? Because those couples were white and those babies were black (and apparently those couples only had love to give if the children looked like them or could be passed off as "their own").

I ask you, though- Are those black babies worth less as human beings because they are more difficult to place (due to the prejudices of others)? Are those beautiful little girls better off in pieces in a garbage disposal? I would argue the same for Down's children, although that's no so much the case since agencies exist solely for the placement of Down Syndrome children and currently there are more waiting families than their are adoptable children with Down's.

Human beings are of equal worth: regardless of gender, race, age or ability. To think otherwise is the very definition of bigotry.

Posted by: Jacqueline at August 30, 2007 10:14 AM


"my mother tried from the age of 25 to concieve her own children. She wanted them desperately. She used IVF, anything she could try. I guess my mother is a grand scale baby killer, huh?"

@Erin: Hey! My mom's a grand-scale baby-killer too! They should get together and have coffee sometime!

*eyeroll*

And a ::headdesk:: to the original post. What stupid parents, I hope they are never able to conceive again.

Posted by: Rae at August 30, 2007 10:19 AM


Jacqueline- So the hell what? If you can't afford the medical costs that a baby with a disability may need, it will probably die. Harsh reality. Hospitals don't run a charity service. They'll make it comfortable, but you can't afford the expensive surgery or the expensive drugs it takes to keep your child alive, it will die. Social services won't keep him or her alive either. They're broke.

Reform the health care system so people who need stuff can get it. Then I'll say, Oh, yeah, there's no inherent difference.

Also, if a couple really wants children that badly, they'll take anything. My kid brother is Korean.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 10:21 AM


And Jacqueline, you should really pay attention to how you guys talk sometime. About you know, human beings. Like Muslims. And homosexuals. And abortionists.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 10:23 AM


Rae and Erin,

I am glad that your mothers' choices resulted in "you"...my world is brighter because of it!

Posted by: mk at August 30, 2007 10:25 AM


Uh, Erin. You don't know what you're talking about. Please don't pretend to. Every child that fits certain criteria is automatically placed on SSI medicaid. For example, every child born weighing less than 1100 grams fits this criteria.

My son has been on SSI medicaid for 2 years and would have been regardless of our salary. In addition, there is SSI payments that are paid depending upon salary to offset the cost of childcare. In the United States at least, there are programs to help children with disability.

Posted by: lauren at August 30, 2007 10:29 AM


Exactly. Payments are made depending on salary. As soon as you try to improve your situation and make it out of that little bracket, you are on your own(that's how the welfare trap works too :-/). Maybe you haven't read the kind of things I have, but if you deny that people die everyday because they can't afford the medical care that they need to survive, you're blind.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 10:32 AM


Oh, and one more thing, Erin. Many hospitals *are* charaties. The largest children's hospital in our area, cooks childrens, donates millions of dollars of service every year. The Scotish Rite hospital in Dallas doesn't charge patients anything for its services.

Posted by: lauren at August 30, 2007 10:32 AM


I went to Scottish Rite when I was little once. They charged my parents. A LOT.

LOL. It COOKS CHILDREN?????

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 10:34 AM


PrettyInPink: "As a side note, the older the woman having the child, the more likely she is to produce a down's syndrome kid. Anybody like to add thoughts to this statement?"

Yeah, so what's your point? Please be respectful to individuals with Down syndrome. "Down's kid" is disrespectful. I suggest "a child with Down syndrome." They aren't "produced," they are conceived.

Erin: "Hey, Jacqueline, do you know how much it costs to raise a handicapped child, and how low a rate of adoption they have?"

Erin, I know. I am a mother of a child with Down syndrome. I know of people who cost far more than she does. What's your point? My daughter has brought unexpectd joy into my life. I would have thought I wouldn't want a child with Down syndrome. Oh, was I wrong! It has taught me that we don't always know it all.

BTW, there is a waitng list to adopt children with Down syndrome. If only the mothers wouldn't abort them.

This story about these two innocent babies sickens me. The mother only feels bad about aborting the non-DS baby; not the one with DS. She has no idea of the gifts she threw away (both of them).

Posted by: Ellie at August 30, 2007 10:35 AM


Erin, payments that go above and beyond medical care are dependant on salary, yes. I agree that it is foolish to discourage working by cutting payments, but doing so will not remove therapy or medical care from your child. Both are provided regardless of income.

Posted by: lauren at August 30, 2007 10:36 AM


We kill babies when we don't want them and we kill babies when we want them more than anything (IVF is the killing dozens of your own children in the hopes of birthing one). Regardless of the motives, those babies are equally dead.

I want children. I want a quiver full of them. Desiring to have, love and care for children is a beautiful thing. And having worked in adoption I can tell you the pain I see in infertile couples. Not being able to have biological children is a substantial loss on so many levels, but there are plenty of children who were abused, neglected, or orphaned that are in need of love and care- so my sympathy grows thin when these couples only want babies "on their terms" and only have a home for babies that are as close to their ethnicity as possible.

So wanting and coveting children is a good thing, only it has its limits: killing children (IVF, abortion) and stealing children (Madonna, Angelina Jolie).

And Erin, I don't know how old you are- but saying your birthmother would have preferred you dead over placing you for adoption is a horrible assumption to make of someone, especially your mother. That's very disrespectful to her and women who place for adoption. Choosing not to parent for whatever reason and maliciously wishing death on your own child are not the same thing. Show a little respect for the woman that carried and birthed you.

Posted by: Jacqueline at August 30, 2007 10:37 AM


Erin-
http://www.tsrhc.org/

There is no charge to patient families for treatment, and admission is open to Texas children from birth to 18 years of age.

They obviously don't anymore.

Posted by: lauren at August 30, 2007 10:39 AM


Ellie, I give you so much credit! You are so special. I'll bet your child brings you so much joy.

Posted by: Heather at August 30, 2007 10:40 AM


Ellie- I worked with Down Syndrome children. They're wonderful. I knew a girl in middle school with DS who tried to convince everyone that she was dating Mitch from Baywatch. Dana was such a sweetheart.

Lauren- Have you ever been denied a treatment that you needed because you could not afford it? I personally know two people who were rejected from hospitals for things that they needed. One needed a transplant. The other couldn't afford to continue their cancer therapy. The woman who couldn't afford her cancer treatment died within 6 months of the end of the treatment. Her daughter was left motherless AND without any funds to use at college. This is a BRILLIANT girl who could have gotten in anywhere she wanted. It happens.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 10:42 AM


With my last pregnancy, I was taking some medication. Sorry. I'm going to get blunt here. This bit$h of a doctor told me that d/t the medication, my child could be born with a cleft palate. She assured me that I could abort the pregnancy. I wanted a new doctor immediatly, and I got one. I gave her the dagger dart eyes. She took the hint.

Posted by: Heather at August 30, 2007 10:44 AM


Erin, grow up.

http://www.cookchildrens.org/site.asp?com=D4DF82657E58415BA06DA5697DC13CB0&spid=28F20A2145DA4F35AAC006257279AA60

Charity: To the extent that our resources permit, we will not refuse necessary or needed care to any children residing in the region we serve because of their parentsĺ inability to pay.


