Stanek weekend question: Your thoughts on the “right to privacy”?
I’m no constitutional scholar, but I’m told the “right to privacy” was invented to provide a foundation for the “right to abortion.”
But privacy appears to be a “right” only when convenient for liberals.
While the Left calls Bradley Manning a “hero” for releasing classified military information, and likewise calls Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, “a flawed-hero figure fearlessly committed to the freedom of information” – “flawed” only because two women with “questionable motivations” have accused him of rape, the Left draws the line when the right to abortion privacy is breached.
Currently a writer at RH Reality Check is castigating me for being the first to release the names of late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart’s victims, Jennifer Morbelli and her preborn daughter Madison Leigh, along with details surrounding their deaths, provided to me by multiple sources.
I’m told Washington Post got the names only 30 minutes after I did – from yet another source – so they would have eventually come out.
The real point of the attack against me is obvious. Abortion proponents want to draw attention away from the fact that a high profile hero of their movement is likely responsible for the death of a woman.
How do I know this?
Easy. Feminists are hypocrites. They always ignore when abortionists themselves are cavalier about medical privacy. I have the names of probably 100 mothers who have gotten abortions at clinics owned by Carhart, Alberto Hodari, and others, only because these people indiscriminately tossed their private information into the trash, for instance, the following, which I’ve posted before (redacted)…
But it is ideologically inconvenient for feminists to trash abortionists for recklessly trashing the names of mothers who kill their babies.
Still, the question remains, how far do pro-lifers go when it comes to protecting privacy vs. exposing the darkness of abortion to sunlight?
I consider myself a thoughtful militant about this topic. Abortion is mass genocide being committed on the grandest scale in human history. I view how I sift information I receive as how I would sift information I might have received as a civil disobedient in Adolf Hitler’s midst, or in the midst of slave ship traders.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
“these people indiscriminately tossed their information into the trash”
Yes, but abortion proponents will still lay the blame on pro-lifers for digging through the abortionists’ trash. Not on the abortionist who improperly and illegally disposed of that information. Typical.
Sorry to hear that you are on the receiving end of their hypocrisy.
The other side is very effective at silencing people. In my opinion, silencing people is one of, if not their main, strategy. They are only tolerant of their own views!
How many “patients” died at an abortion clinic should be tracked and BE REQUIRED TO BE POSTED IN HUGE SIGNS IN THE LOBBY OF THE CLINIC. This information should also be tracked and attached to each abortionist’s medical record so that patients can view that record and assess their chance of surviving the abortion procedure at the clinic of their “choice”. The information should also breakdown the kind of abortions that each abortionist at the clinic has performed so that the patient will have an idea/information of how experienced or inexperienced the doctor that they will be visiting is.
Oh Im sorry. Are these the same liberals who helped create TSA? The same “conservatives” who created DHS? Who now molest us in the name of preventing terrorism on a plane? So much for right to privacy. It only exists when it suits them.
Yes, I believe we have a right to privacy. But that doesn’t mean the right to hurt others in private. So no, a woman can’t hack her baby into pieces and a man can’t rape a lady on the street and then they excuse their actions because they have a “right to privacy”. Privacy isn’t a blanket excuse to hurt others.
Wow, it’s amazing how badly the other side does not want this story to be about Carhart. Their motto, deflect, distract and derail.
Ditto to the comments above!
When a person’s actions or neglect causes the death of another there is no right to privacy, at least in a civilized society. Does the rule of law allow for cover-ups? Perhaps the libs and abortion rights crowd thinks it does. But what they don’t realize is that what they would allow now when it seems to help their cause will in time come back to haunt them eventually…it always does.
On the larger question of a right to privacy it does seem that there should be some kind of constitutional protections that would put limits on the applications of technology in monitoring so much of what we do…before it gets out of control. The 1984 scenario is not that far fetched anymore.
As bad as I feel for her husband and family, as with any tragedy, the name of the victim(s) makes it real for the public.
I read all of the comments at RH Reality Check. I know. I can never get those minutes of my life back but what is so glaring over there is their misdirected anger. ALWAYS misdirected.
Never at the abortionists. EVER. It’s Jill and her ilk. Jill and her goons. All prolifers faults that WE caused so much pain.
Not Carhart who inflicted pain and death on a baby girl and her mother.
And where can I find the “right to privacy” in the Constitution again?
Carhart’s “clients” would still be pretty anonymous…if he hadn’t killed them.
Carla: Try the 9th and 10th amendments. Don’t fall for the thought processes of the statists that rape our rights everyday.
Namely, the right to boycott abortion clinics in a manner similar to how unions and other leftist cronyist organizations boycott everything else.
It sounds to me as if Jill Stanek is feeling either guilty, or a bit afraid. I don’t blame her. Those are both appropriate emotions, given that she’s exploited a series of tragic events for a private family in the name of a questionable political cause. This family faces not only invasion of privacy, but also a very real safety risk, thanks to the diligent efforts of those in the anti-choice movement.
If Dr. Carhart is guilty of malpractice, then that’s certainly something that should be investigated and punished. But that seems to be beside the point here, and instead this is once again just about making sure that no woman of childbearing age has control over her own body, ever again.
I’ll never understand … Like you said, Carla, she is a victim because of her invasion of privacy, not because of what a butcher did to her & her baby?!
I feel for the family, but if their “choice” was difficult, loving, and wise, then let’s hear about it!
Onward! Speak the truth in love!
While there is no “right to privacy” explicitly spelled out anywhere in the Constitution, such a right is implied by things like the fourth and fifth amendments. If you didn’t have a right to keep things to yourself where no pressing need is indicated on the part of the state, the police would not need a warrant to search your house/car/spy-watch (delete as applicable) any time they wanted. Additional laws, like HIPPA, protect confidential relationships, such as doctor-to-patient or spouse-to-spouse, but are specifically limited in their reach.
That being said, such a right is a guarantee of how the government does or does not get information from its citizens. It has nothing to do with how the citizens get information from each other. Provided no laws are broken, there is no legally binding rule that says any citizen may not state true information about any other citizen in the public sphere. And it is not the responsibility of the general population to make sure that any given person’s information remains private for any reason. This is why it isn’t illegal to report on what George Clooney had for breakfast (although that would be simultaneously weird and boring, which is a hard combination to pull off).
Simply put, yes, I think there is a such thing as a right to privacy, and I think it’s Constitutionally implied. Such a right does not guarantee a right to abortion (in fact, the two have nothing to do with one another) and does not prevent private citizens from publicizing information obtained via legal means.
Abortion advocates need this to be about pro-lifers’ being wrong, because they want to control small unborn human beings to death, and not “live and let live”…
If Carhart kills his patients, that’s beside their point. Their point is that pro-lifers are somehow at fault for NOT WANTING anyone else to die at an abortionist’s hands.
The desire to control others is the motive of the anti-choice movement.
The idea that you’re concerned about this woman’s tragic death is bizarre. You’re claiming she’s a heartless murderer, and pretending to have concern about what happens to her, all in the same breath.
Lavender ~ You can care about people whose behavior you disagree with. No one here called her a heartless murderer.
Jill and her goons. Hey that’s me! Yay
I’m so glad Jill Stanek has finally addressed this topic!!! As I’ve previously pointed out, our culture’s entire attitude toward “privacy” is schizophrenic. Perhaps no culture in history has so rigorously protected it in a legal manner — and no culture in history has been more cavalier about privacy in a social respect. As a National Review writer astutely noted, “We have a culture which vigorously guards the right to privacy but in which nothing is private.” The right to privacy gives people the right to use contraceptives, girls and women the right to get abortions through the 6th month of pregnancy (and sometimes beyond), and adults the right to perform all manner of sexual acts consensually.
Yet in this culture that so guards the right to privacy, people routinely go on television to discuss the most private possible matters. Many, many people go on TV to talk about their illicit and bizarre sexual relationships and many, many, many more people watch people talk about that which is supposedly “private.” If you are “cheating” on your spouse or “Significant Other,” call this show and tell the world about it. Ditto if you are living with 2 boyfriends or have 3 “wives” or get sexually excited every time you see a lady wearing high-heeled shoes.
Pre-Roe, famous women signed a petition stating “We Have Had Abortions.” Actress Lee Grant, writer Grace Paley, historian Barbara Tuchman, playwright Lillian Hellman, athlete Billie Jean King, journalist Gloria Steinem, writer Anais Nin, poet Anne Sexton, and singer Judy Collins all signed this paper broadcasting to the world that they had (usually illegally) had embryos and fetuses expelled from their bodies. They made this most private matter public so that it could become a legally private matter. Huh?
HUH??????
Again, Lifejoy, your claim is incoherent.
No one made Jennifer M. walk into that clinic to have an abortion, she and her husband made a free decision to walk in and undergo this procedure. YOUR VIEWS say that abortion is murder. Therefore, in your view, she’s a murderer.
