Mainstream media drag feet in reporting post-abortion death
Heaven forbid that any mainstream reporter should actually do some actual journalism the way “just a blogger” Jill Stanek did on this story.
If you know anything about Jill Stanek (which, of course, no liberal reporter would) you know that she wouldn’t report something like this unless she was absolutely certain of the facts, and so this concern-troll attitude that Stanek’s reporting “could not be immediately verified” bespeaks the incompetence and sloth of reporters who can’t be bothered, at least, to contact Stanek as a source.
~ Robert Stacy McCain expressing contempt over the failure of the mainstream media to adequately cover the story of the latest victim of abortionist LeRoy Carhart, Jennifer McKenna Morbelli, The Other McCain, February 12
and this is why we rely upon the alternative media for our information.
Hey, Jill….like your hairstyle good pix
11 likes
Something that bothers me about this whole thing….well just one of the things that bothers me. Does anyone else find it strange that you put in the obit about your deceased daughter and have a memorial for her when you elected to bring about her death through abortion?? And I am not knocking my post abortive friends who grieve after the fact and through their healing but she paid a dr. to end Madison’s life by causing a cardiac arrest and t hen mourns her death publicly??
12 likes
Indeed!!!
Jill Stanek
With her typing fingers on the prolife pulse!!! :)
13 likes
The “mainstream media” can’t print unverified allegations just because Jill Stanek made them. They could get sued for defamation if things they report turn out not to be true (Stanek and all the people republishing her assertions without verifying them could as well, but I guess it is worth the risk to them in order to make this family miserable and shame this poor woman.)
The “mainstream” media also has ethical standards, which Stanek apparently does not about disclosing private information about private citizens. You’ll notice the Washington Post didn’t print the woman’s name even when reporting the protesters made posters of her. Susan B. Anthony List didn’t either.
Beyond ethical concerns, there are legal obligations. In most states there are a variety of privacy torts. You don’t get to just dig up info about private individuals and make it public. But it seems Jill is willing to risk a lawsuit to make this grieving family miserable and either shame this woman or make her a poster girl.
6 likes
Well CS I thought the abortion supporters are not ashamed of her exercising her legal right to destroy her “products of conception” and since she died as a result of exercising her legal right to do this…why is there shame????? If she had been killed in a traffic accident or run over by a drunk driver she would be identified. So she was killed at the hands of an abortionist…why the secrecy??? why the shame????? BTW where is the outrage from NOW on this????
15 likes
Susie, I didn’t say the deceased woman or her family should be ashamed. I said Jill et al are trying to shame them. You ask, “why the secrecy?” It is because we have legal rights to determine for ourselves whether our personal information is released (I doubt NOW would disagree).
We also have protections from false information being circulated about us. But I’m sure you guys will keep making up information about this woman which you have no way of knowing so you can judge her.
Do you think this woman should be forced by the law to continue a pregnancy if her baby was not going to survive? That would be using the law to torture women in the middle of a tragedy.
In your perfect legal world, I presume the state would be able to incarcerate this woman to keep her from terminating her pregnancy.
7 likes
Well CS just google search her name and you will see that the MSM is giving the same information that Jill did but she is the one who broke it first. Even the hometown news is reporting the facts now…name and all. Late term abortions illegal in NY but she traveled to MD where it was legal. All the same information. The only thing they got wrong was the abortion was not failed….that part was successful…the baby was killed …..the failed part was that the mother also died. Even abortion supporting Huff Post is reporting name and all…
http://hudsonvalley.news12.com/news/woman-dies-after-failed-late-term-abortion-1.4624348?firstfree=yes
13 likes
The problem is the original disclosure! Her name is public information now THANKS TO JILL. Why is this so hard to understand?
4 likes
The Long Island News 12 station reported on Jennifer’s death, including her name and the general circumstances of late-term abortion.
A simple Google search also turns up the Daily Mail (UK), The Huffington Post, and Newsday Westchester as the top news searches reporting Jennifer’s name.
The Daily Mail even printed her HUSBAND’s photo, which Jill has, at this point in time, not posted. In fact, he was cropped out of the most recent photo of Jennifer on this site.
Looks like the mainstream media is beginning to print the news now, days after Jill reported it. The MSM doesn’t wanna know what it doesn’t wanna know. When you have mainly smaller news outlets reporting on this, you know there is a purposeful media blackout. To act as if they did this to protect the family of the woman or her “good name” is ridiculous, IMO.
BTW, here’s the timeline for the events surrounding Savita Halappanavar’s death: http://savitatruth.com/index.html
12 likes
Ha! Susie, we are beginning to think alike… ;D
7 likes
And this is why I don’t pay any attention to the “legitimate” media. ABCNNBCBS are all too busy shilling for Obama to do actual journalism, and FOX is only better by comparison.
10 likes
I wonder, too, CS… what was your reaction to the fact that Tonya Reaves’ death was made public after she bled out at an UNLICENSED (like all IL Planned Parenthoods) Chicago PP?
10 likes
Oh dear. I guess you guys are having trouble understanding. That other media is reporting her name now does not change the fact that Jill was the first person to make it public. She was very proud of this. See her previous post here.
Or maybe you do understand but you don’t care about the law, journalistic ethics, or acting like a decent human being.