And yes, Erin, I know that people die all the time due to hospitals axing the funds. Ask Jacque, she probably knows more about that particular problem than anyone.

However, I would argue that it is easier for a child born disabled to a relatively poor family to get government assistance than a healthy child born to the same family.

Posted by: lauren at August 30, 2007 10:44 AM


Heather, thank you. I thank God every day for the privilege of being her mother. It is very special indeed to have a child like her. Most women who find out their baby has DS are very sad. But if they keep them, they come to find out that they have really been blessed. Unfortunately it is difficult to see beyond that when you first find out. They read things like this tragic story and think there must be something terribly wrong with it. Most mothers do come to appreciate the special gift they've been given.

Posted by: Ellie at August 30, 2007 10:46 AM


Heather, thank you. I thank God every day for the privilege of being her mother. It is very special indeed to have a child like her. Most women who find out their baby has DS are very sad. But if they keep them, they come to find out that they have really been blessed. Unfortunately it is difficult to see beyond that when you first find out. They read things like this tragic story and think there must be something terribly wrong with it. Most mothers do come to appreciate the special gift they've been given.

Posted by: Ellie at August 30, 2007 10:46 AM


Jacqueline- I do not know my birth mother. I am not in any way obligated to respect her. Do I wish I were dead now? Of course not. I'm just saying that then I wouldn't have cared. Respect for me is something that has to be earned. If I ever meet my birth mother and find her to be a decent human being, of course I will respect her. My mom has my respect because she has raised me for 19 years and earned it. Being an incubator just doesn't make me respect someone. If a pregnant lady is a jerk to me I'm not going to respect her just because she's pregnant.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 10:48 AM


Ellie-

I apologize for my lack of "people first" language. A child with down syndrome is not a "down's syndrome child." It's a child first. Thanks for the reminder.

Oh Erin, apparently you don't know me and my research and lobby work on behalf of people denied care because of an illness of a disability. I am currently doing doctoral research to overturn the Texas Futile Care Law, so that disabled people of all ages get the care they require. The difference between you and me is that I am trying to change this evil, not using this evil to justify additional evil (killing the disabled unborn). So we should kill the handcapped before birth so that they aren't killed after birth by lack of health care? I prefer changing the system over killing the children, but hey, that's just me.

And by the way, you're wrong. It's a fight to get disabled kids care but it's possible. Only in states like Texas that will deny care and inhibit in-state transfers do we actually encounter the situations you speak of, and even then, it's a rarity. Daniel Cullen and Emilio Gonzales are the only two cases I can think of, and both of which were won by an out-of-state transfer or a court injunction which allowed time for Emilio to die a natural death.

One more thing- there will be people that develop disabilities after birth. Would you recommend killing them for all the reasons you use to justify killing the unborn? Explain that double standard for me, will you?

Posted by: Jacqueline at August 30, 2007 10:49 AM


Lauren- that was poorly worded. Look at it. It says cooks childrens. Cooks Children's, or the like, or better use of commas, and you wouldn't have gotten my snarky comment.

I thought it was funny.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 10:51 AM


Ellie, this same witch of a doctor assured me that a DS baby could be aborted. I really got bad vibes from her. She lacked compassion. Guess who had so much more?? A male gyn. He was heaven sent. He told me not to worry about the cleft palate problem. It did not happen, but had it, surgery would have corrected it. He also weaned me off of the medication, and assured me that there was a very slim chance of this happening.

Posted by: Heather at August 30, 2007 10:52 AM


Elli, I think so often (as was the case with my doctors) doctors deliver news of the possibility of DS as though it is THE WORST THING EVER. Because almost all DS children are aborted, the parents don't really have any experience with a child with DS and just assume the worst.

I was really happy to read that many parents of children w/ DS are making themselves availible to parents who are dealing with the diagnosis.

Posted by: lauren at August 30, 2007 10:53 AM


Erin, think of Dana then. Think of what she added to the world. Imagine a world without people like her. This is what it is coming to because of earlier testing. Already 9 out of 10 that are diagnosed are aborted. And this is without the earlier testing. Unfortunately, "choice" for any reason leads to "choice" for specific reasons, which leads to targeting the handicapped. What kind of message does that send to people like Dana?

Posted by: Ellie at August 30, 2007 10:53 AM


I also had to wonder how many abortions she had performed.

Posted by: Heather at August 30, 2007 10:54 AM


Erin, yeah real funny...

Posted by: lauren at August 30, 2007 10:54 AM


Erin,

Women are not incubators and you deserve to be smacked for your disrepect.

Posted by: Jacqueline at August 30, 2007 10:58 AM


On a happier note- LAUREN! It's LAUREN!

Lauren is my BFF! We even have bracelets to prove it.

Posted by: Jacqueline at August 30, 2007 11:00 AM


Jacqueline- That sounds like wonderful work!

I don't consider it a double standard- I consider it an option. Keep in mind that as long as it is within a reasonable period of time(before viability) I see no real difference in aborting a handicapped fetus or a regular fetus. I do think that things need to change. If given the choice between dying a horrible death in the world because no one will give me the types of medicine I need, etc, etc, or dying in the womb before my brain can understand pain or the like, I'd take the womb. I've said several times, it's not like I have anything 'against' children with disabilities. I have worked with them for several years. I get angry when I see the problems with out system that people consistently ignore- that ends in complications or deaths that are completely unjustified. I'm not for more abortions in the case of fetii with handicaps- I'm for less suffering when they are born. And of course I would never say we should kill people if they became disabled later in life. I may at some point go blind(no time soon though, yay, experimental treatment). But I sure don't want anyone to whack me. And that's the point. I don't want someone to kill me. A fetus can't want to live or want to die. It's brain isn't functioning until mid-second-trimester. Am I being clear? I feel a bit jumbly this morning.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 11:00 AM


*shrugs* Pro-lifers tend to treat them that way. Maybe you guys are rubbing off on me.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 11:02 AM


Erin, my point in all of this was that you made an incredibly false claim that women are never told to abort children with disabilties. We are. By those beakons of "choice" who claim to respect whatever choice a woman makes and blah blah blah.

The bottom line with abortion in terms of disability, is that no one is pro-choice. The people who matter are all either pro-abortion or pro-life. If you "choose" poorly, you will be berated for your "choice" by the very people who are supposed to support you. Anyone who nominally supports abortion becomes a vocal proponant once an abnormal result rolls in. I know because I have lived it. It's so bad even the NYT acknowledges it. It is offensive for you to claim that pressure to abort is a figment of our imagination.

Posted by: lauren at August 30, 2007 11:10 AM


No, Erin it is the pro-choice crowd who treats women like incubators. They have so marginalized motherhood that homemakers are a ridiculed characature and womanhood is something to be subverted.