DeniseNoe, what are you talking about? Those women voluntarily went public. It was their choice. You can voluntarily give up private information, and it’s not a violation of your privacy.
The desire to control others is the motive of the anti-choice movement.
I’m not opposed to choices. The only choice I oppose the legality of is killing one’s child via abortion, and only because it violates that child’s basic human right to live.
That’s what I just said. You want to control others. You ignore the complexity of this issue, elevate an embryo over a living, breathing woman, and you demand control over the woman’s life.
That’s what I just said.
No it’s not.
You want to control others.
No more than any Child Protective Services agent.
You ignore the complexity of this issue,
It’s not that complex. People who say it is are usually trying to obfuscate because their position is unpalatable on its face.
elevate an embryo over a living, breathing woman,
No, I don’t. I do, however, refuse to lessen the gestating child to “less than” his/her mother, because they are every bit alive as she is. Their cells are performing respiration just as their mother’s are.
and you demand control over the woman’s life.
No, I don’t. I’ve been pregnant and given birth twice. I didn’t need to kill either of them to retain my right to vote, the ability to dress myself as I pleased, drive wherever I wanted, etc. I couldn’t care less about what a pregnant woman does on her day-to-day, as long as she’s not killing anyone or harming her child. Just like parents AFTER their children are born have all their same rights minus the right to neglect or abuse their child.
Embryos live and breathe too. Get a clue.
@ Lavender: I recognize the difference between free choice and force. My point is that, as a culture, we have a profoundly schizophrenic attitude toward privacy when it is legally so protected yet so frequently voluntarily relinquished.
Yes, you ignore the complexity of the issue, by making up simplistic reasons and attributing those reasons to someone else.
Yes, when you declare that women aren’t competent to make this decision, you elevate a fetus above a living, breathing woman. Life is not defined solely by cell division. No, an embryo is not as alive as you or I.
Embryos are valuable, but not more valuable than women.
To list the ways you don’t want to control doesn’t erase your desire to control the destiny, the health, the life of others.
Jennifer M and her husband faced a tragic situtation, and they made a personal decision that ended in her death. You can condemn her, but when you do, you show your lack of humanity.
DeniseNoe says:
March 2, 2013 at 6:30 pm
@ Lavender: I recognize the difference between free choice and force. My point is that, as a culture, we have a profoundly schizophrenic attitude toward privacy when it is legally so protected yet so frequently voluntarily relinquished
That’s not a sign of a schizophrenic culture. It’s a sign of human diversity, and of the diverse situations we all face. One person finds freedom in talking, and another finds freedom in privacy.
Hans, please take your own advice and get a clue.
Embryos don’t breath. They don’t eat. They don’t cry. They don’t think. They don’t love. They are valuable as the potential of life, but they are not equivalent to living people.
Sorry the preceding is so scrambled. I was replying to both Denise and Hans, and part of what Denise said is mixed in with my comments.
Privacy is relevant to problem pregnancies. People often say that if a girl or woman doesn’t want to raise a baby, she should carry to term, give birth, and place for adoption.
This is a remarkably unpopular choice. Why do so few women have babies and place them for adoption? I don’t believe the primary reason is that I sometimes point out adoption’s statistical “anti-life” links to certain types of homicides. I’m really not that powerful.
However, I have read that girls and women cite privacy as a reason this choice is unpopular. They feel that an abortion may be kept private while the moon belly advertises the pregnant state to one and all.
There is an article online that attempts to address why having babies and placing them for adoption is so rare and privacy is one of the things cited.
There are other matters as well such as that abortion allows the girl or woman to avoid what they see as the overall discomfort, dangers, and pains associated with carrying a pregnancy to term.
“Potential life”????
You’ll have a difficult time finding a science textbook on embryology to back you with that!
An egg is potential life. A sperm is potential life. But when the egg and sperm join, a new, unique, and living member of the human species comes into being. All this person needs for healthy survival is nutrition — same as all other human beings, including Lavender. The only way to stop this human being from being is to kill her — which is identical to the way we artificially cancel any living human being, including Lavender.
Lavender was a person, even when she was enjoying the embryonic stage of development. I know she was a human being then, because she is a human being now.
We need to protect children in the womb, just as we need to protect Lavender from murderers and rapists — because human children have the same human rights as human adults, even in the womb.
Del says:
March 2, 2013 at 7:32 pm
“Potential life”???? You’ll have a difficult time finding a science textbook on embryology to back you with that! An egg is potential life. A sperm is potential life. But when the egg and sperm join, a new, unique, and living member of the human species comes into being. All this person needs for healthy survival is nutrition
(Denise) People on both sides of this question seem to think that either the time in which a human life comes into being must be conception or the case against legal abortion collapses.
This is not true. In the first MONTH of pregnancy, a great deal of development takes place. By the 6th week of pregnancy — just 2 weeks after the end of the 1st month — the fetus possesses arms, legs, a torso, a head, and a beating heart. It is recognizably human. Thus, by the time the girl or woman has missed her first menstrual period, the unborn is “formed.”
It is not necessary to ascribe full humanity to a one-celled zygote to argue against legal abortion. They must take place after the female has missed her period — and by that time humanity can be “seen.”
The zygote may be considered a blueprint but an actual human being has probably developed from that blueprint by the time the average girl or woman aborts.
People who want to ban abortion don’t hold up signs of 1-celled zygotes. However, they may hold up a 6-week embryo.
Then we’re even, because you won’t find your views supported in a science text, either.
Del and I are not the same as embryos. An abortion is not the same as murder. Not scientifically, not legally, and not morally.
The unfortunate view of the anti-choice movement is that an embryo is superior to a living, breathing woman-thus their attacks on the rights of women to have an abortion even when a pregnancy threatens her health, even when the pregnancy is the result of rape.
The zygote may be considered a blueprint but an actual human being has probably developed from that blueprint by the time the average girl or woman aborts.
Denise,
I wouldn’t consider the zygote anything other than “an actual human being”, since the new human organism comes into being at amphimixis and there is no point at which a supposed “blueprint” is “replaced” with something else. Blueprints do not construct themselves into buildings if you plant them in the ground. This stands regardless of how something looks to the layman.
Lavender,
“Then we’re even, because you won’t find your views supported in a science text, either.”
I beg to differ:
“Each of us began life as a single cell stocked with DNA inherited from our parents.” – Biology, 8th Ed., Campbell, Reece, pg. 8
It doesn’t say “Each of us gained the potential for life when the blueprint of a single cell was created by our parents.”
“Del and I are not the same as embryos. An abortion is not the same as murder. Not scientifically, not legally, and not morally.”
Depends on what species of embryo you’re talking about, Lavender. We’re not the same as neonates, either. However, ourselves, newborn infants, and human embryos are all living members of our species, which makes us human beings. Abortion is not the same as murder currently only because murder by definition is illegal, and abortion is legal. Scientifically, it is the same-prematurely forcing the life cycle of another human being to end. Not legally, but we’ve already addressed how and why that is an injustice. Morally, it is absolutely the same, due to the other commonalities already discussed.
“The unfortunate view of the anti-choice movement is that an embryo is superior to a living, breathing woman-thus their attacks on the rights of women to have an abortion even when a pregnancy threatens her health, even when the pregnancy is the result of rape.”
Both what you think our view is and that it is “unfortunate” is incorrect. As mentioned earlier, it is not that a gestating child is SUPERIOR to his or her mother, but EQUAL, both deserving protection of their basic human right to live. As far as I know, nobody opposes termination of a life-threatening pregnancy. Saving one life is better than losing two. As far as opposing abortion in the case of rape, I oppose that precisely because it’s not about controlling women, but protecting children, and children are children, even when their fathers happen to be rapists.
I’m anti-abortion and in favour of instigating an investigation into Carhart and, in particular, this case. There were a lot of flaws in the article over at rhreality, and a lot of unwarranted, exceptionally nasty reader comments. Of course, some of the comments here have been pretty nasty as well, although the general tone has been fairly compassionate.
I can understand Jill being emotional about this case, and I am as well, and I realize that can lead to errors in judgment. But I still don’t know what good has been done by invading the privacy of this family, who — correct me if I’m wrong — have not given permission for their images and private information to be used, especially in the case of the Pinterest stuff. I couldn’t even bring myself to click through to that because it reminds me of the times I stare at car crashes when I pass them on the highway, and how disappointed and grossed out I feel about myself afterward. It can be difficult to force my attention away (human nature, after all), but that’s what I’ve been trying to do lately.
The proper time for a victim’s name to be made public in something like this is when there is a trial. Until then, try to think of how the family must be feeling about having their privacy invaded (possibly by psychos whom you would never support but who have gotten their information from your site). It’s weird that searching the WaPo site gives me no hits, and that the first page of Google results when I search for her name gives USA Today as the most “reliable” link.