5 likes
CS, we do care about the law, journalistic ethics and acting like decent human beings. The law should recognize every human being’s right to life; there is no law against reporting deaths and facts inconvenient to pro-abortion groups. Journalists have an ethical duty to report the truth, and the fact that a woman died at his clinic demands reporting, because it’s an issue of public concern. Decent human beings, I’m sorry to say this, do not think it’s OK to torture a baby almost ready to be born by injecting poison into her heart or tearing off her arms and legs one by one. This isn’t an attempt to shame a dead women, it’s an attempt to finally get some to accept the vile human cost to abortion by putting a real, flesh and blood face in front of people instead of empty slogans like “choice” and “women’s health.”
16 likes
Bravo, Jill. You’re a tough, class-act. :)
10 likes
Her name is not a public concern. If Jill had reported the story but withheld the name, that could be a defense in a privacy lawsuit. Obviously, no one cares whether what St. Jill did was moral or legal, so I am wasting my breath.
7 likes
No media blackout here, folks, move along..
Note this quote from a comment on McCain’s piece:
“I am not pro-life, but doing and getting an abortion at 33 weeks it just CRUEL.”
11 likes
Ninek…why is it less cruel to kill your baby when she is smaller? One thing I can’t get over is that we are willing to kill innocent defenseless human beings in a manner that we would not put a convicted killer to death. In TN the ACLU is saying that a lethal injection for a death row inmate needs to be banned as cruel and inhumane treatment but for a baby…go for it. How can you make sense of this??
There was a vet in TN contracted to put dogs down from the humane society. He was doing it by lethal injection to the heart. Someone did an undercover video and everyone went wild. News reports on TV, editorials in the paper, demonstrations at his office. He was fined…lost his license for a period of time and run out of town. But for babies….no pbl. What is wrong with this picture????
And again, help me understand how you publicly mourn a daughter that you affirmatively put to death at a memorial service like you both were killed in a car accident???
12 likes
Oh dear. I think saying her and her baby’s name is important. They were real people, with real lives, real loves, real tragedies. Abortion kills real people.
The bigger question is: what in the world happened to this family and this mother who felt like they had to kill a (named!) baby to solve a problem?
Further: how does ANY of this look like liberation and empowerment?
18 likes
It’s not up to you whether her name is public. It is up to the family.
“Kathy Morbelli, the dead woman’s mother-in-law, told The Journal News that she is extremely upset with the rhetoric swirling around the death of Morbelli and her unborn daughter, who was to be known as Madison Leigh.
‘They know she was a wanted baby, they know she was named,’ she said. ‘I just wish that the people could let my son, who is only 29 years old, mourn in peace….”
4 likes
What other kind of murder would you expect any media not to report or name names?
16 likes
What other kind of murder would you expect any media not to report or name names?
Bingo. I have to wonder if CS would be upset if a mainstream media outlet had given the woman’s name… or is it just wrong if a pro-lifer does it?
14 likes
‘They know she was a wanted baby, they know she was named,’ she said. ‘I just wish that the people could let my son, who is only 29 years old, mourn in peace….”
This is interesting, since it has been stated somewhere that one of the reasons Carhart is being investigated is because Morbelli’s father, a detective, is pushing for it.
12 likes
Oh, my bad. Who cares how this affects the family!
6 likes
Yeah. Speaking of her son, I wonder what his whole role was in this disgusting mess.
14 likes
Same question as Courtney and Kel.
Maybe CS will give her opinion.
5 likes
CS,
It was only a matter of time before someone released the victims’ names. And why not? The names of victims are usually released, even minors, such as all the boys killed by Jeffrey Dahmer and John Wayne Gacy.
I later learned that a Washington Post reporter independently got Jennifer’s name from a police source within a half hour of my posting.
Your problem is with who first reported the name – a classic case of shooting of the messenger. You care more about that than the fact Carhart KILLED A WOMAN.
This is a huge story, CT. The poster boy of the abortion movement, and star of the Sundance Film Festival only two weeks ago, dangerously aborted a 29yo 33-wker and then left the state without having a doctor on call to cover him, and without having hospital privileges at any rate.
CS, your real problem is don’t like the exposure of Carhart. You don’t like the fact that a name and photo have been placed next to the ambiguous word, “victim.”
I wonder if you have the same problem with Ms Magazine for publishing the naked photo of dead Gerri Santoro?
21 likes
You know, that mother-in-law’s remark just really smacks of denial.
“This was a wanted child.” Wanted conditionally, you mean. On the condition that this child had no sort of abnormalities.
When doctors give a terminal diagnosis for your child, you don’t run to a chop shop to kill that child. You fight for your child. Why is it that when the child is found to be ill in utero, it’s acceptable (even considered “merciful”) to slaughter that child by lethal injection rather than treat, but once born, treatment is a given and lethal injection would be far too shocking (in some states, it isn’t even legal to do that to a criminal). This is a mental disconnect. A huge one.
23 likes
CS, did you think that the names of the Newtown shooter and all his victims should have been released? Why would Carhart and his victims be different?
I think your concern is over making abortion look bad, not so much over grieving families. Unless you are commenting on not releasing names of killers and victims on other sites where names are reported. Do you do that on a regular basis?
17 likes
Susie, hi,
The point of the quote I quoted was that the commentor began with the phrase, “I’m not pro-life…” The disgust with abortion is emerging in the general population. The train has left the station and momentum is building OUTSIDE of any political movement.