Talk of "forced incubation" and "walking incubators" is quite hurtful to someone unable to carry to term. It belittles something that so many women cry for years over not being able to achieve. How stupid and disfunctional a woman must be in order to fail at the most base and demeaning thing a woman may go through.

The pro-choice crowd has degraded motherhood and women, not the pro-life.

Posted by: lauren at August 30, 2007 11:16 AM


Lauren, that's blatantly stupid. I can't think of a SINGLE choicer I know that would berate someone for not aborting a fetus that was disabled.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 11:18 AM


Lifers expect women to be mothers, even if they don't want to. They place the value of a fetus over the rights of the mother to control her own body. If you want to have a kid, you should be able to. If you don't you shouldn't be forced to. You cheapen motherhood by forcing it upon people who don't want it.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 11:21 AM


"Yeah, so what's your point? Please be respectful to individuals with Down syndrome. "Down's kid" is disrespectful. I suggest "a child with Down syndrome." They aren't "produced," they are conceived."


I'm not trying to be disrespectful or be leading. Just threw a statistic and asked what people thought about it...


How is saying "Down's syndrome kid" disrespectful by the way? Or the word produce? I can't call a child a kid? I can't call conceiving producing? I do realize it's a sensitive subject, as this always is, but the language should be the same without being disprespectful. I mean, I call healthy children kids. Why not DS children? Produce comes out of "reproduce" and is just a synonym for conceive, have, give birth to. How in the world is that disprespectful?

I know a lot of people, myself included, with health problems.

By the way, my mom had me, after my brother. She produced another kid shortly thereafter. We found out (as kids) that my brother and I are epileptic.
Continuing, epilepsy has been costly on the expenses too, but insurance luckily helps us out a lot. I know a lot of kids with disabilities who also recieve federal aid, and received it the minute they were born..

btw, Sorry, I didn't want to make a big deal out of this, but I honestly don't feel I was politically incorrect, unless standards have raised and I just wasn't aware of it.

Posted by: prettyinpink at August 30, 2007 11:44 AM


Lauren,

I find it sad that nowadays it makes it hard for people to be homemakers. I know a lot of women who want to, but the way society is set up nowadays, both parents often need to work full time jobs to support their household.
When parents are forced into such a situation, it often makes it hard for adults to spend a lot of time with their children. I wish that there were enough benefits that being a stay at home mom was an easier career choice to make.

Posted by: prettyinpink at August 30, 2007 11:47 AM


Oh,I see Erin, I suppose I just imagined being told that my son was a drain on society and that I was irresponsible to bring him into the world.

Dr. Dan Brock of the National Institutes of Health suggested that blind and severely disabled children should be aborted for the good of society.

But, you're right Erin, I'm stupid.

Posted by: lauren at August 30, 2007 11:48 AM


No, Erin. No evil government busibody is "making" women get pregnant. Women make the choice to engage in sexual reproduction and then are shocked *shocked* when they reproduce.

We aren't running around injecting zygotes into unsuspecting women.

Posted by: lauren at August 30, 2007 11:52 AM


Therefore you're justified in assuming that all choicers think like that. Anyone else? Rae? Hal? Anyone else think that lauren's kid is a drain on society? Because obviously, we're supposed to.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 11:52 AM


*headdesk* Next time I hear that stupid 'consentto sex=consent to pregnancy' argument, I'm just....grrr. IT IS NOT THE SAME.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 11:54 AM


PIP, it's possible to live on one salary, but not at the standard of living that most american's wish to have. It invovles frugality and used cars. Unless, of course, that one salary is quite high. Generally those types of jobs are taxing on family time as well.


I't is very unfortunate that we no longer live in a time where most people can live on one salary. If you want it badly enough it is possible, but it's definitely "easier" financially, to live on two.

Posted by: lauren at August 30, 2007 11:55 AM


Erin, you have point. Although "kids with Down syndrome" would be more PC than Down's kids. Parent's of children with ds would rather people not use "Down's" as an adjective.

Perhaps I'm a bit more sensitive to the language because I have to live with the prejudice of the world toward people with Down syndrome.

I suppose if you use the word produce instead of conceive for all babies, that's not specifically disrespectful to those with ds.

Posted by: Ellie at August 30, 2007 12:05 PM


Erin, yes honey it is.

You are accepting the risks associated with a behavior.

You're yelling "WAHH consenting to gambling is not consenting to having to pay money when I lose"

Yes, dear, it is. You weighed the percetages, found them to be in your favor, and so engaged in the behavior. However, you did so KNOWING full well of the risk of pregnancy and decided to do it anyways. You accepted the risk. Just because you lose a bet, doesn't mean that you didn't make it.

So yeah, women consented to the possibility of pregnancy. Then they defaul when it's time to pay up.

Posted by: lauren at August 30, 2007 12:06 PM


Sorry, that post was for prettyinpink not erin

Posted by: Ellie at August 30, 2007 12:07 PM


I consent to walk across a very busy city street every day to go to and from class. I know that there is a teeny risk that I may be hit by a car when I cross because Atlanta drivers are all insane. Does that meen I am consenting to maybe get hit by a car if I decide to cross the street anyway?

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 12:07 PM


Heh, thanks, Ellie. I was confused for a minute.

Posted by: Erin at August 30, 2007 12:09 PM


Ellie, I understand. It is a sensitive subject, esp because it hits so close to home for you.

I promise you, I respect children with Down's Syndrome and the parents that raise them tremendously. That's why this article is so sad.

Posted by: prettyinpink at August 30, 2007 12:10 PM


Erin, your accepting the risk.


Although, the function of crossing the street is not to be hit by a car. Not true for sexual reproduction.

It'd be like shooting off a gun, hitting a person, and saying "hey, hey, I know that guns are intended to shoot and wound something, but I just like pulling triggers! I can't be held responsible for my pulling of triggers hurting someone!"

Yes, you can. You weigh the risks, find the odds to be in your favor and shoot away. Even so, you're responsible if someone gets hit by your bullet.

Sorry, Erin. Women know full well that having sex is the way babies are made. Unless you think the stork brought you here wrapped in a little pink blanket, you are responsible for the reproductive outcome of your reproductive act.

Posted by: lauren at August 30, 2007 12:30 PM


Ellie, Barbara Curtis (who has 4 sons with DS, 3 adopted) wrote an interesting blog post when she was attacked for calling her sons "the Downzers." Her main point was that subgrouping kids is a big family thing (she has 12 total), but her kids wondered if PC language wasn't actually more prejudiced:

"I brought this up for family discussion a few days ago and my kids had an interesting take: they thought someone who had such a virulent emotional reaction to this would probably actually be the more prejudiced person because it shows some underlying shame - as if our kids need this kind of propping up by political correctness to be accepted and loved.

Sometimes kids can cut to the quick of a philosophical disagreement, can't they?"

Certainly not accusing you of prejudice against your own child, just food for thought. You can read her whole post here:
http://www.mommylife.net/archives/2007/07/why_i_call_them.html

Posted by: Michelle at August 30, 2007 12:38 PM


"People First" language asserts that people are people first, then their attributes. For example, a person with Down Syndrome is a person with down syndrome, not a "down syndrome person." They are a person first.