Jill, I honestly believe that you did this with the best of motives, in terms of trying to expose an abortionist and not to shame someone who chose to have an abortion. I’m also disgusted by clinics’ lack of care in disposing of documents, as well as the reluctance of pro-choicers to question Carhart.
You deserve a lot of respect for what you do for the cause, but it’s time to stop trying to justify releasing Jennifer’s personal info. If the family truly did not authorize you to release it, just apologize and move on. If it’s true, own up, because you’re only hurting our cause, and I know that’s something you wouldn’t want to do.
And if I’m wrong on my interpretation of this, please accept by sincere apologies. Again, I really appreciate all the effort you put into this cause.
Bucket of duh, an embryo certainly does breath. On a cellular level, he or she breaths, and as development progresses, organs begin to develop. An embryo consumes, in fact this what one of our other abortion advocates decried on another thread, that a mother has no obligation to allow her child to use her as a resource.
You think that a woman and child are not equal to each other. Gloria Steinem recently said again that women can’t be equal while they have a uterus. Seems like it’s the pro-abortion crowd is having a problem with the concept of equality. No surprise there.
But, Lavender, I want to give you a prize, for using the “the new It’s Too Complicated meme.” Yep, we’ve seen PP’s missives instructing you minions to describe the issue as too complicated for labels. Go you!
Abortion IS murder.
Carhart is a murderer, and his victims were BOTH Jennifer Morbelli AND her child. There is NOTHING complicated about it.
Now, why don’t you tell me that to fill a jar with a child’s blood and body parts is just too complicated to describe the child as dead. Maybe if you use enough words it won’t be so.
X
Right on the $ as usual. I copied your comments here and would love to send them to my confused sister who thinks she’s pro abortion but just uninformed. I’ve never seen someone defend life so succinctly before. Thank you.
You’re welcome to use anything that you like, jamie. Thank you for your kind words. :)
Lavender,
May I point out that your statement is redundant? The embryo, fetus, etc (these term simply describe level of development, as does “woman”) is LIVING and BREATHING too. Maybe not breathing air, but I can guarantee they are an individual human life who is respirating in whatever way is appropriate for their stage of development (as does the woman). And no one here is elevating the unborn over the born – they are EQUAL. Prove me otherwise.
Lavender, I have three questions for you
1) Why do you consistently refer to pre-born humans as embryos, particularly when Madison was a 33 week old fetus?
2) Would you protest the Washington Post had they been the first to report on Carhart’s most recent victims? Are you protesting on other news sites and blogs that have reported on the fatal abortion of Jennifer (and Madison) Morbelli?
3) Madison Morbelli was reportedly killed at 33 weeks because of a diagnosis of a serious seizure-related condition.
What kind of message do you think killing fetuses with disabilities sends to disabled older children and adults, and to those who love them?
Jill, I get why you released the Morbelli names. I don’t understand why average people object to reporting on this sad case. It’s sad that the Morbelli family has to bear the shame of the cruel choice to kill 33 week old Madison because she was disabled. It’s more sad that both Jennifer and Madison ended up dying at the hands of an incompetent doctor.
As to late term abortion supporters and their faux outrage- let’s be honest.
Proaborts are not appropriately concerned with Jennifer Morbelli’s death, or her family’s feelings. They are far more concerned with abortion not looking bad at any cost. Too late for that. Sell-outs to women, that’s all they are.
Jennifer deserves to be remembered and…
I always thought the womb was the baby’s private area. Why do abortionist’s feel they have the right to invade that space?
How many babies have died because of “privacy”? The anoymity of the all the dead babies is a tragedy that America has yet to acknowledge. If a baby’s death is kept private, the baby tends to be forgotten. Little Maddie deserved to be remembered.
Xalisae, you are spreading misinformation.
The Catholic Church, and a number of anti-choice activists, absolutely oppose the ending of a pregnancy even to save a woman’s life.
Other anti-choice activists oppose a woman’s right to end a pregnancy that threatens her health.
And many oppose a woman’s right to end a pregnancy that is the result of rape.
Consider yourself informed.
An embryo is not the same as a living, breathing woman.
The efforts to prove that an embryo “breathes” are getting ridiculous.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/27084-babies-breathe-womb/
But, Lavender, I want to give you a prize, for using the “the new It’s Too Complicated meme.” Yep, we’ve seen PP’s missives instructing you minions to describe the issue as too complicated for labels. Go you!
And thank you for offering this tired and thoughtless reply to my comments. This issue is complicated, even if your thought process and ability to understand it is childishly simple.
@Mary Ann-
Lavender, I have three questions for you
1) Why do you consistently refer to pre-born humans as embryos, particularly when Madison was a 33 week old fetus?
Because I was attempting to deal with the issue one step at a time. You see how lost people get otherwise. The discussion is broader than just this case. There’s a reason that abortion in the early stages is entirely left up to the woman, and why it’s not in the case of a 33 week old fetus. As a society, we recognize the difference between an implanted embryo and a late term fetus. We do, as a society, recognize the different stages of development, and the increasing ability to do what we recognize as human.
2) Would you protest the Washington Post had they been the first to report on Carhart’s most recent victims? Are you protesting on other news sites and blogs that have reported on the fatal abortion of Jennifer (and Madison) Morbelli?
I would find it equally exploitative if the name and details were given by the WaPo, yes. Would I protest them because of something they didn’t do? What sense does that make? In any case, I’m posting, a very mild form of protest. I’m not preventing anyone from using the site, or yelling, or otherwise interfering with someone’s legal rights. If you get my drift.
3) Madison Morbelli was reportedly killed at 33 weeks because of a diagnosis of a serious seizure-related condition.
What kind of message do you think killing fetuses with disabilities sends to disabled older children and adults, and to those who love them?
An excellent point, and one that the earlier “it’s not complicated” poster fails to grasp. I work with children with disabilities, and they are fully human, and yet often not recognized as human. However, their humanity doesn’t mean that Jennifer M should be forced to carry a fetus to term with a serious brain defect. It’s a family’s decision, not the government’s.
IS privacy a reason why abortion is so common while having a baby and placing for adoption is so uncommon?
xalisae says:
March 2, 2013 at 8:47 pm
The zygote may be considered a blueprint but an actual human being has probably developed from that blueprint by the time the average girl or woman aborts. Denise,I wouldn’t consider the zygote anything other than “an actual human being”, since the new human organism comes into being at amphimixis and there is no point at which a supposed “blueprint” is “replaced” with something else. Blueprints do not construct themselves into buildings if you plant them in the ground.
(Denise) A seed isn’t a tree or bush but becomes one if planted into the ground. A zygote might not be a human beings but SOON becomes one if implanted into the womb. Again, at 6 weeks of pregnancy a fetus has arms, legs, a torso, a head, and a beating heart. This makes it reasonable to ban abortion because that’s about the time the pregnant girl or woman realizes she is pregnant and can abort.
This makes it reasonable to ban abortion because that’s about the time the pregnant girl or woman realizes she is pregnant and can abort.
It’s reasonable to ban abortion because a woman realizes she’s pregnant at six weeks? Is that what you’re saying?
Let me illustrate the difference between the zygote and the developed embryo. If I had been raped when I was fertile, it wouldn’t have troubled me to seek treatment afterwards to prevent a pregnancy even if it were possible that the treatment might cause a zygote to fall of the uterine wall. OTOH, if I’d had a regular, surgical abortion, I WOULD have been bothered by it (although perhaps not as horribly as having to watch my body get big as a result of the attack). In the latter case, an organism that is recognizably human and developed would be destroyed.
The deaths of the Morbelli mother and child became a public matter when county medical examiner became involved. Hope Cathart medical license is revoked. States should mandate doctor performing abortion to personally have hospital privileges, not leaving victims to a surrogate or ER. Perhaps civil suit for post abortion medical neglect of mother will shut the Germantown clinic down.
Jill, you acted properly in redacting identifying info of women who tossed their photocopies of clinic forms into trash cans on a public street. If you are aware of HIPAA violations on the part of clinics, the fines for such violations even for a first offense are steep and would have an adverse impact on a clinic.
Let me illustrate the difference between the zygote and the developed embryo. If I had been raped when I was fertile, it wouldn’t have troubled me to seek treatment afterwards to prevent a pregnancy even if it were possible that the treatment might cause a zygote to fall of the uterine wall. OTOH, if I’d had a regular, surgical abortion, I WOULD have been bothered by it (although perhaps not as horribly as having to watch my body get big as a result of the attack). In the latter case, an organism that is recognizably human and developed would be destroyed.
You’re illustrating how you feel about the difference, rather than actually illustratring the difference. Which is a perfectly valid, human thing to do-you’re basing your decision on how you react to recognizing a human form. You’re saying implantation is the line for you. Which is not, btw, the view of many prolife activists, thus their objections to the morning after pill.