But this family didn’t refer themselves for an abortion. A woman was given a dire prognosis for her child, and instead of doctors and nurses rallying to support her in her difficult time, she was referred to Carhart. Abortion is deadly, bloody, and ugly. No matter what stage of gestation.
Choose life and provide care. That’s the lesson the medical community needs to learn. Let the consumer demand it, it’s about time.
14 likes
Kathy Morbelli, the dead woman’s mother-in-law, told The Journal News that she is extremely upset with the rhetoric swirling around the death of Morbelli and her unborn daughter, who was to be known as Madison Leigh.
One would think she’d be extremely upset about the hows and the whys of this tragedy.
But I’m guessing she knows a bit about the whys.
Who was really ashamed of who?
15 likes
Jill, the Washington Post would have withheld her name because they have standards. In fact, they left it out of their story even after you spread her name and picture all over the internet.
Why didn’t you just report the story without exposing what should have been this family’s private mourning to the whole world?
And for the record, there are both laws and journalistic standards that protect the identities of crime victims. Newspapers withhold the names of rape victims all the time. Laws protect non-victim private individuals as well. But why does the law even matter? Your doing this to a dead woman and her grieving family would have been wrong even if it were perfectly legal.
You don’t seem to care who you hurt, but you could have gone after Carhart without identifying this woman and making an already terrible situation for her family much worse.
7 likes
CS, are you saying I have so much power as a blogger that I set the standard for the Washington Post? That if I hadn’t gone public with the name, no one else would have?
And what say you about Ms. Magazine publishing Gerri Santoro’s naked body, posterior in the air. Do you think she would have agreed to that?
18 likes
How many women should Carhart be allowed to kill?
13 likes
Obviously, you do not set the standard for the Washington Post as they adhered to a higher one by not printing her name.
I am not presumptuous enough to speculate about what Gerri Santoro would have thought. However, Ms. Magazine did not print her name. She was identified by a family member after it was printed. Can you see the distinction?
Maybe you wanted to hurt the family to punish them? Or maybe this tragedy isn’t as good for your cause without the picture of a beautiful girl to illustrate it? I am genuinely at a loss as to why you would do something so unnecessary.
Maybe you just made a mistake. If you did, you should say so rather than encouraging other people to do what you did. If you’d done this to me, the only reason it would be worth the time and heartache to sue you would be to keep it from happening to other people. An apology might go a long way.
4 likes
“The point of the quote I quoted was that the commentor began with the phrase, “I’m not pro-life…” The disgust with abortion is emerging in the general population. The train has left the station and momentum is building OUTSIDE of any political movement.”
But is it really emerging disgust with abortion in the “general population” or emerging disgust with the “pro-life” movement in Republican circles that would cause a probably-conservative commenter on a known conservative blog to attach a “I’m not pro-life” disclaimer to his post about abortion?
3 likes
ninek says:
“But this family didn’t refer themselves for an abortion. A woman was given a dire prognosis for her child, and instead of doctors and nurses rallying to support her in her difficult time, she was referred to Carhart. Abortion is deadly, bloody, and ugly. No matter what stage of gestation. “
Well…. we don not know what the nature of the fetal pbl is?? We don’t know it was a dire prognosis. Did they refer her to Carhart??? We don’t know that either. Perhaps she and her husband decided that the baby had a defect they could not accept so they went to MD to get rid of the “wanted” baby. I can’t imagine how terrible the father/husband must feel and how responsible. We are supposing that the doctors and nurses did not rally to support her but we don’t know that at all.” It would be hard to imagine any doctor referring anyone to Carhart given his reputation and that he did not have admitting privledges at a nearby hospital.
5 likes
I have a friend who less than two years ago was referred from a beautiful, large professional medical office to a hovel. It happens.
Abortion advocates, would you like to put a maximum or minimum on how many “clients” get killed by an abortionist before you get your dander up? Maybe we have to wait for Carhart to hit some magic number before you show any concern for women’s safety? Tell us, what would offend you about an abortionist? Gosnell didn’t even embarass you. All I heard from advocates after his arrest was “well, this is what it will be like if abortion is illegal…” Bucket of duh. THIS is what it’s like when abortion is performed, legal or illegal.
17 likes
What this whole mess seems to prove to me is that in spite of the legality, abortion is still shameful to those who are ‘pro-choice.’ How else does reporting the death of a woman at the hands of an abortionist show disrespect to a family? It shouldn’t.
This family seems to be suffering the loss of their daughter/daughter-in-law/wife, and understandably so. The irrational statements made by the family show grief, and make little sense, if they in fact believed the abortion to be ‘the right thing to do.’ I can assume from their comments that they are struggling with the abortion now, for the abortionist took their loved one’s life.
But everyone who attacks JS for reporting the woman’s identity seems equally despondent that her name is attached to an abortionist. Why is that, if the woman should be allowed to abort her child? That’s how the woman died; to those who find no problem with abortion, naming the victim should be no more problem than naming someone after their death from an appendectomy gone wrong.
Of primary concern is reporting the fact that Carhart is dangerous, as evidenced by this young woman’s murder. He’s the one that must prosecuted, and naming his victim makes it a real crime, and it got the attention of the mainstream media. JS did well. There will be justice for this young woman’s death.
This family has my prayers, as do all those who struggle with shame around the subject of abortion. But naming this woman, and drawing attention to this case, will not have been in vain if Carhart is stopped.