Posted by: Jacqueline at August 30, 2007 1:11 PM


PrettyInPink: You're forgiven :-)

Michelle: Thanks for the website. I will read the post. I wouldn't take offense if she had the nickname "Downzers" for her children with DS; it's a family nickname. I don't normally react with a "virulent emotional reaction" as she says in what you quoted. I just think in general, it is better to use the "people first" language as Jacqueline said (Thanks, Jacqueline). Perhaps it's because there is so much negativity in general about DS (like going back for a second abortion when the first one missed), and the name "Down" has such a negative sound that the adjective just sounds so, well, down.

Posted by: Ellie at August 30, 2007 1:48 PM


well, I admit that I don't particularly like the term "Down Syndrome" to begin with, mainly because the man for whom it is named was a racist.

Posted by: Michelle at August 30, 2007 2:05 PM


Er, hit submit too soon. Meant to add "But when people say 'Down Syndrome' they don't have that in mind. Seems to me that a person's heart is more important than subtle and unintended implications arising from word choices that have more to do with grammatical simplicity than prejudice."

Posted by: Michelle at August 30, 2007 2:08 PM


"Seems to me that a person's heart is more important than subtle and unintended implications...."

Michelle, I can't argue with that. The heart is definitely more important. Still, it doesn't hurt to be sensitive to the concern....

Posted by: Ellie at August 30, 2007 2:23 PM


Death camps. Pro-aborts hate it when we call abortion mills death camps.

************
I find lying contemptible and find liars contemptible. If the truth suited the antichoice agenda then they wouldnt find it necessary to lie. That they DO have to lie over and over and over again shows both their lack of integrity and the paucity of their argument.

Posted by: TexasRed at August 30, 2007 2:44 PM


I would never TELL someone to abort for ANY reason. Its her decision to make. If a woman discovers her fetus has a genetic anomalie or congenital defect then I am not going to criticize her for choosing to continue her pregnancy. And Im not going to criticize her if she chooses to NOT continue her pregnancy. She has to decide what she can and cannot cope with. Trying to pretend 'you' are in a better position to decide that FOR her and YOU should be making the decision instead of her when YOU are not the one who will be living with the pregnancy, birth and resultant child is arrogance of the rankest sort.

Posted by: TexasRed at August 30, 2007 2:55 PM


Death camps. Pro-aborts hate it when we call abortion mills death camps.

Don't hate it Jill. Just find it insulting to those that have acutual experience of Nazi death camps and those like my father that had to deal with surviviers, thier experiences, conditions.......unlike you and your fantasies over aborted embryos.
Dad had a deep and meaningful relationship with a former member of a death camp. And you talk to embryos. @@ You are weak minded and silly.

Posted by: Sally at August 30, 2007 8:02 PM


"I find lying contemptible and find liars contemptible. If the truth suited the antichoice agenda then they wouldnt find it necessary to lie. That they DO have to lie over and over and over again shows both their lack of integrity and the paucity of their argument."
Posted by: TexasRed at August 30, 2007 2:44 PM

TR,
Then you must find PP pretty contemptible since they lied over and over again to build their abortion mill in Aurora.

Or do you just hate liars when it doesn't fit your agenda. If you do not find PP contemptible then I guess you just proved yourself to be a liar.

What about Bernard Nathanson, he and his whole crew based legalizing abortion on ALL lies. Do you ever do your homework?? Read up on him and get back to me. I guess like MK stated earlier, you just don't want to face the truth.

"Dad had a deep and meaningful relationship with a former member of a death camp. And you talk to embryos. @@ You are weak minded and silly."
Posted by: Sally at August 30, 2007 8:02 PM

Sally,
PCer's always fall back on the it's just an embryo" Millions of babies are aborted after the 8th week of pregnancy. Babies are murdered well into the 2nd and third trimesters?????? These are not embryos Sally. They are unborn children. Wake up and face the truth.

Posted by: Sandy at August 30, 2007 8:56 PM


"Death camps. Pro-aborts hate it when we call abortion mills death camps."

"Sally: Don't hate it Jill."


..of course you don't hate it Sally the Savage, you'd make a good nazi yourself....Adoft would've been proud of you!

Posted by: jasper at August 30, 2007 9:07 PM


Yeah, we should all stand back and admire pro-life peace and love:

Suit: Site threatens abortion providers

By Mari A. Schaefer
Inquirer Staff Writer

The Justice Department asked a federal judge yesterday to order a Reading man to stop posting violent threats against abortion providers in Philadelphia, Allentown and Reading on an Internet site.
U.S. Attorney Patrick Meehan alleged that John Dunkle, 72, "encouraged his readers to kill a specific clinic physician by shooting her in the head."

In a sworn statement, Mary Blanks, a doctor, said she stopped working at Reading and Philadelphia abortion clinics "out of fear of John Dunkle's threats to my life."

The suit came as a surprise to Dunkle.

When reached by phone yesterday, Dunkle said he was not aware of the lawsuit and he would stop posting the offensive material if asked.

"Oh yeah, if someone tells me to stop," he said. "You are not talking to a hero."

Dunkle, however, said he was not the author of the most heinous postings, which he says were put there by a man he refers to as MPC. "I call him MPC - My Philadelphia Correspondent," Dunkle said. "I told him before all this started if the FBI comes and says who is writing this stuff, I'm not going to hide you."

Dunkle said the man told him to go ahead and display it anyway.

Prosecutors allege the postings violate the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act.

"This type of intimidation and scare tactic, regardless of one's beliefs or religious convictions, simply cannot be condoned," Meehan said in a statement. "Using a public forum, such as the Internet, to incite and instruct people to kill is tantamount to a form of domestic terrorism."

The suit calls for Dunkle to remove the postings from his blog and asks the court to prohibit him from publishing further threats, names, addresses and photographs of health clinic doctors, staff and patients.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact staff writer Mari A. Schaefer at 610-892-9149 or mschaefer@phillynews.com.
Inquirer staff writer John Shiffman contributed to this article.

Posted by: Laura at August 30, 2007 10:20 PM


Erin, 9:50a, said: "Hey, Jacqueline, do you know how much it costs to raise a handicapped child..."

My, my, Erin. What a good Nazi you'd make. Did you read the poster on this post?

"60,000 Reichsmarks is what this person suffering from hereditary defects costs the community during his lifetime. Fellow German, that is your money, too,"

Posted by: Jill Stanek at August 30, 2007 10:31 PM


Laura, the aclu should be all over that.

Knowing nothing of Mr. Dunkle, I'll just leave it at that. If he *is* planning violence,I'm glad he was caught.

Posted by: lauren at August 31, 2007 7:16 AM


60,000 Reichsmarks is what this person suffering from hereditary defects costs the community during his lifetime. Fellow German, that is your money, too,"
Posted by: Jill Stanek at August 30, 2007 10:31 PM

What amazes me, is that the ideals are the exact same as the nazi ideals...and yet most of these people who say things like "You know how much it costs to take care of a handicapped person?" don't even seem to REALIZE what an evil ideal that really is. It puts a price on human life! How scary!