However, most people in this nation see such early term abortions as being within the woman’s purview, not societies.
Anti-choice advocates have taken Catholic doctrine and have attempted to turn it into law. In doing this, they’ve had to run over the rights of women, and have placed zygotes and embryos above living, breathing women.
NewRocSusan says:
March 3, 2013 at 8:02 am
The deaths of the Morbelli mother and child became a public matter when county medical examiner became involved. Hope Cathart medical license is revoked. States should mandate doctor performing abortion to personally have hospital privileges, not leaving victims to a surrogate or ER. Perhaps civil suit for post abortion medical neglect of mother will shut the Germantown clinic down.
But NOT Morbelli’s name, or her husband’s name, or her baby’s registry information, or the reasons that she was legally allowed to have a late term abortion. These are NOT public matters.
Stanek seeks to compare herself to Assange and Manning, two indivdiuals who provided GOVERNMENT information-they pitted their small individual selves against a powerful entity, facing a significant risk.
Stanek did not pit herself against a large, powerful entity. She pitted herself against a family in a tragic crisis.
See the difference?
Del and I are not the same as embryos.
Are you and Del the same as Madison was, Lavender?
That’s a good question. Let me ask you-are you the same a person with brain damage incompatible with life?
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/07/late-term-abortion-29-weeks-dana-weinstein
This woman explains her reasons for a late term abortion.
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/indonesian-mother-kills-son-over-small-penis-091437371.html
This woman explains her reasons for a later term abortion.
Are you capable of seeing the difference between agenesis of the corpus callosum and a small penis, Praxedes?
Both mothers believed their child would have a bleak, painful future.
Who are you to judge any mother who makes a decision to end their child’s life?
I’m the person who can see the difference between agenesis of the corpus callosum and a small penis.
You’re the person who can’t see any difference at all.
Fortunately, most of humanity is on my side, and not on yours. Thank God.
Fortunately, most of humanity is on my side, and not on yours.
Yeah, I know, Lav, I’d probably have more humans on my side if your side hadn’t killed them all.
The Catholic Church has never opposed treatment of ectopic pregnancies.
However, pushers of RU-486 and other such pills have ALREADY harmed women with ectopic pregnancies. Plus, I read recently that as many as 17-20% of women taking abortion pills must endure a surgical abortion later, as well as complications from infection. The abortion advocates? Silent as usual. Yes, I was a zygote, an embryo, a fetus, a teenager, and now I’m aging like fine wine. I have been me, I am the same me, at all stages.
Denise, you asked about privacy and adoption. Absolutely pregnant women seek abortions so as to avoid questions about their pregnancy, future plans, and child’s name. Abortion is ALL about secrecy. The industry feeds on fear of truth.
PS Consciousness has no bearing on personhood; otherwise, we could all be killed in our sleep!
As usual the dialog with a troll takes us into different directions. Who would have thought this thread would have led us to a story about a mother who killed her son because of the size of, well, you know what. But that is the way things go when we delve into the consciousness of the world of trolldom.
Trolls are always right, get that into your heads people! They are right about biology, about the Catholic Church, about how nearly everyone in society thinks, about how wrong we are! They are right about abortion, even to the point that would defend abortion even in the case of sex selection or eye color or the shape of the kid’s nose…after all the women’s right trumps the kid’s right every time. It is just so tragic that they cannot see how pathetic their arguments are.
They are the smartest people on the planet and that they deign to waste their valuable time instructing us is a mystery, and it is something I would rather they not feel compelled to do. Because it makes us waste our time tyring to talk sense to a person who has no intellectual curiosity or honesty, both of which we know are essential to learning. But I did say “learning” …how silly of me…trolls do not need to learn anything as they already know everything.
Yeah, I know, Lav, I’d probably have more humans on my side if your side hadn’t killed them all.
Nice dodge, Prax! The fact is, as a culture, we see a difference between a zygote, an embryo, a fetus with a severe brain abnormality, and a nine year old child.
By refusing to see that difference, you give up a lot of what makes humanity special-our ability to make complex moral judgements.
Another poster here called you a troll-but I think you provide a valuable service. It creates a great launching pad for these discussions when someone makes a ridiculous claim like yours.
I refuse to take the bait, and I believe this blog post to be an error.
The woman’s name meant nothing to me, Jill’s reporting of it no different than reading of a murder in a newspaper. I cried (like I cry at most of these pictures of individuals dying before their time) when I saw her happy, smiling face in part of her wedding picture, and realized she had died as a result of Carhart’s malpractice. Unnecessary death is terribly, terribly sad. This case is doubly sad because it happened as a result of an abortion.
It is of little concern to me that this woman’s family now feels an invasion of privacy or anything else. I will not defend the rights of a family that would “take out” one of their members because they would be born with a disability if carried to term. They have demonstrated by choosing a late term abortion that they are not concerned with their own family, why should I be, in any way shape or form?
I believe Jill reported the woman’s identity fairly, and if it were me, I would stand by that reporting, and quit defending it or allegations of violation of a right to privacy. What’s done is done. The woman is STILL dead, her child is DEAD, and the family is grieving. We should be after Carhart, and anything directed at or about the woman’s identity should be rerouted towards HIM, and putting a stop to his horrible practice so no more women die.
Let’s take this fight in the right direction and quit playing by the opposition’s rules.
It’s not about what her name means to you. It’s about what it means to her family.
Then they should’ve protected her ‘name’ better. Actually, they should’ve protected HER better.
This was and is a double tragedy. That this woman chose to end her child’s life and then had her own life robbed from her.
Nothing more, nothing less. The only price to be paid should be by CARHART.
And to think I was told that no one here believed this woman to be a heartless murderer!
Are there any circumstances th at the folks here see as a legitimate reason for abortion?
Do the folks here see birth control pills as acceptable?
Do you believe all believe that this woman’s family deserves to be attacked and threatened for making this obviously painful decision?
Are you all convinced, even though you lack evidence, that Carhart committed malpractice?
I don’t believe this woman was heartless. I think she was sadly misguided by her family and by society at large. I didn’t call her a ‘heartless murderer’, you did. But she did end her child’s life. That is what happens when you choose to have an abortion, a child dies, and you are the cause.
I do not believe there are any circumstances that give a legitimate reason for abortion.
I do not see birth control pills as acceptable.
I do not believe this woman’s family deserves to be attacked or threatened. But I will not sugar coat that they assisted their family member in the abortion of another family member. That is, and always will be, an ultimate betrayal of family.
I am convinced that Carhart committed malpractice because he did not provide adequate follow up care to his patient, and has committed these acts before, and I believe that more proof will come to light as the situation is examined legally.
I’ve not heard that Jennifer and Madison’s family has been threatened in any way. Can you point us to any proof of threats you claim have been made towards their family members, Lav?
but I think you provide a valuable service.
Hey, Thanks! I agree with you on this, Lav!
I don’t believe this woman was heartless. I think she was sadly misguided by her family and by society at large. I didn’t call her a ‘heartless murderer’, you did. But she did end her child’s life. That is what happens when you choose to have an abortion, a child dies, and you are the cause.
LOL. No, I didn’t call her a heartless murderer. Fail. I pointed out that she’s been attacked on this blog and elsewhere as a heartless murderer. You, however, opt for the “she was a dim bulb” tactic. Too brainwashed to know better than how to deal with the situation-a situation you don’t have all the facts on, I must add.
I do not believe there are any circumstances that give a legitimate reason for abortion.
I do not see birth control pills as acceptable.
These would be very extreme far right viewpoints. Which is your choice. To have for yourself. Not for others.
I do not believe this woman’s family deserves to be attacked or threatened. But I will not sugar coat that they assisted their family member in the abortion of another family member. That is, and always will be, an ultimate betrayal of family.
I am convinced that Carhart committed malpractice because he did not provide adequate follow up care to his patient, and has committed these acts before, and I believe that more proof will come to light as the situation is examined legally.
This is “in your gut evidence” not actual evidence.
Praxedes says:
March 3, 2013 at 4:13 pm
I’ve not heard that Jennifer and Madison’s family has been threatened in any way. Can you point us to any proof of threats you claim have been made towards their family members, Lav?
They’ve certainly been attacked verbally, so good for you for not denying it. In fact, her mother-in-law has pleaded for privacy.
I don’t believe I’ve claimed to know of specific threats-I’ve said that Stanek set them up to be threatened. I’m sure you know of the history of violence from some members of the anti-choice movement.
In fact, her mother-in-law has pleaded for privacy
It’s not all about what she wants, is it now?
I’m sure you know of the history of violence from some members of the anti-choice movement.
I’m sure you know Madison and Jennifer are dead as a direct result of what your side believes to be a woman’s right.
In fact, her mother-in-law has pleaded for privacy
It’s not all about what she wants, is it now?