20 likes
CS,
Concerning the picture of Gerri Santoro, shouldn’t MS magazine have attempted to get permission, find a family member, before publishing Gerri’s picture? Even if they didn’t use her name how traumatic would that be to open a magazine and there’s the dead, naked body of my mother, sister, or grandmother on display for a political cause? How did that “family member” feel seeing that picture? Did she/he even know how Geri died?
BTW, years ago I saw the picture displayed on the Phil Donahue show, again I don’t know if anyone got permission from a surviving family member, but they were only too happy to put it on national TV.
Also, didn’t the MSM and abortion groups have a field day with the “illegal abortion” death of Becky Bell? A little less hysteria and a little more responsible journalism would have revealed that Becky died of pneumonia and coincidentally miscarried at the same time. But who cared about facts?
Now concerning Jennifer’s pic, I’m not prepared to argue the legality or illegality of it. However, let’s not overlook the fact that abortion advocates have only been too ready and willing to exploit the tragedies of others to further their own agenda.
18 likes
joan 2:35PM
Why would a conservative blogger put a “I’m not pro-life” disclaimer to his post?
Well joan, why do people on your side go ballistic over being called pro abortion?
8 likes
Because “pro-abortion” is your made-up term and it’s intended as a slur. But I question what that has to do with my post (hint: nothing at all).
2 likes
joan,
uh, no joan. That’s what you folks called yourselves before you decided “pro-choice” sounded a little more palatable. In the old days, placards carried by demonstrators didn’t support choice, they supported abortion. Anyway, why is calling someone pro abortion a slur? What’s wrong with abortion? Was it a slur to call a supporter of slavery pro-slavery? Or was it just a statement of fact?
18 likes
“Pro-abortion” was never used by people to describe themselves. Again: it’s your word. And I said it’s intended to be derogatory. Which it is, of course. Why are you asking me to rationalize your choice of insult?
If you’re asking, in your own bungled way, why anyone would take offense at being called it, then obviously that goes back to the matter of intent. Sort of like why some people here are annoyed when I put “pro-life” in scare quotes. My intent in doing that is obvious.
4 likes
I’m still waiting for an answer, Cs. What other kind of murder ( this one, a baby AND a mom) would you insist your hands off approach? The woman paid to have her child killed, and was killed herself in the process. Why does she get special attention?
See, proaborts HATE the truth. They hate that this story will shine that big ol hot spotlight (Thanks to Jill) of truth on “safe” ” procedure” , which is, at the end of the day, blood and death. Again, where is there any liberation in this pitiful story?
The crime here is that this poor baby is dead and her poor mother was given the only option of abortion, NOT the fact that we know their names. Get off your soap box and start praying that this clinic is shutflown and this monstrous Carhart is never able to do this to people again.
Your faux outrage is goofy. So is your claim, btw, that the Washingto nPost has ethical standards.
14 likes
I’m still waiting for the evidence that Carhart acted negligently here (so far: nothing). People sometimes die from complications from otherwise safe medical procedures. It happens. You wouldn’t see this kind of rush to judgment for any other kind of surgeon (in fact, on any other day, the average conservative “pro-lifer” probably supports things like “tort reform” to shield delinquent physicians from the consequences of their actions). “Pro-lifers” are cynically exploiting this woman’s death for political gain. They have no shame, decency, or compassion. Even the deceased’s family’s pleas not to turn this into a circus are being utterly ignored.
7 likes
joan,
I hate to break it to you, but there was a time when “choice” wasn’t used, it was “abortion”. And people had no problem saying they supported abortion and calling themselves “pro-abortion” and “abortion-supporters”. I hate to give my age away, but facts are facts.
You still haven’t told me what’s so wrong with abortion that it would be considered a slur to call someone “pro-abortion”.
13 likes
joan 5:02PM
Please spare us the sanctimonious chest pounding. PL people have no shame or decency? We’re exploiting this woman for political gain?
Do the names Geri Santoro and Becky Bell sound familiar?
Concerning Carhart, uh, maybe the fact he couldn’t be reached for an emergency and did not have an associate covering for him might constitute negligence.
11 likes
“You still haven’t told me what’s so wrong with abortion that it would be considered a slur to call someone “pro-abortion”.”
Nothing. Just like there’s nothing wrong with being black but that doesn’t stop racists from using racial slurs to demean black people.
“Please spare us the sanctimonious chest pounding. PL people have no shame or decency? We’re exploiting this woman for political gain?
Do the names Geri Santoro and Becky Bell sound familiar?”
I’m guessing you probably did have a problem with the other side using those names and stories in the service of their political ends. Why the double standard?
4 likes
Joan wrote:
“But is it really emerging disgust with abortion in the “general population” or emerging disgust with the “pro-life” movement in Republican circles that would cause a probably-conservative commenter on a known conservative blog to attach a “I’m not pro-life” disclaimer to his post about abortion?”
I think (and I’m pretty sure polls show, but haven’t got links handy) that there is a large segment of the U.S. population that is still uncomfortable with late term abortion.
I can’t speak to why exactly the conservative blogger said “I’m not pro-life” although I can guess that it is along the lines of “I’m not out picketing at clinics, or sending $ to SBA or other pro-life cause, (or fill in the blank of your stereotypical-according-to-prochoice-circles prolifer, ie, I’m not EXTREME) but …”
It matters not at all. He said what mattered. THIS was over the top. And it is, even in most pro-choice circles.
2 likes
Mary, if what Ms. Magazine did was wrong would that somehow make what Jill did okay?