It is so terrifying to think of how slowly and deceitfully, these ideals are brought into society. People don't even see it coming.

Eventually, will we be the next ones on the "non desirables" list?


Posted by: Bethany at August 31, 2007 8:50 AM


Yes,because in modern society, money has no value and there are no poor people. To heck with reality, the PLers can just be happy pretending that everything will work out perfectly fine as long as the woman pops out the baby. Who cares if she has the money to support herself? Or the OB/GYN bills? Or for a midwife? I guess she can always deliver it herself and put it in a dumpster or something. So much better than killing a little fetus!

Money matters. I'd never put a price on a human life personally. Society will and does. Reality. Sorry.

Posted by: Erin at August 31, 2007 10:28 AM


There are couples who are willing to adopt and pay all the woman's medical bills. THAT IS better than "killing a little fetus" as you put it so elegantly.

Posted by: Rosie at August 31, 2007 10:48 AM


Erin,

Your argument would only work if there weren't resources out the @ss to help pregnant women. Maternity homes, Medicaid, CPC's and so on and so forth.

How many women do you know that have starved to death because they didn't fork over the 400 bucks to have an abortion?

Posted by: Jacqueline at August 31, 2007 10:52 AM


Rosie-there are not enough.

Jacqueline- I was on my way to class two days ago. A woman who looked like she hadn't bathed in several days came up to me. She told me that she was 7 months pregnant(and it was obvious) and because of that, the battered women's shelter wouldn't take her. She had a cast on her arm and had just come from Grady's. She couldn't afford to go to the Salvation Army for a few nights- even though it only cost $12 per night.

I gave her $20. Looks like the system sure is taking care of the pregnant ladies, eh?

Posted by: Erin at August 31, 2007 10:56 AM


Wow..how cold society has become. One of my daughters very good friends is a down's child. I think of my daughter not having her very good friend and what she would be missing if Carla would have been aborted. Carla has given us joy and she certainly is unique as are we all. God has a plan for Carla and part of that plan was to enrich our lives. I'm sure of it.

Posted by: jessie at August 31, 2007 11:26 AM


Erin..there is no difference between aborting a 6 month old baby by sucking the brains out or leaving a child in a dumpster or drowning your 6 year old because you are tired of being a parent. The argument is purely geographical...dead human, live human...dead baby live baby...I'll side on life everytime....live baby.

Posted by: jessie at August 31, 2007 11:30 AM


Amen, Jessie!

Posted by: Ellie at August 31, 2007 11:33 AM


Erin, 10:56a, said: "She told me that she was 7 months pregnant(and it was obvious) and because of that, the battered women's shelter wouldn't take her."

You were scammed, Erin. That was an incredible lie.

Not the first one you've been snookered on.

Posted by: Jill Stanek at August 31, 2007 11:43 AM


Because women don't accept help or know about help doesn't mean that help doesn't exist. Problem is, if women don't know this help exists, then it's all the same to them. Hence we need better case management and advertising of services to help pregnant women.

Posted by: Jacqueline at August 31, 2007 11:49 AM


Jill...have you heard about the doctor in Europe that thinks a mother should have up to a year after the child is born to "dispose of it"? I heard that on Faith 2 Action-Janet Folgers show, but I can't think of his name. Is that where society is moving?

Posted by: jessie at August 31, 2007 11:51 AM


Erin- not to deningrate your compassion, but that 20 bucks didn't help her much. Had you directed her to a CPC, they would have found housing for her, as well as other resources. That 20 bucks might get her through the night, but what about tomorrow night, and the next night, and the next night? I know you hate CPC's, but they do help women (if you'll suck up your pride enough to send a woman there).

Posted by: Jacqueline at August 31, 2007 11:51 AM


I think this says a lot:

http://www.f2a.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=american.home

Posted by: jessie at August 31, 2007 11:54 AM


Jacqueline: Two things. A, I have no idea where a CPC is in Atlanta. B, where the hell can you get off telling someone that their charity is misplaced?

Jill- I wasn't scammed. I checked with the SalArm. They had seen the woman and she hadn't been able to pay.

I really want to hear someone answer Laura's hypothetical question. It's one of the few points I stand with her very strongly on. If you were in a building that was on fire and you had to choose to save either a cooler that had 800 embryos in it, or a screaming, crying 8 month old baby, what would you take out of the building?

I can't believe that some people are so blind that they can't believe that there are pregnant women who starve, that there are people who can't afford food for their children, and that a lot of them have tried everything to get help. People need help 100 times more than fetuses do. Fix the messed up world before you start getting so energetic about bringing new people into it. Or do you just want to pump out a bunch of kids, and say, oh, they'll take care of it when they grow up. Then they'll say the same thing about their kids, and the world will just get to the point where everyone is alive, but everyone wishes they weren't.

Posted by: Erin at August 31, 2007 12:12 PM


jesse: "Jill...have you heard about the doctor in Europe that thinks a mother should have up to a year after the child is born to "dispose of it"? I heard that on Faith 2 Action-Janet Folgers show, but I can't think of his name. Is that where society is moving?"

Jesse, you can pretty much do that in this country already...with maybe just a small penaly, maybe a year in jail, some fines, etc.

Posted by: jasper at August 31, 2007 12:20 PM


Jacqueline: Two things. A, I have no idea where a CPC is in Atlanta. B, where the hell can you get off telling someone that their charity is misplaced?

#1) Erin, you have the internet. Do a google search..there are tons of them!

#2) You tell us our charity is misplaced all the time!

Listing of Georgia Pregnancy centers

http://www.lifecall.org/cpc/ga.html
Alpha Crisis Pregnancy Center
2133 Whispering Pines Rd
Albany, GA 31707-2573
912-431-2343

Birthright of Albany
Albany, GA
912-883-LIFE
800-550-4900

A Beacon of Hope Crisis Preg Center
9855 Nesbit Ferry Rd
Alpharetta, GA 30022-5350
770-752-9188

Americus CPC
1620 Martin Luther King Jr Blvd
Americus, GA 31719-2290
912-928-2802

Athens Pregnancy Center
2350 Prince Ave, Ste 8
Athens, GA 30606-6028
706-353-2117

Covenant Care Services
337 S Milledge Ave, Ste102A
Athens, GA 30605-7219
706-546-7267

Atlanta Care Center
3115 Piedmont Road,
Suite D-201,
Atlanta, GA 30305
404-262-CARE
404-261-2736

Bethany Christian Services
1867 Independence Sq., Suite 201
Atlanta, GA 30338
770-396-7700

Birthright of Atlanta
Atlanta, GA
770-451-2273
800-550-4900

Crisis Pregnancy Services
680 W Peachtree St NW
Atlanta, GA 30367-1931
404-881-6571

