UPDATE, 11/24, 12:25p: Flint MI's ABC 12 TV ran a story last night about the alleged forced abortion by Alberto Hodari (whose real first name we now know is Abraham), interviewing the victim, Caitlin Bruce. "They ripped the life out of me that day," she said. How true.
[HT: Operation Rescue]
A teenager claims in a lawsuit that an abortion provider in Flint and his assistant forcibly terminated her pregnancy after she screamed for them to stop.
The Flint Journal reports that the teen was 6 weeks pregnant when she went April 9 to the doctor's clinic. The lawsuit claims she changed her mind before the doctor started and yelled to stop.
In a court filing, the doctor says the procedure was under way when she asked to stop and he had to complete the abortion....
The lawsuit also claims the teen was mistreated because she is black, a claim the doctor denies.
The lawsuit was filed June 12 in Genesee Co. Circuit Court. The seen seeks damages "far exceeding" $25k due to severe emotional stress, mental anguish and additional medical treatment.
The Flint Journal, which also omitted naming Hodari, added:
The teen alleges that she screamed "Stop, stop, I don't want this," before the procedure, but he and an assistant held her down and covered her mouth as they terminated her pregnancy, according to court documents.
She... has since been admitted to Hurley Medical Center because she was suicidal after the abortion, according to court documents.
The following doesn't pertain to the story per se, except to show how Hodari the Hacker spends his blood money.
Sidewalk counselor Lynn reported that 2 men emptied out Hodari's Livonia abortion mill garage Friday, revealing an antique car previously unknown to pro-lifers. It's hard to keep track of them all.
Once the men spotted Lynn taking pictures, they lowered the garage door partially to hide what all was inside...
And here's an aerial view of Hodari's Bloomfield Hills, MI, estate, also from Lynn, courtesy of Google maps...
Assuming this is a true story, how would this allegation be proven? I am no legal expert - I do obey the laws of physics, but I am no legal expert otherwise.
There are 4 people: mom, aborted baby, doctor, and doctor's assistant. so, this looks like 2 against 1, unless the assistant betrays boss, which could be a sure way for the assistant to get into trouble. It seems like the baby's corpse could provide no info, since the goal was the baby's desruction anyway.
The mom could get a fellow patient from the waiting room to verify that screams were heard - how would you track down waiting room witnesses? Clinic records?
Finally: the car: E Type 2+2? Cool.Posted by: Row1 at November 23, 2009 12:02 PM
FYI - it says copyright Microsoft Corporation, for the pic taken from Google's site. Also, there's no way either Microsoft or Google has pictures that good on their site. Not even in NYC or LA or southern CA - you don't get pics that good at that angle unless you're on a helicopter. That being said, I can't explain the MS copyright notice.
Very strange.Posted by: James at November 23, 2009 12:16 PM
Perhaps the boyfriend/husband could videotape next time, just in case the "evidence" is needed. Women videotape all the time at live-births. The abortionist wouldn't object, would he?Posted by: Janet at November 23, 2009 12:16 PM
What's there to see in a "termination of pregnancy?"
Just a buncha cells, some tissue......an abortionist should have no problem allowing taping. Right??!!
When making your "choice" one simply cannot change one's mind and want a different one.Posted by: carla at November 23, 2009 12:38 PM
I hope this young woman gets all the help she needs!! I will be praying for her. Her experience is horrifying!!Posted by: carla at November 23, 2009 12:40 PM
Mind-numbing, isn't it? A woman should have a right to protect her own interests, even it might make the pro-aborts queasy. Videotape, audiotape, go for it.
How can two news reports NOT mention the abortionist HODARI's name? Obviously it was intentional, to protect the abortionist from hypothetical violence. Maybe to protect the newspaper from charges of "inciting violence"? Is this the kind of solid reporting they teach in journalism school?Posted by: Janet at November 23, 2009 12:50 PM
Maybe it's just me but the whole incident sounds like rape.