So they deserved to be threatened? Is that your point?
I’m sure you know of the history of violence from some members of the anti-choice movement.
I’m sure you know Madison and Jennifer are dead as a direct result of what your side believes to be a woman’s right.
You really cannot manage to maintain any attention to topic. Everything is just an opportunity to deliver some thoughtless line. Are you claiming that Carhart did this deliberately?
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/07/late-term-abortion-29-weeks-dana-weinstein
We don’t know the kinds of brain defects Jennifer M’s child had-but this woman lays out the specifics in her situation.
I’m sure you know of the history of violence from some members of the anti-choice movement.
“Anti-choice” movement? Is that what you’re calling yourselves now? ;)
Yes, the pro-abortion movement does have quite the history of violence, with all those babies ripped apart in the womb. Kudos to you for acknowledging that.
You really cannot manage to maintain any attention to topic.
No, Praxedes is doing fine. You’re the one who seems to be having difficulty with attention, as well as comprehension.
Everything is just an opportunity to deliver some thoughtless line.
Which you appear to be taking full advantage of . I have yet to see an intelligent defense of your position in any of your comments.
33 week old Madison was killed/aborted because she was severely disabled.
33 weeks…
33 weeks is far past viability.
Why not deliver Madison and let someone with financial means and a heart for disabled children raise her? How can we justify killing/aborting disabled members of our family, our society simply because they are disabled?
This story sickens me on a personal level no end. My youngest brother had Duchenne muscular dystrophy. He and his friends with the disease knew that people were aborting little girl and little boy fetuses with their condition. AS IF its not hard enough to be a teenager in a wheelchair. They would comment on how low it made them feel that so many in our culture look down on them to the extent that they justify aborting children based on their disabilities. That their life was only considered in relation to their disease. It hurt my heart no end, and changed my position to pro-life.
Seriously, where’s the love? We cannot love the disabled among us and be ok with aborting them at the same time.
So they deserved to be threatened?
I’ve asked you before, Lav. Where has any family member of Jennifer’s and Madison’s family been threatened?
Jill, Please, whatever you do, do not allow yourself to stop reporting on these issues. I am so grateful for your work at Christ hospital, and the work you do exposing awful practices and doctors like Carhart.
In a civilized society, we must come up with a better solution to problems than the violence of abortion. Abortion is cruel, dangerous, and needs to end.
Trolls and die hard proaborts notwithstanding, the majority of America is waking up to this. And you are helping with that process of admitting where we’ve gone wrong as a nation and working to heal it.
Whenever abortion’s harsh realities exposed, loving, healthy people turn away from it. The other side knows this, and of course that’s why they’re coming after you.
God bless you, and keep up the good work.
The Catholic Church does not oppose medical interventions that save a woman’s life even if they result in the death of the fetus.
As to the issue, the names of victims are released as soon as family members are aware of the death. That is standard journalistic practice.
You asked and I answered, Lav. There is no ‘FAIL.’ I’ve heard your arguments, many, many times over the years.
If you don’t want to hear pro-life arguments, don’t hang out at pro-life blogs. I stand by my comments.
“If you don’t want to hear pro-life arguments, don’t hang out at pro-life blogs.”
I wish i could like your comment 100 times just for this.
*I
You asked and I answered, Lav. There is no ‘FAIL.’ I’ve heard your arguments, many, many times over the years.
If you don’t want to hear pro-life arguments, don’t hang out at pro-life blogs. I stand by my comments.
You missed the point. You claimed I called Jennifer M a heartless murderer. It was an attempt at deflection, and it was a big old fail.
What do you mean by “victims,” CT? Like in a crime or accident? Or someone who dies as a result of complications from a legal medical procedure? Until there is a trial to prove that a crime occurred, is there anything gained by releasing the names of the family who just suffered through this, especially when none of them have sought out the media (as far as I can tell from researching)?
Do I believe Carhart is guilty of at least negligence? Very possible. I’d certainly like to see a through investigation done. Am I interested in defending his abortion practices, legal though they might be? Definitely not, I’m anti-abortion.
I just think there are too many people making assumptions for which there is no proof. Whatever you think of the Washington Post, at least they were able to run 2 stories on this without having to reveal the names of those involved. Again, please, someone come up with a single constructive thing to be gained by releasing Jennifer’s name at this point? Bueller? Bueller?
I’m genuinely grateful that Jill digs out stories like this that the MSM often avoid. But I’m also thoroughly disgusted by some of the train-wrecky comments I’ve seen here from people I can only assume have no access to info from the family, otherwise smart-sounding people who should know better. And if the access to info is from medical professionals violating patient confidentiality, that’s pretty sketchy and gross, as well as the providers being subject to potential legal action. My stupid college newspaper had better journalistic principles than this.
Look, I realize most of you mean well. Although I’m not religious, I understand and respect that Jennifer’s actions conflict with many of your beliefs. There have been plenty of thoughtful comments, even when they’re negative, and I certainly don’t think everyone is going overboard. But too much of this shakedown so far smacks of stuff I’d read in the National Enquirer. Let’s set up a lynch mob and bring out the pitchforks! Don’t forget the scarlet letter A’s for the family that we’ll make them wear before we know all the facts, if we ever do.
I’m probably a little too angry to comment here again for a while. And that’s spoken as an ardent anti-abortionist. There are a lot of great things about this site and this community, but this story has brought out way too much of the ugly.
And people ask me why I often prefer the company of animals to humans.
In your eagerness to find fault with and vilify the Catholic Church & right-to-lifers, you overlooked the principle of double effect, which is permissible by the Catholic Church & many right-to-lifers, in which an action is permissible if it indirectly causes the death of one while saving or treating the primary person. One example would be a radical hysterectomy on a pregnant woman to remove & treat uterine cancer which would end the pregnancy and indirectly kill the fetus. Another example would be removing the fallopian tube of a woman hemorrhaging with an ectopic pregnancy, saving her life and indirectly ending the pregnancy. However this aside, I have yet to see a surgical abortion indicated for the treatment of fetal abnormalities by any main stream medical organization, anyone other than abortion rights groups, especially at the stage in pregnancy when the fetus is viable and early induction is normally indicated when pregnancy complications arise. We’re not talking politics here, we’re talking best practice & safety, in late-term surgical abortion mortality occurs in 12 of 100,000 cases at more than 21 weeks of gestation
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/252560-overview#3
Also, it’s worth noting anecdotal evidence from women facing poor prenatal diagnostics indicate many face abandonment (& refusal of further treatment) by physicians if they indicate wanting to carry to term, as well as stigma and withdrawal of support from family as well (I saw this in an article & will be glad to look it up when I get on a regular computer). Also, many may not be aware of the rising number of perinatal hospice & support services as well. In other words, these women are not choosing abortion out of empowerment, but rather being abandoned to despair & hopelessness, do they not deserbe better care?
And finally, here are the stories of women and their families who received support and choose to induce labor early or carried to term (and got hold their baby & say goodbye). They are certainly grieving a loss, but seem more at peace and less angry: http://benotafraid.net
So they deserved to be threatened?
I’ve asked you before, Lav. Where has any family member of Jennifer’s and Madison’s family been threatened?
And I explained before. As I said, the anti-choice movement has a history of violence. Most people in the anti-choice movement are peaceful, but others have committed acts of violence like clinic bombings, like driving cars into clinics, like shoving women, and of course, like murdering doctors.
Jill Stanek not only violated this family’s privacy while they were grieving, she put them at risk from the violent faction of the anti-choice movement.
I was intriqued by Stanek’s attempt to claim whistle-blower status rather than what she seems to many of us-like Gladys Kravitz on steriods, not caring about the law or a family’s grief, as long as she had a face to put on a poster and wave around. As if plastering this woman’s name and her husband’s photo, her father’s occupation, all over the internet was the same as Bradley Manning sending documents that embarass the military to Wikileaks. As if she was “brave” to stand up to a grieving family. As if it was wise to give their personal data out so they could have security concerns on top of everything else.
BTW-I see so many comments on this thread that show that the poster lacks knowledge of the kinds of disabilities we’re talking about. Time to do some volunteer work with these families, folks. Families with children who are nonverbal, confined to wheelchairs, unable to swallow, and suffer seizures need trained babysitters. And some agency will be happy to train you to provide the very specialized services that such a child needs.
I didn’t edit my comment in time and ment to say I was addressing Lavender. I’m not going to defend posting this women’s identifying information & photograph before journalists or her family was ready, although I have no problem with pro-lifers generically stating when Carhart (or any other medical/abortion provider) has committed malpractice or injured/killed a patient. But rather I’m going address some of the old pro-choice canard you’re throwimg out & repeating. I do not identify as “pro-life” but rather “anti-abortion” as this better describes my position. I am spiritual, rather than religious and self-identify as an agnostic theist and politically moderate, and I am one of many non-traditional who oppose abortion on the grounds of science & ethics, in which we oppose abortion taking an innocent human life. So you can keep your pathetic stereotypes to yourself.