Family Concerns CPC West
950 Cunningham Place SW
Atlanta, GA 30310-1348
404-756-0000

Birthright of Augusta
Augusta, GA
706-733-LOVE
800-550-4900

Care Pregnancy Center
1298 1/2 Broad Street
P. O. Box 1775
Augusta, Georgia 30903
(706) 724-FREE (724-3733) or
(803) 649-9890

Baxley Crisis Preg Ctr
561 Blackshire Highway
Baxley, GA 31513
912-367-5454

Appalachian Area Crisis Preg Ctr
PO Box 1789
Blairsville, GA 30514
706-745-7518

CPC of Coastal GA
3365 Cypress Mill Rd Suite 7
Brunswick, GA 31520-2867
912-267-1100

Calhoun Pregnancy Center
200 East Belmont Driv
Calhoun, GA 30701
(706)625-5768

Franklin Life
171 Bowersville Road
Carnesville, GA 30521
706-384-5081

Save-A-Life of Carrollton
Carrollton, GA
770-832-0256

Pregnancy Care Center of Bartow County
20 Douglas Street
Cartersville, GA 30120
770-382-7224

White County Life
Suite A
19 E. Jarrard Street
Cleveland, GA 30528
706-219-1678

Columbus CPC
1300 Wynnton Ct
Columbus, GA 31906-2140
706-327-9935
706-322-5024

Refuge CPC
954 Main St NE
Conyers, GA 30012
770-922-5939
800-696-5939

Habersham Life
101, 215 Hodges Street
P.O. Box 612
Cornelia, GA 30531-3293
706-776-5225
800-499-0177

Whispering Hope Resource and Pregnancy Center
133 Samaritan Drive
Suite 402
Cumming, GA 30040
770-889-8302

Paulding Pregnancy Services, Inc.
300 W.I. Parkway, Suite 102
Dallas, GA 30132
(678) 363 - 9255
pauldingps@juno.com

Woman's Enrichment Center
118 W. Gordon St
Dalton, GA 30720
706.278.1050

House of New Life
4650 Flat Shoals Rd
Decatur, GA 30034
404-241-8062

Doraville Pregnancy Resource Center
5935 New Peachtree Road
Doraville, GA 30340
770.451.1030
dhayes@cdmc.org

Pregnancy Resource Center
3030 Chapel Hill Road
Douglasville GA 30154
770.920.1000
prc@pregnancycenter.info

Dublin Save-A-Life
120 S Monroe St
Dublin, GA 31021-5234
912-275-9500

Women 4 Women
PO Box 1971
Duluth, GA 30096
(770)232-1991

Gilmer Pregnancy Center
PO Box 383
Ellijay, GA 30540
706-276-1945

Fayette CPC
116 Bethea Rd, Suite 306
Fayetteville, GA 30214-7239
770-719-2288

Pregnancy Center
13 N Lee Street
Forsyth, GA 31029
912-994-3173

Gainesville Care Center
434 Green Street Place
Gainesville, GA 30501-3318
770-535-1245

Caring House
Griffin, GA
770-229-4474

Pregnancy Problem Center
411 King Arnold St
Hapeville, GA 30354
404-763-4357

Hart Life
121 Vickery street
Hartwell, GA 30643
706-376-1700

Paulding Pregnancy Services
1899 Lake Road, Suite 120
Hiram, GA 30141
770-222-6911

Pickens Pregnancy Center
1549 E Church St, Suite C
Jasper, GA 30143
706-692-6303

Hope Resource Center, Inc.
29 South Avenue
Jefferson, GA 30549
(706) 367-5304 - 24 hour hotline

CPC of Coastal GA
147 NW Broad Street
Jesup, GA 31545-1310
912-588-0010

Jonesboro CPC
530 Parkwood Way
Jonesboro, GA 30236
770-477-1501

Pregnancy Care Center
LaGrange, GA
888 413- 8378
706-884-3833

Gwinnett Crisis Pregnancy Center
501 Crownpointe Way, Ste. 140
Lawrenceville, Ga. 30045
770.338.1680

A Center of Hope CPC
3080 Hwy 81 PO Box 1714
Loganville, GA 30052
770-466-3900

Covenant Care Services
3950 Ridge Avenue
Macon, GA 31210-5002
912-475-4990
800-226-5683

Sav-a-Life Ministry, Inc.
Pregnancy Test Center
Macon, GA
912-475-1570

Cobb Pregnancy Services
186 Alexander Street
Marietta, GA 30060-2035
770-590-9361
Email: cps@cobbpregnancy.org

Women's Pregnancy Center
1545 Powers Ferry Rd, Ste 3E
Marietta, GA 30067-9401
770-953-1972

Pregnancy Resource Center of Henry County
3834 Jodeco Road
McDonough, GA 30253
770.957.8288
pregnancycenter@charter.net

Oconee Area Pregnancy Center
1508 N Columbia St
Milledgeville, GA 31061-7130
912-452-7376

Hope House
Moultrie, GA
912-985-4673

Newnan CPC
29 Brown Street
Newnan, GA 30263-2003
770-251-7158

Pregnancy Care Center of Perry
1104 Meeting St
Perry, GA 31069-3342
912-988-8199

Rome CPC
100 Redmond Road
Rome, Georgia 30165-1536
706-235-6833

Coastal CPC
5214 Paulsen
Savannah, GA 31405-4723
912-355-6295

The Living Vine
535 E 54th Street/PO Box 16932
Savannah, GA 31405
912-352-9998

Savannah Care Center
105 E 34th St
Savannah, GA 31405
912-236-0916 or
912-236-1030

Birthright of St.Mary's
1531 Highway 40 East, Suite B
St.Mary's, GA
912-882-7171
800-550-4900

Crisis Pregnancy Center Of Statesboro
204 S College St
Statesboro GA 30458-5204
912-764-4303

Sav-A-Life North GA Crisis Center
PO Box 407
Summerville, GA 30747
706-857-1457

Heritage CPC
104 1/2 N Green St
Thomaston, GA 30286-3552
706-647-8743

Hannah's House Maternity
226 W Hendricks St
Thomson, GA 30824
706-724-3733

Tifton CPC
2214 Tyson Ave
Tifton, GA 31794-3031
912-382-4491

Toccoa Life Cares
406 W Doyle St
Toccoa, GA 30577-2316
706-886-0177
800-499-0177

Agape CPC
4315 Cowan Rd, Suite 1
Tucker, GA 30084-4831
770-938-2000

Birthright of Valdosta
Valdosta, GA
912-244-LIFE
800-550-4900

Pregnancy Support Center
210 W Gordon St
Valdosta, GA 31601-4515
912-333-0080

Evergreen CPC
202 North Ave
Warner Robins, GA 31093-1930
912-922-5791

Birthright of Waycross
2006 Alice Street
Waycross, GA 31501-6210
912-283-8333
800-550-4900

The HOPE Center
9740 Main St, Suite 120
Woodstock, GA 30188
770-924-0864

Posted by: Bethany at August 31, 2007 12:27 PM


"Rosie-there are not enough."

sure there are.