Where are the liberals who should be bashing Hodari for his ostentatious abode? If this were Sarah Palin's home, we wouldn't hear the end of it. Oh, but that's different...Posted by: Janet at November 23, 2009 12:54 PM
Oh, and Thank you Lord for Jill Stanek!! :)Posted by: carla at November 23, 2009 12:55 PM
Thank you Jill, for all you do for LIFE!
And thank you Lord, for Carla's witness! :)Posted by: Janet at November 23, 2009 12:56 PM
Mutual Admiration Society meeting adjourns after this: Thanks to Carla and Janet for your witness, too!Posted by: Jill Stanek at November 23, 2009 1:49 PM
I read the Docet for the baby Shanice civil case this morning, and it said Motons were to be this morning. Renelique and other of the defendents, are trying to get the case trown out. I'm only going by what the docket says. RJPosted by: RJ Sandefur at November 23, 2009 3:05 PM
Of course the doc is going to lie and say the procedure had already started and it would be dangerous to the patient to stop. Who can prove WHEN she screamed and if indeed the baby was already being aborted at this point? This poor woman. When she was interviewed there were pink baby things in the background. Has she had another baby? It won't replace the one STOLEN from her, but hopefully it will comfort her a little.
These abortionists are animals with a rapist's mentality.Posted by: Sydney M at November 24, 2009 8:22 AM
I don't like abortionist pigs!Posted by: RJ Sandefur at November 24, 2009 11:37 AM
I know it is hard but please pray for abortionists. They are completely deceived and doing Satan's work.Posted by: carla at November 24, 2009 12:35 PM
Think about it. What's a 6 month abortion cost? A lot. Hodari didn't want to loose that money.Posted by: Anna at November 24, 2009 12:47 PM
Poor Caitlin Bruce. My heart goes out to her. If only she had found a Women's Pregnancy Center instead of Hodari's clinic. What a different story this would be.
Bill O'Reilly needs to report on this.Posted by: Janet at November 24, 2009 1:00 PM
I am seeing two different ages listed for the baby, was he/she 6 weeks or 6 months?
Thanks, Jill, for your endless supply of info!!
Angela, I caught that, too. 6 weeks in the article yesterday and 6 months in the news clip today. I have no clue which was right, nor a guess.Posted by: Jill Stanek at November 24, 2009 1:58 PM
While I support any law-breaking doctor to lose his license and/or his freedom, I think we should wait for some more info to emerge in this case. I believe the age of the fetus was 6 weeks, due to the fact that patients are under anesthesia for DNE's (and a 6-month DNE would make this an illegal abortion to begin with, wouldn't it?).
Oh, and videotape away. I always say 1 out of 3 antis eventually escort a patient or become a patient themselves. It's always interesting when antis have to switch sides due to personal reasons.Posted by: Dhalgren at November 24, 2009 2:05 PM
"I always say 1 out of 3 antis eventually escort a patient or become a patient themselves. It's always interesting when antis have to switch sides due to personal reasons."
Posted by: Dhalgren at November 24, 2009 2:05 PM
"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it."
Lie much, Dhalgren? From where did you pull THAT "statistic" ? Nevermind. I know where.
Definitely wrong if the doctor did that. As bad as someone else forcing her to give birth.Posted by: Jerry at November 24, 2009 2:52 PM
Are you pro abortion all three trimesters? Just curious.
Jerry @ 2:52 p.m. You can't fight biology, Jerry. ALL pregnant women give birth. An abortion is just birthing a freshly dismembered child. An abortionist must use deadly force against his or her defenseless victim, after forcing open the mother's cervix. http://www.abortionno.org
@James: Microsoft has pictures taken from an angle (choose "Bird's eye" from arial menu): http://www.bing.com/maps/Posted by: Chris at November 24, 2009 3:07 PM
Abortion is not illegal at 6 months. A woman could get an abortion through all nine months of pregnancy. All she has to do for a late abortion is is claim "mental health", and it happens regularly. Dr. Tiller used to rubber-stamp any ridiculous reason and call it an abortion "to preserve the [mental] health of the mother". Poppycock, I say. I'm sure he's by far not the only "doctor" to do so.
klynn73, from which parrot did you deduce that?Posted by: Jerry at November 24, 2009 3:17 PM
Whoa, Jerry. Are you actually disputing the fact that all pregnant women give birth? Really? Or is this going to be another example of proabort redefinition of words?