3 likes
joan,
You’re the one talking about no shame or decency. I’m pointing out that your side had no qualms about exploiting personal tragedy when it served your purposes, even publicizing the picture of a dead and naked woman, and promoting the “incredible lie”(the words of one of the doctors who debunked the illegal abortion claim) concerning Becky Bell.
How do I feel about Jennifer’s situation? I felt it was only a matter of time before her name and info came out, I was already reading of a woman dying after a 33 week abortion on Drudge, though she wasn’t named. So far it looks like authorities are cracking down on Carhart’s filthy clinic and the shoddy abortion clinic licensing and inspection practices of the state of Maryland are being made public, which I’m sure you and NARAL and NOW would be overjoyed about. After all, don’t you support only the strictest standards when it comes to abortion clinics? I know I do for my beautician and veterinarian.
So being called pro-abortion isn’t a slur. Funny, I could have sworn you said it was.
9 likes
Geri Santoro’s daughter hadn’t known thet her mother had died in an abortion; she’d been told her mother had died in a car crash. She was outraged until the abortion advocacy movement talked her into believing that spalshing her mother’s naked corpse all over the place would prevent other women from dying similar deaths.
Funny, though, how when women die similar deaths now it’s a big yawn.
Getting a bad prenatal diagnosis is a horrible, horrible shock. People go through the normal stages of grief. And too many people are eager, while those parents are still stunned and grasping at straws, to shunt them off to the abortion mill. It makes the referring parties feel as if they’re doing SOMETHING, rather than just being there for the long, arduous task of helping people to adjust emotionally, spiritually, and in practical terms to a devastating blow. For the people making the referral, for the abortion clinic staff, once the abortion is over, it’s over for them. They never have to give another thought to the woman and her dead baby. But to offer real help is emotionally, spiritually, and in practical terms a grueling experience.
People grasp at straws at a time like that and tend to clutch on to what’s offered to them as something, anything to do to escape the situation. They don’t realize until after the baby is dead that there is no way to escape the situation. For the rest of their lives, their hopes and dreams for a healthy baby were crushed. For the rest of their lives, they remember their baby. For the rest of their lives, they remember that they made the decision to end that child’s life.
We need to be proactive in making sure everybody knows — espeically the pastors and rabbis to whom these women might be reaching out — know that the way that’s easiest for the bystander isn’t the easiest way for the family. It makes a bad situation even worse.
12 likes
“What other kind of murder would you expect any media not to report or name names?” – moot question. This isn’t ‘murder’, its that simple.
Maybe the MSM are wary because they don’t want to get dragged into making as yet unverified claims such as “the latest victim of abortionist LeRoy Carhart”.
5 likes
“I’m still waiting for the evidence that Carhart acted negligently here (so far: nothing). People sometimes die from complications from otherwise safe medical procedures. It happens. You wouldn’t see this kind of rush to judgment for any other kind of surgeon (in fact, on any other day, the average conservative “pro-lifer” probably supports things like “tort reform” to shield delinquent physicians from the consequences of their actions). “Pro-lifers” are cynically exploiting this woman’s death for political gain. They have no shame, decency, or compassion. Even the deceased’s family’s pleas not to turn this into a circus are being utterly ignored.”
I actually agree with you to a point, but I think it’s funny that you ignore it when pro-choicers do the same about other cases, as long as it matches the agenda. Nobody should be making assumptions about what happened, but there isn’t anything wrong with pushing for more oversight and regulation, and making sure this incident is investigated thoroughly.
What do you think about how people reacted to that Irish woman’s death? You don’t think her death was terribly exploited by your side?
9 likes
CS,
Again, I can’t argue the legality of what Jill did as I’m not a lawyer. Personally I have no doubt the young woman’s name becoming public was only a matter a time, especially with the AG investigation of Carhart.
You asked if we see the distinction in Ms Magazine publishing Geri’s picture but not her name. A family member saw it, someone who may not have even known how she died. I think a picture of a naked, dead loved one would be a horrible thing to see in a magazine or flashed across a television screen. You may see a distinction here, I don’t.
Did Ms.Magazine take this into consideration and make any effort to contact a family member, or was this just too good of an opportunity to pass up?
8 likes
Reality, 5:39PM
Yeah right, like they had any qualms about trumpeting the “illegal abortion” death of Becky Bell.
10 likes
Two thoughts:
– There are approx 50K medical deaths from errors a year – how man of those should be covered and by who?
– News organizations are for profit media – why does anybody feel slighted when they cover or don’t cover certain things? It’s like complaining that McDonalds doesn’t have a menu you like. In a free market world, go elsewhere.
5 likes
Hi Christina Dunigan,
Abortion advocates got their hooks in the parents of Becky Bell as well, people in a state of grief and shock over a daughter’s miscarriage and very sudden and tragic death.
http://www.gargaro.com/beckybell.html
4 likes
Mary, let’s say what Ms. Magazine did was totally wrong, does that make what Jill did okay?
4 likes
This is why I hate these search and destroy missions on pregnant women. The only reason is to pressure them into an abortion. Just imagine if this women had not had that test.
12 likes
CS,
I told you I’m not a lawyer so I can’t give an answer to that question.
4 likes
Hi Susie Allen,
She might be alive today. Also, if the child was born with anomalies incompatible with life, I would hope this would unite her family in support and love, instead of a family now shattered by grief and loss. If the child had a disability compatible with life, they might find much to their surprise how much they love and cherish her. Who can ever know?