Also I find it hypocritical for you to be here denouncing Jill and her readers while remaining silent on mainstream pro-choicers exploiting Savita’s death against her family’s wishes: http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/keep-savitas-name-out-of-abortion-row-husband-29096789.html
Families with children who are nonverbal, confined to wheelchairs, unable to swallow, and suffer seizures need trained babysitters. And some agency will be happy to train you to provide the very specialized services that such a child needs.
Hey, Lav. I did work with a nonverbal, wheelchair bound, tube-fed, seizure-proned child. Sadly, he passed away as a young adult from pneumonia but not before he taught me all about real love, compassion, suffering, hope, and dignity. I wish you could have met him although he may have avoided eye contact with you and refused to share his glorious giggle with you.
You see, he had an uncanny knack of seeing into the human heart. No, my bad, you’ve made it clear, you’ve chosen not to see.
LOL, Lavender! You’re barking up the wrong tree here, lady. I’ve been working in direct care with the MR/DD (Mental Retardation, now called Intellectual Disability/ & Developmental Disability) & the physically disabled population since 2007 (and if you don’t believe me, I’d be glad to direct you to the website of the agency I’ve most recently worked for), in addition to helping care for my cousin with moderate MR & epilepsy from time to time. In addition, my ex-husband (who identifies as pro-life), has moderate-severe hearing impairment & sensory processing disorder, but has also choose to work in this field & has been working with a non-verbal young man with severe MR & autism for the last 6 years. Professionally I’ve worked with everything from mild MR & conduct disorders, to profound MR, cerebral palsy, & severe autism. In fact, for these last two years I worked in a group home with ladies with severe autism (most non-verbal & physically aggressive at times due to frustration) & severe/profound MR, with one young lady having epilepsy, and another had cerebral palsy & degeneration of the corpus collusm. But you know what, while their care could certainly be challenging at times, despite their disabilities these individuals were able to learn, communicate through sign language, and experience joy. You have to be able to look past their disability to see the human soul inside.
Did you even visit the BeNotAfraid website or read any of the women’s stories there? What about Myah, who carried to term and cared for Baby Faith Hope, who was born with anecephaly, until she passed away (Myah faced a lot of criticism & personal attacks for choosing to carry to term from the so-called compassionate warriors of “choice” on your side). Or are you just conveniently ignoring personal experiences & narratives which don’t fit into your pro-choice viewpoint.
Without their names made public there would be no story.
If a person’s actions require privacy perhaps they shouldn’t be doing them.
To the pro choice people …sigh…i have been a nurse for 26 years . All of you take,something so simple and twist it with semantics. I’ve corrected doctors before. When a woman is keeping her baby it’s a baby. I suppose when a doctor uses the term fetus and embryo it is simply to comfort the woman in crisis to make it easier to kill her baby. An embryo is a little baby and a fetus is also a baby. It’s simple. They want. to dumb us down. Its working .Lavender you strike me as a woman stuck in post abortion syndrome …stay here and talk with us. Many of us on this blog were once pro choice too!
Begin to research the abortion industry and see how sleezy they are. Anything to get that blood money. I doubt Carhart has lost much sleep over killing Jennifer and Madison. He’s already killed Cristin Gilbert and her baby. Oh well..that’s just a risk that comes with abortion. Then back to business as usual. Go visit the site Cemetery of choice site. As far as privacy I wonder why so many women want to talk about. their abortions with me. Could it be that something is eating at them?
“What do you mean by “victims,” CT? Like in a crime or accident? Or someone who dies as a result of complications from a legal medical procedure?”
I meant victims as in people who have died in some newsworthy way – crime, car accidents, plane crashes, house fires, medical mistakes, suicide etc. Journalists do not wait for the results of civil or criminal trials to identify people in stories. Unless the person is a minor, at most they wait for next of kin to be notified and then they report the story – the name of the deceased and the name of the anyone alleged to have played a part in the death. They don’t wait for trials and they don’t wait for the family’s permission.
“BTW-I see so many comments on this thread that show that the poster lacks knowledge of the kinds of disabilities we’re talking about. Time to do some volunteer work with these families, folks. Families with children who are nonverbal, confined to wheelchairs, unable to swallow, and suffer seizures need trained babysitters. And some agency will be happy to train you to provide the very specialized services that such a child needs.”
Right b/c once you work w/ “these kind of people” (you know the kind who GOD FORBID need a trained babysitter (HORROR)) you could reach no other conclusion than that they should have been killed! Of course! Sorry to burst your bubble but those of us who DO work with them or who have family members like this have come to a very different conclusion. And so have they – many severely disabled people like their lives. Who are you to decide that it can be taken from them? Don’t kid yourself, it’s not love that motivates people to kill their disabled children. It’s fear and selfishness.
Right on about the disabled, CT!
Lavender there will come a day when your health will decline . What are your feelings on that? My husband died suddenly on February 28th. I would have taken care of him had he aged longer and gotten sick. What are your. feelings on that? Should society just get rid of you?
Society wants perfection . No such thing. Everyone is beautiful in their own way.
CT- spot on re: your comments about the disabled among us.
Thank you for loving them beyond platitudes, and beyond their difficulties.
People are not defined by their disabilities. And I know about the real difficulties being from a family with a severely disabled child. Think of the smiles and love little Madison would have brought to the world.
People who judge how bad it must have been for
her to live with siezures make no sense to me. They’re ok with how her body (and her mother’s) must have convulsed under the abortion that killed both of them.
Tragic.
Ninek: Denise, you asked about privacy and adoption. Absolutely pregnant women seek abortions so as to avoid questions about their pregnancy, future plans, and child’s name. Abortion is ALL about secrecy. The industry feeds on fear of truth.
(Denise) Does this mean that abortion is inevitable?
I suppose you could develop something that would HIDE pregnancies in the hopes of leading more girls and women to carry to term and then place for adoption. Do you see this as possible?
OTOH, could we lead women to be more comfortable about having babies they will not raise? Could we make it a custom to ask pregnant women, “Are you raising the baby or placing for adoption?”
Of course, adoption has many problems in it. However, people here sometimes believe that if any negatives are mentioned about either adoption or single motherhood, abortion will be encouraged.
Since privacy is the topic here, along with our culture’s odd attitude toward privacy, it might be relevant to consider two things generally justified on the grounds of privacy. One is the practice of having an unlisted phone number. The other is the somewhat related Do Not Call List.
It is rather odd that so many people seem to react so strongly to sales calls since, after all, those are in fact inconveniences rather than, as pregnancies can be, ordeals.
Privacy is between a woman and her doctor and the dumpster
What I have yet to see from any proabort is honest to goodness sadness or remorse or grief over the death of Jennifer and baby Madison.
Nothing on how tragic and avoidable their deaths were.
Never disgust at Carhart the butcher who instructs women to NOT go to the ER, gives them the line to his horse barn and skips town and is unavailable.
There is this eerie feeling that they are PROUD of Jennifer for exercising her “right to choose”(to kill her baby)and she is just collateral damage. Another body to add to the heap of other women who have died in their abortions.
PS
I have a degree in Special Ed Lavender. Have had years and years and years of experience with those that have disabilities. They have taught me so much about love and life and joy. They have taught you that they deserve death.
If abortion did not take the life of an innocent human being and at times their mothers I would have no problem with it.
hmm, it seems that someone failed biology class. I happen to know that the unborn child receives nutrition during development through the placenta. And they smile and HICCUP (I felt my niece hiccup in the womb at least two months before she was born….she’s now 13!). Human beings give birth to human beings…not “potential clumps of cells”.
No, I think Jennifer was probably convinced that her baby was going to be hard to take care of OR that she’d “die anyway” so having the abortion “would cause her less pain” (The baby named MADISON…she wasn’t a POTENTIAL LIFE…..she was a BABY GIRL who LOST HER LIFE!). And Jennifer paid the price for her poor decision.
Also think someone is mad that Jill exposes Carhart for what he is: someone who KILLS babies and HARMS women, or in this case, KILLS women!
Abortion isn’t some procedure like having your wisdom teeth pulled! Its a dangerous procedure in which at least ONE dies: the INNOCENT CHILD….and sometimes it mortally wounds women as well!
Also, perhaps if Jennifer’s family had ignored the instructions to NOT GO TO THE ER! (which any legitimate doctor would say is STUPID) perhaps she would still be alive, but she’d be wounded just the same. There would not be bringing back Madison, and no replacing her with a new baby that’s “healthy”. Eugenics still exists in this country and a little baby girl paid the price.
Tonya Reaves had also died from complications from a second trimester abortion and her identity was released. Why don’t I see the same amount of hand wringing regarding her “rights” to privacy coming from the pro aborts on this page? That’s pretty perplexing.