BIRTH means separation and emergence of the offspring from the mother. This process can produce a live child, a stillborn, a miscarried child or, in the case of an abortion, a dead, dismembered child. I guess the last possibility would be an ectopic pregnancy, and admittedly we don't call all of these "giving birth" but any conceived child does leave his or her mother's body by one of the above. No parrot anywhere here--if you're hearing voices originating from your shoulder area, please seek help.Posted by: klynn73 at November 24, 2009 3:46 PM
Alright, let me provide my definition since you chose a different definition from my mine:
"the act or process of bearing or bringing forth offspring"
But, semantics aside, forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term (better?) is equal to forcing her to abort. Keyword = force.Posted by: Jerry at November 24, 2009 4:36 PM
6:00pm They pulled the video. I've heard about the story, though. Probably more lawyering going on...
I agree with Anna, Hodari wanted the chunk of cash for a 6 month abortion, & he probably got sloppy thinking he could get away with a forced abortion during regular business hours without administering a "date-rape drug" to wipe out the girl's memory. Abortionists just get arrogant after a while if they're never fully investigated. (Or harrassed by "anti-choicers", as they would view it.)
I like the idea of tamper-proof security video cameras installed in the "procedure rooms" at every abortion mill. Have them reviewed weekly by a special medical committee for abuses. I know, I know, but one can still DREAM of a world that protects women from abuse.....Posted by: MEL at November 24, 2009 5:12 PM
The video is now back up. I wonder why it wasn't available before? WOW--the nurse showed the girl the ultrasound monitor!!! What a shocker!!!! I'm speechless.Posted by: MEL at November 24, 2009 5:21 PM
"But, semantics aside, forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term (better?) is equal to forcing her to abort. Keyword = force."
That's hilarious. There is no force required for a woman to carry a pregnancy to term. But force is required to stop that from happening. I know you like to ascribe the word "force" to us because it sounds so pushy and oppressive, but we're not the ones wielding forceps and vacuums, ya know?Posted by: Janette at November 24, 2009 6:11 PM
If abortion is legal and someone denies her the ability to get an abortion on her own free will, by force, what is that?Posted by: Jerry at November 24, 2009 7:02 PM
Womancare Abortion Services
The following services are available for women seeking pregnancy terminations:
Abortion through 24 weeks
Hello posters; I think the doubters out there can now see that this means 6 months. In case my word isn't good enough, here's the link.
Leave the cash on the night stand, thank you very much. Several grand, that is!Posted by: Anna at November 24, 2009 7:03 PM
26 weeks = 6 months. There are 52 weeks in a 12-month year.
One quarter (3 months) = 13 weeks.Posted by: Jerry at November 24, 2009 7:06 PM
Jerry, your an idiot. And not worth and not worth any more typing. ENDPosted by: Anna at November 24, 2009 7:43 PM
Jerry, you have it backwards, pregnancy is a natural, biological process and if not interrupted either naturally or artificially, will continue to term. There is no force in carrying a pregnancy to term, only force and artificially intervention used to interrupt the pregnancy. And actual coercion, either by threats, intimidation, or physical force, to have an abortion occurs more often then coercion to carry to term (I can pull statistics from an objective source). Let me say it again, there is no force in carrying to term, only women who want to interrupt and forcibly end a natural process (and not without biologically physical and emotional consequences, I might add).Posted by: Rachael C. at November 24, 2009 8:28 PM
Pregnancy is typically dated by last known menstrual period (LNMP) and gestational period (date from conception, typically assumed as 14 days or 2 weeks after LNMP) Pregnancy is broken up into 3 trimesters, with each trimester being 3 months, and each month is roughly 4 weeks. Therefor, 6 months would roughly be 24-26 weeks, depending if you're counting from LNMP or gestational age.