Posted by: Rosie at August 31, 2007 12:29 PM


I was in the middle of the city on my way to class. Pardon me for not whipping out my laptop in the middle of Brooke Street to look up CPCs. Bethany, actually, I think you're the ones who spit venom at anyone who donates to PP. What monetary charity of yours have I ever downplayed?

Posted by: Erin at August 31, 2007 12:31 PM


No, Rosie. There are not remotely enough parents who want to adopt as there are orphans. Not REMOTELY.

Posted by: Erin at August 31, 2007 12:33 PM


Crisis Pregnancy Centers!

Posted by: Bethany at August 31, 2007 12:33 PM


Erin, MK was adopted as well as you, and she had some great statistics and references that could refute your statement about that.

Posted by: Bethany at August 31, 2007 12:35 PM


I said I didn't like the organizations. I didn't even know that you donated to them. That's fine with me. Doesn't mean I have to like the organization. I'm not calling it a waste of money, or the like, am I?

Posted by: Erin at August 31, 2007 12:37 PM


I said I didn't like the organizations. I didn't even know that you donated to them. That's fine with me. Doesn't mean I have to like the organization. I'm not calling it a waste of money, or the like, am I?

Would you suggest to any of your friends who are in your friends' situation to go to a CPC?

I happen to volunteer at a CPC and the majority of our work is donating diapers, maternity clothes, baby clothes, formula, counseling, and referrals to good doctors, financial aids, etc....to help women out. I know for a fact that if you referred that woman to a CPC (even just telling her to search for one in your area) she could find help there. All the help she could possibly need. We do this out of our hearts, as a ministry. We do not get paid for helping these women, and most of the help comes out of our pockets or from donations from churches, etc. Maybe it wasn't you who was talking so badly about CPC's so many times, but I figure you'd agree with anyone who had anything bad to say about them, since they are against abortion. Correct me if I'm wrong though.

Posted by: Bethany at August 31, 2007 12:42 PM


Erin: There are not remotely enough parents who want to adopt as there are orphans. Not REMOTELY.

I don't know if the "remotely" really applies or not - I would think the number of parents who adopt is a lot bigger than the number of orphans waiting for adoption.

However, whether or not that's true, there are a lot of kids in state care or in unsatisfactory foster-care situations. I think it's between 100,000 and 200,000 in the US.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at August 31, 2007 12:43 PM


No, I wouldn't suggest that they go to a CPC. I would suggest a PP or a normal OB/GYN. I do not like CPCs. For one thing, there is no possible way that an organization can at every single turn, help a woman in every single way she could need. In a few cases, sure, but it gets far to expensive. Salvation Army, Red Cross, UNICEF, charitable organizations cannot always help everyone. It's not financially possible. Unless almost no one is coming and you really have that much surplus funding, it's not fiscally rational.

The reason I don't like CPCs is because there have been several documented cases of those centers lying to women about the status of their pregnancies in order to prevent them from legally obtaining an abortion.

http://www.alternet.org/rights/35545/

Am I saying that all CPCs are like this? Of course not. Some of them are probably completely legitimate places to go to in case of an unplanned pregnancy, who won't shout at you about the evils of abortion or the like, and who will calmly and gently lead you through your options. I'm not saying they need to provide information or encourage abortion, but if it comes up, they shoudl be able to provide a place the woman can go if she wants to follow it up. Just like some PP centers can be under-par in terms of cleanliness or qualified employees, some CPCs can be staffed by religious zealots whose concern is not for the pregnant woman but for the fetus.

Posted by: Erin at August 31, 2007 12:58 PM


The reason I don't like CPCs is because there have been several documented cases of those centers lying to women about the status of their pregnancies in order to prevent them from legally obtaining an abortion.

Erin, honestly! The title of the article says "Anti-choice" and the first reference in the first sentence is "Planned Parenthood". This is unbiased information? Planned parenthood surely wouldn't have ANYTHING to lose by girls choosing to go to a CPC instead of paying them for abortions, would they?
Come on!

Posted by: Bethany at August 31, 2007 1:07 PM


Bethany- I do not have time to root through all my files and find my AP articles. I will find them later, I am trying to pack for a convention right now

Posted by: Erin at August 31, 2007 1:09 PM


erin...by your logic..if I lose my job and can't afford to feed my 8 year old...I should just kill her that would solve my problem.

By your logic then the genocide in Darfar is ok because well, they can't get along and it would just be easier if a certain section of the population no longer existed.

The world will never be "fixed" and its sad when any child or person is unwanted or starves or goes through tragedy or is born with aids or is missing a foot, but how do you say that person has any less right to live then you.

If a child is born in the US, most states have laws where the mom can drop the baby off at a hospital no questions asked. Babies in the womb feel pain when they are sliced, acid washed and sucked out of the womb.

Posted by: jessie at August 31, 2007 1:37 PM


and Erin..

Could you tell me when Conner Peterson became a person with inalienable rights? How can Scott Peterson be charged with his murder if Conner was just a fetus?

Posted by: jessie at August 31, 2007 1:39 PM


Erin, honestly! The title of the article says "Anti-choice" and the first reference in the first sentence is "Planned Parenthood". This is unbiased information? Planned parenthood surely wouldn't have ANYTHING to lose by girls choosing to go to a CPC instead of paying them for abortions, would they?
Come on!


Bethany to add to the above..planned parenthood lies all the time. They are against legislation that would require ultrasounds to be given before an abortion. They are against offering pain medication for the baby-because they do suffer when they are sliced apart and planned parenthood has told kids to lie about their age so they didn't have to report an abortion in the instance of incense.

Posted by: jessie at August 31, 2007 2:00 PM


Erin, 12:58p, said: "For one thing, there is no possible way that an organization can at every single turn, help a woman in every single way she could need. In a few cases, sure, but it gets far to expensive."

Erin, you're wrong on that point. I've spoken at hundreds of CPC banquets all over the country. I know these groups. They indeed would and do help mothers AT EVERY SINGLE TURN, even way after they have given birth. They do indeed help with medical expenses, legal expenses, clothing for both mom and baby, furniture, food, formula, housing, and education.

Your preconceived notions of CPCs are 180 degrees wrong, Erin. Jac was right. Wish I'd have thought of saying that. Had you directed that mom to a cpc, she would have been truly helped. (Still don't believe a shelter turned her away b/c she was pregnant, however.)

Posted by: Jill Stanek at August 31, 2007 2:05 PM


I would suggest a PP or a normal OB/GYN. I do not like CPCs.

PP and normal OB/GYNs are not social service agencies that help with housing, nutrition, etc.

Planned Parenthood provides little to no prenatal care and will only do so if they can bill Medicaid for it.

So with those referrals you've offered no help.

Now- when you are walking down the street and you're not a social worker, it's difficult to offer a needy person anything but the money in your pocket. But now that you know better, you can refer them to some place that can help beyond what you have in your pocket.