16 likes
CS says: February 13, 2013 at 9:20 am
“The “mainstream media” can’t print unverified allegations”…
“The “mainstream” media also has ethical standards,”…
ConSort, CourteSan,
google Trayvon Martin and edited 911 tapes.
Google Newtown father and hecklers
It is always entertaining when fools display their folly.
Thank you for the laughs.
10 likes
hysteriCS,
…”the Washington Post would have withheld her name because they have standards.”…
Ony the news that fits the liberal template.
10 likes
CouldShoulda,
like the newspaper that printed all the names and addresses of privates citizens who had licenses to carry concealed weapons.
14 likes
For the third time in the past year, NBC News has been caught selectively editing video for political gain, with the most recent instance coming on the Monday, January 28 …
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/search/node/hecklers#ixzz2KpITyKPh
10 likes
#Savita
Really. The hypocrisy is seriously hilarious.
12 likes
Mary, I can tell you what Ms. Magazine did (unless there was a case about it) would have no bearing on whether what Jill did was legal. But that isn’t what I’m asking:
If we say what Ms. Magazine did was totally wrong morally, does that make what Jill did morally or ethically okay?
5 likes
The story in question was a March 27 Ron Allen report on NBC’s ‘Today’ in which 911 audio was edited to make it sound like George Zimmerman said “he looks black” immediately after saying “this guy looks like he’s up to no good.”
In the actual 911 audio, Zimmerman only described Martin’s race after the dispatcher asked, “And this guy: is he white, black, or Hispanic?”
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb-staff/2012/03/29/bozell-irresponsible-media-skewing#ixzz2KpK0G5H6
4 likes
CS
It is the height of absurdity to suggest that media outlets only disclosed this dead woman’s name after Jill Stanek had reported it in her blog.
If MSM had the journalistic integrity and sensitivity you falsely impute to them they would NEVER had published her name.
Personally, I don’t see the problem with publishing her name. She died from complications from cosmetic surgery. What’s the big deal? No shame in that.
It’s only news because the ‘butcher’ who botched her elective surgery treated her like a cadaver while she was still alive.
The surviving family will be more than willing to capitalize on the deceasesd misfortune. Malpractice suit is being prepared as we speak.
The baby who was deliberately murdered will proably not receive a proper burial.
13 likes
Xalisae, seriously?! Her husband put her story out there and demanded an investigation. Jill published private info against the wishes of the family.
And birther, Jill gloated about being the one to discover the name. Even if it maybe would have been released eventually by some other ethically deficient person, it doesn’t change what Jill did. And whether or not you see “any shame” is irrelevant tho whether it is cool to release medical information about a dead woman. “Complications from cosmetic surgery?” this supports my theory that her identity was released so people like you could shame her.
5 likes
CS,
The news was already out there and as I said it was only a matter of time, especially since this young woman’s death, a medical examiner’s case, was now a police investigation and the clinic and doctor that treated her would become an AG investigation as well. Its not like Jill went scrounging through the medical records of abortion patients, looking for someone to write about. There’s also the question here of state liability with their lax licensing standards, and I use the term standards loosely.
This is a situation taking on a life of its own. Do I consider it unethical and immoral for Jill. No, since the news was out there and what difference does it make who releases the woman’s name and when, it will be released, and why is it any more or less moral for one person or another to release it?
9 likes
CS, 7:30PM
This situation is now out of the control of the family and it has nothing to do with Jill. When the death of your family member is being investigated by the police, when there’s a state investigation going on, when someone notorious is involved in the death of your loved one, you can’t expect much in the way of privacy. Sorry, right or wrong, that’s how it is. Look how the families of murder victims are hounded.
Jill gloated? Exactly how?
10 likes
I would point out that nothing Jill has done or will do will ever hurt this family as much as Carhart already has.
18 likes
Good work, Jill. As far as I’m concerned you’ve done nothing wrong in your reporting of this story.
12 likes
CS,
What are your feelings on what Carhart has done to devastate this family? What do you think about his appalling negligence in not being available for an emergency, or not having an associate available? Why are the police involved? What do you think of his clinic being under investigation by the Maryland AG and what has been discovered so far? What do you think of the state of Maryland licensing abortion clinics without an inspection? Was Carhart’s facility ever inspected and when?
Let’s hear your outrage CS.
14 likes
Never before have I ever ‘liked’ such a large percentage on any single thread.
7 likes
“If the child had a disability compatible with life, they might find much to their surprise how much they love and cherish her. Who can ever know?”
Two of my grandmother’s children had severe abnormalities. They died within hours of being born. The trauma of “giving birth to death” landed her in an institution for some time — and she had an incredibly supportive family.
“Who can ever know” what would have happened had she had the option not to carry two doomed–yes, doomed–pregnancies to term?
Pro-life=pro-torture.
4 likes
“giving birth to death”
This is exactly what abortion is. Thanks for the new lingo, BV.
Don’t you go on soon? Don’t get too dizzy.
12 likes
Great photo Jill…and even greater work on behalf of the sanctity of human life. LL <3
8 likes
“Don’t you go on soon? Don’t get too dizzy.”
Huh? Guess this is some reference I’m not getting.
1 likes
What’s better, birthing a dying child and giving him a dignified death, or ripping the child to shreds and flushing him down the toilet?