I am confused: was this girl 6 weeks or 6 months pregnant?
Jerry: Pregnancy is the NATURAL end result of sexual relations between a man and a woman.Posted by: LizFromNebraska at November 24, 2009 9:39 PM
And, Anna, when did you become a rocket scientist? Abortion is legal; get over it.Posted by: Jerry at November 24, 2009 10:50 PM
Anna posted, "Think about it. What's a 6 month abortion cost? A lot. Hodari didn't want to loose that money."
It's LOSE, not LOOSE. Homeschooled, were you?
OK, Jill, you can delete my post now since you really don't give a hoot about opinions here; rather, all you seek is validation for your group of ignoramuses.Posted by: Jerry at November 24, 2009 10:53 PM
Abortion certainly isn't about women's rights or equality.
It's about sexual availability.
Big business in NICU due to those post abortive problems with cervical incompetence.
After obamacare, those preemies don't have a prayer.Posted by: Pharmer at November 25, 2009 9:26 AM
Does anyone have any comments on this if the incident happened?
"Woman Says Anti-Abortion Nurse Removed IUD Without Permission, Then Lectured Her
ALBUQUERQUE (CN) - A clinic nurse first removed her intrauterine birth-control device without permission, the patient claims in a federal action, then told her that "having the IUD come out was a good thing," because "I personally do not like IUDs. I feel they are a type of abortion. I don't know how you feel about abortion, but I am against them."
The patient sued Presbyterian Medical Services Rio Rancho Family Health Center and nurse practitioner Sylvia Olona in Federal Court.
The plaintiff says she went to Rio Rancho to have the strings on her IUD shortened.
The complaint states: "As soon as Defendant Olona began speaking to (the plaintiff), she questioned her about her choice of contraception.
"As Defendant Olona began the procedure, (the plaintiff) felt Olona pull on the strings of the IUD. (The plaintiff) felt a distinct pulling on the strings followed by a sharp pain in her uterus similar to a very strong menstrual cramp.
"As that happened, Defendant Olona stated, 'Uh oh, I accidentally pulled out your IUD. I gently tugged and out it came.' She then explained, 'I cut the string than went back and gently pulled and out it came. It must have not been in properly.'
"Olona then stated, 'having the IUD come out was a good thing.' She asked (the plaintiff) if she wanted to hear her 'take' on the situation. Without receiving a response, Defendant Olona stated, 'I personally do not like IUDs. I feel they are a type of abortion. I don't know how you feel about abortion, but I am against them. What the IUD does is take the fertilized egg and pushes it out of the uterus.'
"Defendant Olona stated, 'Everyone in the office always laughs and tells me I pull these out on purpose because I am against them, but it's not true, they accidentally come out when I tug.'
"At this point, Defendant Olona advised that (the plaintiff) needed to take a pregnancy test. (The plaintiff) did, and the test was negative.
"Defendant Olona told (the plaintiff) that is was better that she did not have the IUD because she could now use a "non-abortion" form of contraception. Defendant Olona suggested the deprovera (depo) [sic] shot or the pill, and made clear that she would not insert a new IUD."
The plaintiff demands damages for battery, constitutional violations and negligence. She is represented by Ryan Villa with the Law Office of Robert Cooper."
My take on this situation is that the story does not make sense. A nurse who believes that an IUD is an abortifacient type of birth control would not then suggest hormonal birth control to take its place because those forms of birth control do the same thing that the nurse was so against the IUD doing. Any nurses or doctors here care to add to that?Posted by: army_wife at November 27, 2009 10:49 AM