I have my suspicions as to why this is, but I’ll keep that to myself for now.
“but I’ll keep that to myself for now.”
Just out of interest, is there any particular reason you’re keeping this to yourself? Also, any particular time in mind for when you’ll reveal them?
I’ll state my suspicions when I hear an explanation by the pro aborts on here as to why Tonya Reaves identity being revealed to the public wasn’t as big a deal as Mrs. Morbelli’s identity being released to the public.
“I’ll state my suspicions when I hear an explanation by the pro aborts on here as to why Tonya Reaves identity being revealed to the public wasn’t as big a deal as Mrs. Morbelli’s identity being released to the public.”
Fair enough, I’d like to hear an explanation from them as well.
To those who advocate adoption: How do we deal with the issue of the fact that the expanded belly of the pregnant woman means that having a baby and placing for adoption, unlike abortion, cannot be kept private?
CT, Ladybug, Heather, Carla, and others:
You mean you cared for BORN people?!
But I thought you were pro-lifers?! Ha. ; )
As more young women make adoption arrangements for their babies, other women will see them as role models, and say, “Hey, if she could do that maybe I could too”. We simply need to encourage it, because so many young women don’t really want to abort. Many of them are in a crisis.
In a culture where adoption arrangements are more common, people would naturally frame their questions, as in “Oh, are they a nice family? Have you met them? Oh, you and the wife both share common interests, wow..” etc. Those kind of conversations may still be rare today, but slowly they are getting more common.
Surely, you’re going to counter with a story of a woman that simply refuses to let her child live. I personally can’t get to every women and heal her heart. But I can pray for her. I’m certainly never going to settle for abortion being legal. It should be illegal. Because it’s murder.
Heather, my sympathies for the loss of your husband ):
I only read and post sporadically here (and am anti-abortion), but from what I can tell now, Tonya’s family went to WBBM in Chicago the day after her death and went public with their demands for answers about her death. Good for them! When I’m a little less busy, I’d like to read more on her case.
The difference is that, as far as I can tell, Jennifer’s family have not sought any publicity here. I would love for them to sue Carhart, or at least get a thorough investigation of what happened. If they do, then understandably her name would have come out then.
The Washington Post published 2 stories on Jennifer so far, including the one on February 9, with calls from pro-life groups to shut down the clinic. They managed to make this case newsworthy without revealing her name or publishing a link to her Pinterest account. Even The Daily Mail didn’t do that, and they’re pretty universally known as the kings of voyeuristic sensationalism.
Why are you so HATEFUL of adoption Denise? I have TWO cousins who were adopted by their parents. One of them is now in the process of trying to adopt a child with his wife due to their own troubles with having a child. And there are closed adoptions, though I think those are rarer now…most adoptions are open or semi open, unless circumstances prevent that.
LizFromNebraska says:
March 4, 2013 at 1:33 pm
Why are you so HATEFUL of adoption Denise?
(Denise) I am not hateful of adoption. Pointing out its negatives doesn’t make me hateful of it. The FACT is that there are strong statistical connections between adoption and some types of homicides.
There are also problems with single motherhood. For example, people in prison are disproportionately likely to come from single mother homes. If I point this out, am I HATEFUL of single motherhood?
Well, Denise, adoption at least doesn’t have to necessarily involve that dreaded “big belly” that you think concerns so many women.
(eyeroll)
Hans Johnson says:
March 4, 2013 at 3:25 pm
Well, Denise, adoption at least doesn’t have to necessarily involve that dreaded “big belly” that you think concerns so many women. (eyeroll)
(Denise) And how does that “big belly” get avoided if the girl or woman carries to term?
At the present time, we can’t do pre-natal adoption.
Big bellies aren’t all that bad. I’ve had experience. Less so lately, thankfully. But it was a lot harder to get rid of than from a pregnancy. And mothers get quite a good trade-off for their efforts.
Hans Johnson says:
March 4, 2013 at 3:40 pm
Big bellies aren’t all that bad.
(Denise) I’ve never said big bellies are either “bad” or even unattractive. Some people find pregnant women especially beautiful.
I have talked to a woman who said her reaction to the “swell and swell and swell” was “No way. No way in H—.” She aborted.
I have also asked if the big belly could be a reason having babies and placing for adoption is so unpopular. I’ve read that some women have said abortion can be kept private but having a baby cannot — because of the big belly.
I want to add that I’m by no means any type of “privacy” fanatic. When the Do Not Call List first came out, I impulsively put my name and number down on it. A few days later — before it even went into effect — I called the registry up and asked my phone number to be removed from it.
I got 2 recorded telemarketing calls today. Yesterday, a person called and I quickly but politely said I didn’t want the product but wished her well.
“I’ll state my suspicions when I hear an explanation by the pro aborts on here as to why Tonya Reaves identity being revealed to the public wasn’t as big a deal as Mrs. Morbelli’s identity being released to the public.”
I could be mistaken and apologies if I am, but wasn’t Tonya Reaves’ name released by her family? I do know that her mother and another family member filed a lawsuit.
Proaborts start groups like the I Had an Abortion project in attempts to de-stigmatize abortion but when a woman dies after an abortion, they want to hush everyone up.
What is it? Be loud and proud about abortion or shut the heck up about it?
The actions of some of Jennifer and Madison’s family attest to the fact that they support legalized abortion. If you support legal abortion, you need to OWN IT and stop pointing the fingers at anyone in the prolife movement who discusses the facts surrounding abortion.
There would not be this uproar about privacy if Jennifer had passed away after having a wisdom tooth or a cyst removed. The fact is and always will be that Jennifer died after a legal abortion that also took the life of her baby girl, Madison.
OWN IT proaborts.
Jane Fonda has said children born to teen mothers “have less supportive and stimulating environments.” She says they have other disadvantages.
Is this HATEFUL of teen mothering?
I don’t know who released the information about Tonya Reaves first. I don’t know if her family had approached the news media after her name was released or if they are the people responsible for getting it released in the first place. If anybody can find that out I would appreciate the info.
As for the Washington Post, they may not have posted Mrs. Morbelli’s name, but they did use that as an opportunity to vilify the abortion protestors. Petula Dvorak was the author of that article. She was critical of the protestors and whoever leaked the information to them in the first place. However, she was NEVER critical of Carhart. Very telling. Carhart abandons his patient and she dies, no problem, people find out his patients name and leak it, oh the horror! Huh! That’s worse and it is given more attention? Am I missing something here?
As for Mrs. Morbelli, she is in my thoughts and prayers often. As is her little girl, her husband and her family. This case has haunted me since I’d first heard about it. I was in a similar situation in regards to a poor prenatal outcome with my third daughter. I had undergone some prenatal testing and the results were awful. I was told that my daughter had a 1/13 chance of having some kind of chromosomal abnormality or something worse. The pressure for me too have an amnio was enormous. I said no and proceeded on with my pregnancy. I was constantly pressured too have an amnio. Even up until my third trimester! We all know why they like to do amnio’s. If something is found, the next step is pressuring the mother to abort. All the way up until the last trimester. What if I had weakened and given in to the pressure? You can make some really crappy decisions when you are scared and vulnerable. People like Carhart prey on that stuff.
Pregnancies are viewed in such an awful light nowadays. I swear, I almost feel like your unborn child is looked at as a kind of tumor. Let’s find out if it’s malignant or benign. If it’s malignant, we’ll just cut it out. Just terrible! I’ll never forget the atmosphere at mt perinatologists office. There were pregnant women all over the place, yet you could cut the tension with a knife. The atmosphere in an oncologists office is probably more cheerful.
@ Meri: And what happened after you gave birth?
I assume you held your baby and loved the baby for at least a brief period of time.
My little girl was born and she was a lot healthier than the doctors suspected. As a matter of fact, she was just about perfect. With the exception of the hole in her heart. She was born with a VSD(ventricular septal defect). It has closed up on it’s own. It was scary there for a little while though. If it hadn’t started to close up on it’s own, she would have had to get surgery. That wasn’t the case and I am so grateful for that. The perinatologists missed the hole in her heart. I can’t see how because I practically lived in their office getting ultrasounds. I forgot to mention that she didn’t have any chromosomal abnormalities as was expected.
I’m sorry if I painted such a bleak picture in my comment that it made you think that she didn’t survive. That was the picture that was painted for me by the doctors and they were WRONG! I swear, at one of my appointments they flat out told me that my little girl could just die in utero at any second. It was awful. My sister in law accompanied me to one of my visits to the peri and she was quiet on the drive back home because she was traumatized by what the doctor said about my daughter Either way, I had already loved my little girl from the get go and I was in it for the long haul with her until the end no matter what.