13 likes
They said Carhart could not be reached. Who is arguing Carhart wasn’t negligible? My OB gave me her cell phone and when I woke up bleeding last year (turns out it was normal labor bleeding but I didn’t know) I could reach her right away. Carhart should have been able to be reached NIGHT OR DAY.
10 likes
Her husband put her story out there and demanded an investigation.
Oh, I’m sorry. When your HUSBAND wants to use your dead body as a political tool so the next time he knocks up his new wifey with a female child they won’t have to kill her on the down-low, that’s peachy-keen. Did not get the memo on that one. My bad. Maybe that’s why we haven’t heard a full medical report about that case yet. It’ll just look ultra tacky after all this tripe about “Women’s Reproductive Rights!!” that Savita didn’t even ask for or want an abortion upon admission and her husband is probably actually the most responsible party for her death which was why he was pushing for one. As long as he doesn’t have to pay to feed and house a worthless female child, I’m sure he’s happy. I’d probably feel a little differently about the situation if any of HER immediate family was being as vocal as her husband is. Too bad they started cracking down on sex-selective abortions in India, or they could’ve just gone and had it done there. :(
Nah, John. It’s all totally okay as long as mom doesn’t see it happen. Have you ever even had an abortion? When you go in, the first thing the abortionist does is tap your forehead lightly with his magic wand to make you forget you ever carried a child at all! Then, he just gently applies the wand to your abdomen, and *POOF*! The child is gone. They just evaporate like magic.
5 likes
Mary, interesting that you have to add facts (i.e. that someone else would have found out and published Jennifer’s name and circumstances) to justify what Jill did. If what she Jill did is morally okay, why is everyone running from it? Jill got a scoop no one else had and she wrote about it naming names. Was that an okay thing to do if her identity would have been confidential otherwise? (until, perhaps the family chose to disclose it, or it was revealed in an investigation sometime after the family had some time to grieve.)
Regarding Carhart: if he was negligent, which you don’t have evidence of besides one anonymous allegation, the family should go after him. But they should have been able to do it in peace. Why shouldn’t they have been allowed that? Tell me why you, Jill et al get to decide what is right for them in the middle of their tragedy.
2 likes
BV 9:57PM
I’m very sorry about your grandmother but do you think it possible that Jennifer’s family may now be in need of mental health services?
3 likes
CS 10:20am
Whether or not it is moral, names are released all the time by news media, bloggers, etc. Sorry, that’s how it is. If Jill had scrounged up the random name of a woman who had an abortion and published it for exploitation reasons, I would consider that immoral and unethical.
The medical examiner, police, and Maryland AG are involved. Any hope for privacy is gone. Where do you get the notion that families are given time to grieve before their tragedy is made public? Families routinely endure their tragedies being made public. Don’t you ever read newspapers or the internet?
Concerning Carhart, if he couldn’t be reached either by the family or hospital, and was not covered by an associate, he is guilty of negligence that is beyond appalling. Did you see what was found in his “clinic”? I hope you’re outraged by this. I hope you’re outraged by the fact the state is so lax on licensing and inspection. I bet kennels in your community have to meet stricter standards. BTW, 17 abortion clinics in Maryland are functioning under the same lax licensing and inspection standards. Seems to me there’s plenty here for you to be outraged about CS. Maybe you should channel your outrage into something really constructive.
3 likes
It is so hard to take most of this seriously. The “shoot the messenger” accusation against Jill is almost laughable and would be if the subject matter were different. Obfuscation and misinformation is the lifeblood of the MSM, and so it seems too the lifeblood of our trolls.
Mary is absolutely correct about Carhart’s negligence and the appalling lack of outrage from the pro-choicers here and in the MSM.
5 likes
Maybe that’s why we haven’t heard a full medical report about that case yet. It’ll just look ultra tacky after all this tripe about “Women’s Reproductive Rights!!” that Savita didn’t even ask for or want an abortion upon admission and her husband is probably actually the most responsible party for her death which was why he was pushing for one.
The report confirms that Ms. Halappanavar asked repeatedly for an abortion and was told that the law prevented the hospital from performing one. The report also says that the hospital’s refusal to perform the abortion when it was evident that the fetus would not survive was one of several mistakes that led to her death.
I’d probably feel a little differently about the situation if any of HER immediate family was being as vocal as her husband is.
Ms. Halappanavar’s parents were quite vocal about their (now-confirmed) belief that their daughter’s death was the unnecessary result of anti-abortion medical policies. Apparently that fact has been ignored by the pro-life community, presumably in the service of continuing the racist narrative to which you are all so devoted.
2 likes
The reporters didn’t have any such qualms about misreporting facts (which they did) to stir up a big story about Savita.
3 likes
So, no one is going to explain what this ‘dizzy” business is about? Is this like some super inside joke I’m not in on?
2 likes
The investigation team also found that even before the family requested a termination, the clinical situation indicated a “significant and increasing risk to the mother” was present and carrying out an abortion should have been considered whether or not requested by the patient.
That’s from your own article. Why all the media hub-ub about legalizing abortion in Ireland WHEN ABORTION IN THAT CASE WOULD’VE ALREADY BEEN LEGAL?!
4 likes
That’s from your own article. Why all the media hub-ub about legalizing abortion in Ireland WHEN ABORTION IN THAT CASE WOULD’VE ALREADY BEEN LEGAL?!