Posted by: Jacqueline at August 31, 2007 3:28 PM


By the way, I googled "Planned Parenthood PreNatal Care" to see what I'd get and was confirmed. I got one site however that shocked me. I'm shocked that PP offers anything for the unborn other than poisons and dismemberment, but I was more shocked to see the site say this: "If you are pregnant and looking for quality care for yourself and your baby, you can come to Planned Parenthood of Delaware." Did you catch that? Planned Parenthood called it a BABY. I'm floored. So in their own words, Planned Parenthood kills 138,000+ babies a year.

Posted by: Jacqueline at August 31, 2007 3:30 PM


Jacqueline-they say that, but when you go to PP they assume you are there for an abortion so if you are teetering they push you to the abortion because you know they get tax money for that.

My hairdressers sister went in with questions and they didn't even give her other options, she they just asked when would she like to make the appointment. Thank God she did an about face and kept the baby.

Posted by: jessie at August 31, 2007 4:06 PM


Wow, Jacqueline!!!

Jessie, great points, by the way.

Posted by: Bethany at August 31, 2007 4:16 PM


Jacqueline, they SURE DID! See, liars all slip up from time to time.

Posted by: Heather at September 1, 2007 8:30 AM


The reason I don't like CPCs is because there have been several documented cases of those centers lying to women about the status of their pregnancies in order to prevent them from legally obtaining an abortion.

http://www.alternet.org/rights/35545/

Erin,
The of accuracy of this story is questionable at best.

John at Generations for Life and JivinJ have both actually researched and looked into the accuracy of the story and have well-written articles on this:

Evil CPC Story an Urban Legand?
"It´┐Żs this last sentence in particular that raised a red flag for me."

The ´┐Żcrisis pregnancy center´┐Ż staff then proceeded to wage a campaign of intimidation and harassment over the following days, showing up at the girl´┐Żs home and calling her father´┐Żs workplace. Our clinic director reports that she was ´┐Żscared to death to leave her house.´┐Ż They even went to her school and urged classmates to pressure her not to have an abortion.

"They went to her school? One wonders how they would have done this. It´┐Żs next to impossible for a stranger to enter a school building, as nearly all schools´┐Ż doors are locked from the outside.

Perhaps ´┐ŻThey even went to her school´┐Ż´┐Ż means that the CPC workers waited outside the school for the girl to leave at the end of the school day.

But how could they have known who this girl´┐Żs ´┐Żclassmates´┐Ż were? Or did they just go up to students at random (who, for all the CPC workers knew, didn´┐Żt even know who this girl was) and ´┐Żpressure´┐Ż them to tell her not to have an abortion?

Until I see convincing evidence to the contrary, I think a healthy dose of skepticism is called for here."

New Development in the Evil CPC Story

"It occurred to me today that if, in fact, the Indianapolis Police had shown up at the Planned Parenthood acting on a tip that a girl was being forced to have an abortion, they obviously would have filed a police report.

Since police reports are matters of public record, I called the Indianapolis Police Department to find out if there was any police report that would corroborate Planned Parenthood´┐Żs version of events.

The woman I spoke with at IPD did a search and came up with: nothing.

I also asked her to do a search on the crisis pregnancy center. Again: nothing.

If the CPC really did engage in ´┐Ża campaign of intimidation and harassment,´┐Ż it´┐Żs rather hard to believe that the police were never contacted. If Planned Parenthood cares so much about women, wouldn´┐Żt their first move have been to call the police on the girl´┐Żs behalf before telling the public?

I also checked the Marion County Clerk´┐Żs Office records to see if any lawsuits had been brought against the CPC. One would certainly think that if Planned Parenthood´┐Żs version of events were true, and if the ´┐Żintimidation and harassment´┐Ż brought by the CPC were so intense that they made the girl ´┐Żscared to death to leave her house´┐Ż, Planned Parenthood wouldn´┐Żt have wasted a second in providing the girl an attorney to sue the CPC.

This search found, yet again: nothing.

Now the question becomes: Will those who took Planned Parenthood at their word´┐Żdespite the story´┐Żs notable lack of specific details´┐Żcontinue to stand by it?"

Calling Their Bluff


Some people will believe anything

"Unfortunately, no pro-choice blogger that I've seen has taken this story with a grain of salt. They've all taken Planned Parenthood's word even though the story has virtually no solid details. The name and location of the CPC isn't given. No witnesses are given to corroborate the story. No police report. Just the word of Planned Parenthood. "But I read it on the internet so it's gotta be true!"

Now maybe Planned Parenthood isn't making up the story. What if Planned Parenthood was told this story by a client or supporter of theirs? One would hope they'd investigate this story to make sure it was 100% true before e-mailing it to their supporters, no? One would hope they'd contact the CPC in question to get the CPC's side of the story and to see if the story had an basis in fact, right?

I'm with Serge on this one. The fact that this story is being publicized at a time that eerily corresponds with the lobbying efforts on behalf of a pro-choice bill to regulate CPCs makes me wonder if something (such as the whole truth) is not being told."

As Jivin J notes in Those deceptive pregnancy centers
"After viewing the pictures of the inside and outside of this clinic, I have an extremely difficult time believing that anyone (much less a girl, her mother, and her boyfriend) could mistake this pregnancy center (filled with prolife brochures) for a Planned Parenthood."
Related:
Christina at Real Choice has pictures of the alleged CPC which shares a parking lot with a nearby Planned Parenthood:
http://realchoice.blogspot.com/2006/05/more-on-evil-cpc-hoax.html

Revisiting the Supposedly Deceptive CPC Story
"An Indiana television station did a piece on the alleged incident where a girl was supposedly misled by a pregnancy center posing as an abortion clinic. They also have a video of it (which wouldn't work with my media player).

It seems the 17-year-old girl's story has changed or Planned Parenthood was lying in their original e-mail. The article says,
I could die, I was going to ruin my life, " the 17-year-old said the center told her after she had already made the decision to get an abortion.

Telling a girl she could die and that abortion could ruin her life doesn't seem to be the kind of thing that a pregnancy center trying to pass itself off as an abortion clinic would say, now does it? According to the original Planned Parenthood e-mail:
"The group took down the girl's confidential personal information and told her to come back for her appointment, which they said would be in their "other office" (the real Planned Parenthood office nearby). When she arrived for her appointment, not only did the Planned Parenthood staff have no record of her, but the police were there ´┐Ż the "crisis pregnancy center" had called them, claiming that a minor was being forced to have an abortion against her will."
Now the girl is telling us the pregnancy center told her that she could possibly die and her life would be ruined? If I was trying to pass myself off as an abortion clinic, the last thing I would say is "abortion could kill you." Does anyone else see the inconsistency in these stories?"

The inconsistancies and red flags are glaring in this story. Is this a true story of CPC wronging a girl or is it an elaborate urban legand created by Planned Parenthood to generate sympathy and support. Don't just trust what you hear. You do the research and decided.

Posted by: Rachael at September 3, 2007 8:05 PM