No, it’s not from “my own article.” I did not write the article. You’re confusing imaginary reporting–which is what you do when you blame Mr. Halappanavar for his wife’s death based on his ethnicity–with actual reporting, which is what the article did.
There was “media hubbub” because the law, at least as the hospital interpreted it, did not permit a termination until Ms. Halappanavar’s life was in immediate danger, at which point it was too late. If the termination had been performed before she was at death’s door, then she might not have gotten to death’s door in the first place. I realize that is not as satisfying an answer for you as INDIAN = GUILTY, but life doesn’t always give us what we want. Of course, since what you want is to assign guilt based on nothing but skin color, life will give you plenty of opportunities.
2 likes
Did you even read all of the article you posted? It doesn’t sound as though you did. When I said “your article” I meant the one that you had posted a link to as a source. I didn’t think that you actually wrote it. It’s sad that I have to spell that out for you.
If you would’ve bothered to have read the entirety of the article to which YOU linked, you would have found the media frenzy to have been manufactured and unfounded, as the article states what the ACTUAL problem with Mrs. Halappanavar’s care was-incompetence all around. Her tests were improperly monitored, there was a lack of available personnel to adequately care for her, and even when staff WAS available, a few took a “Not my problem.” attitude towards her. The amount of gross mishandling of her case indicated in the article to which you linked is, frankly, astonishing. Added to that the fact that the primary reason indicated for not terminating the pregnancy was supposedly a detected heartbeat when the heartbeat ceased a couple of days after her admission, that is just gross negligence.
Or…
They suspected she’d tried to abort herself and just pretended to be negligent.
3 likes
I didn’t think that you actually wrote it. It’s sad that I have to spell that out for you.
You people tend to lack information literacy, so I thought it best to err on the side of clarity.
If you would’ve bothered to have read the entirety of the article to which YOU linked,
Of course I read the entire article, as well as several others. As I said, the delay in termination was one of several factors leading to her death. Staff incompetence was certainly another factor.
Or…They suspected she’d tried to abort herself and just pretended to be negligent.
In other words, you would have let her die for no reason other than that she was Indian, and so you think the hospital let her die for no reason other than that she was Indian. Disturbing, yet unsurprising.
2 likes
I have read many of the posts here, and the comments, and there is a conspicuous absence of any posts with a position contrary to yours. Is that what you consider an “open forum”? I am posting this in the presence of 9 people who will be watching to see if you eliminate it. Some agree with me, some don’t, but ALL believe that a one-sided diatribe is not an “open forum” You can’t feel very confident about your position if you continue to delete the legitimate and non-sensational posts of those with different views.
2 likes
You people tend to lack information literacy, so I thought it best to err on the side of clarity.
“No U!” Classy and fully of wit, as always. And I mean “wit” with a capital “Sh”.
Of course I read the entire article, as well as several others. As I said, the delay in termination was one of several factors leading to her death. Staff incompetence was certainly another factor.
Except that delay of termination would be PART of the incompetence rather than a separate issue, since the report said that a termination would’ve been lawful upon admission due to her condition in the first place. So all the screeching about the law is moot, since the law wasn’t to blame, but incompetence and negligence (or negligent malice).
In other words, you would have let her die for no reason other than that she was Indian,
Wow. Did you put on a cape before you made that leap? Please, please, PLEASE show me where I said anything REMOTELY CLOSE to such a barbaric statement. PLEASE.
…and so you think the hospital let her die for no reason other than that she was Indian.
No, I think the hospital MIGHT have treated her carelessly because they suspected she had attempted a self-abortion and figured she had it coming. This whole equating “might’ve attempted to self-abort” with “being Indian” is really a logical jump that is disturbing. I brought up the cultural pressure to have male children as a possible reason someone would attempt to self-abort in a country where it is illegal, as a possible excuse for the GROSS negligence of the hospital staff, mostly because I cannot fathom an entire hospital full of staff as THAT incompetent. It’s not the “Indian” part of the equation, but the “attempted to self-abort” part that I was getting at. But I’m not surprised a liberal would latch on to anything with even the faintest HINT of race involved like a freaking lamprey and totally disregard anything else being said. So, let me spell it out for you, since I seem to have to do this quite often for you:
I have a hard time believing any hospital and staff collectively to be THAT horrible at their job(s). I think that perhaps there was evidence discovered upon admission that Mrs. Halappanavar had tried to induce herself to abort her child (I don’t really care WHY she might have, what color, race, etc she was), and the staff purposefully gave her what-for through medical neglect hoping they could pass it off as confusion within the ranks and/or honest oversight.
As a minority myself, I find your attempt to accuse me of racism quite laughable on it’s face. I’m sorry, lady, but “women who attempt to self-abort” isn’t a race, even if a racial/cultural reason could be the impetus for such behavior.
2 likes
I have read many of the posts here, and the comments, and there is a conspicuous absence of any posts with a position contrary to yours.
He said, right below the post of a fellow dissenter. LMFAO!
2 likes
Darryl, you’re funny. I’ve been a regular commenter here for about a year and an occasional lurker for a few months before that. This is actually one of the BEST places on the internet I’ve seen for allowing dissenting views. Seriously, have you ever read anything here that is NOT this one thread?
2 likes
Of course, I don’t no why I’m asking about you reading other threads because, as X pointed out, there actually is other dissent on this thread.
3 likes
*know (why isn’t the editing feature working right now?)
2 likes