I’ll be honest though, and I hate to say this, but I was terrified to give birth to her. I didn’t know what the heck to expect. God forgive me , but, I just couldn’t help it. I didn’t know what I was going to be looking at or if she would even survive her birth. Well, I looked over at the incubator and saw a tiny little girl staring straight at me. Her eyes were wide open and very interested in me. She was an itty bitty little thing weighing in at 5 pounds 12 oz. I will never forget that moment.
@ Meri: Your story has my hair standing on end! I am just so glad you ignored the medical advice and have your child now.
So far I have not heard any outcry that the supposed DNR status (private medical record) of THIS PATIENT was leaked out into the media. Not a peep. The incomplete story has people foaming at the mouth about an 87 year old woman who was not given CPR, without knowing the reasons why.
Lefties are only concerned about privacy when the skeletons in their own closets are rattled.
I’m looking forward to their response when laws are passed allowing law enforcement to conduct routine home inspections to make sure that guns are locked away safely. What ELSE will the police find in those leftie homes??? ;-)
911 calls are a matter of public record–there’s a rationale behind that but at the moment I can’t recall what it is. If you ask me, I think they should be private, especially when a person’s name is mentioned. I don’t actually think there is a good reason for the general public to hear the 911 calls–on a basis of need to know, I’m not sure that we do need to know. But it is what it is at the moment–I don’t write the laws. Additionally, it seems as though the station contacted the woman’s daughter for a statement–no doubt she gave permission for the release of her mother’s name.
I’m not sure that we do need to know.
When in doubt, ask Jennifer Starr what names should be a matter of public record. After all, we ghouls, voyeurs and jackals really disgust her and it’s only her opinion that matters.
Ms. Starr, these little folks would give you permission to publish their names if they could but they can’t because you and your ilk supported their deaths: herestheblood.com
Regarding Jennifer Starr’s post
What supposedly leaked in the case of the assisted living facility patient was her DNR status. I do not recall that being a part of the 911 call, and is not likely a piece of info that her daughter would have offered even if she was certain of it.
Also news sources do not agree on the patient’s DNR status. Click my nic for details.
I just want to pipe in once more to the accusation that pro-lifers only want to control women. Proof, please.
I’m getting very weary of these strawmen and windmills, and gosh, I’m not even the one fighting them! The abortion advocates are!
Since it is a human being that dies in an abortion, and it is the parents and the abortionist that forces that human to die, how is that NOT controlling the small human being? Without interference, the little human will keep growing, and in some unfortunate cases, will die naturally of natural causes. But the parent(s) and the abortionist cannot wait. They do not have the patience to wait until the child is ready to leave on his own. How is forcing the child, in a bloody, violent, and deadly way, NOT controlling the child’s life to the point of death?
How badly do you abortion advocates want to keep killing children? Badly enough to blame a Nothing Windmill? Did I get off the couch and become active in the pro-life movement because I wanted to control women? Really? That’s what Blue, Lavender, and whatever other colors come and post on this side are saying. They are, when they say that we want to control women, accusing ME PERSONALLY of wanting to control women. Since this is not the case, I demand proof, or shut up.
ninek says:
March 5, 2013 at 4:09 pm
I just want to pipe in once more to the accusation that pro-lifers only want to control women. Proof, please. I’m getting very weary of these strawmen and windmills, and gosh, I’m not even the one fighting them! The abortion advocates are!
(Denise) I think we can all agree that the best way to decrease abortions is to decrease pregnancies among women who don’t want to get pregnant. I also think that we can all agree that decreasing such pregnancies is a way of HELPING women, most of whom do not ENJOY getting abortions.
Ninek, how can we decrease these pregnancies?
New leaf just turned over: from now on when abortion advocates accuse me or us of trying to control women, I’m just going to say, “That’s a boldfaced lie.” and move on.
If they accuse me or us of supporting murderous criminals, I’m going to say, “That’s a boldfaced lie.” and move on. I’ve got kids to save.
Denise, I couldn’t disagree with you more. Pregnancy is not a problem. Despising pregnancy IS the problem. How can we get women to tap back into the naturally occuring compassion that most parents feel for their children? We have a compassion problem, not a pregnancy problem.
Some women will abort a planned child. There is no way to protect that child if the first line of defense (mother) becomes the one who acts to end the child’s life. Remember the photo on Jill’s quote of the day, of the African-american woman who was pregnant with twins? Who would have kept a boy, but didn’t want two girls? She was not in a crisis. What about the teen who (posted on a website I used to visit) that she wanted to get an abortion so she wouldn’t be fat in her prom dress? Or the pro-choice blogger who planned her pregnancy, then got a late term abortion and lied to her family that she’d had a miscarriage?
You see, once legal abortion exists, and without any restrictions, then any reason or no reason will do. It is that very frame of mind that needs to be healed.
My mother had a strong interest in protecting me, despite the lack of perfection in her life. The question is, how do we fan the flame of love and compassion in a culture that throws people away?
@ ninek: These sad and unfortunate instances are the RESULT of abortion’s legalization and widespread social acceptance. What was the CAUSE of its legalization? That was because girls and women were getting pregnant despite being completely unwilling (or unable) to carry those pregnancies to term. IMO, if problem pregnancies had been adequately addressed as they should have been, abortion would not have been legalized in the first place.
There are 3 million unplanned pregnancies in America per year, half of which end in abortion. The focus should be on ensuring that the women who get pregnant are the ones who want to have babies.
Not all females are prepared to become mothers. I have no characteristics that would make me a good mother. I was targeted for seduction at 15 years of age by an adult male sexual predator. Luckily, I “Just Said No.” However, this man and others like him should know that they are on dangerous territory when they try for a girl this young. They might if the statutory rape laws were rigorously enforced.
@ ninek: Wouldn’t you agree that most abortions are of unplanned pregnancies?
And that decreasing such pregnancies would decrease abortion?
The fact is that babies and children need a great deal of affection and stability to grow up into normal, healthy adults. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to suggest that not all fertile females should be getting pregnant. You may think Jane Fonda has a “hateful” attitude toward teen pregnancy but the fact is that children should be raised by healthy, high-functioning adults and not by other children. Trying to prevent young, unmarried girls from getting pregnant is a legitimate goal. So is preventing pregnancy in adult women who aren’t prepared to parent.
ninek: Do you think this problem started long before abortion was legalized with the expression calling a single female who was pregnant “in trouble”?
I just wanted share I am watching a documentary called Wretches & Jabberers, about two individuals (Larry & Tracy) with autism, who use assistive communication devices and travel the world (with their caregivers) teaching people about autism, abnormal movement disorders, and to meet new people & experience new things.
Denise, your attitude is like the attitude of women and men who fought to legalize abortion: The mother’s feelings are more important to you than the child’s life.
Rendering abortion illegal will save more lives than anything else. When abortion was illegal, less babies died. It’s so simple, but you, yes you, need to face the fact that you are so overwhelmed by your identification with pregnancy anxiety, that you fail to fully realize the importance of a small child’s life. How can I make YOU understand that? If you can’t even understand that, how can we keep OTHER women out of the abortionist’s stirrups? You keep wanting this to be about happy pregnancies. Well guess what, pregnancy is nine months long, usually, and in any 9 months out of anyone’s life, plenty of people can have fear and anxiety, and set backs and challenges.
Children don’t deserve the death penalty because of their mothers’ emotions (to say nothing of coersion from families, husbands, bosses, and boyfriends).
“You see, once legal abortion exists, and without any restrictions, then any reason or no reason will do.”
Ah, yes. the anti-abortion laws in the Congo, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka and Nicaragua have successfully fostered cultures that respect human life and dignity.
“You keep wanting this to be about happy pregnancies. Well guess what, pregnancy is nine months long, usually, and in any 9 months out of anyone’s life, plenty of people can have fear and anxiety, and set backs and challenges.”
Yeah, and nine months isn’t that long of a prison sentence, relatively speaking.
See, this is where your side has lost, and is going to lose, over and over again: no matter how much you dress up your argument in the language of compassion, or spurious appeals to “science,” the core of your belief is that a pregnant woman could literally be suicidal with the thought of carrying to term, yet she would still have to do it.
This is a sentient, grown human being we’re talking about here. Yes, this should be about happy pregnancies. You guys like “science,” right? You like pointing to intro to bio textbooks and jabbing at the pretty diagrams, as if a scientific definition could ever yield up the answer to questions about jurisprudence and rights. So I assume you’re read up on how toxic stress can be to unborn children, no? And you want to tell me that pregnancies don’t have to be “happy.” that women can drag themselves through the experience and pop out a totally healthy, functional child on the other end?
woman could literally be suicidal with the thought of carrying to term, yet she would still have to do it.
Um, yeah, and if a man threatens suicide if his girlfriend wants to break up with him, we should pass a law that she must remain with him. We should always cater to the wants of the suicidal person.
Actually, suicidal individuals need love and counseling, BV. They don’t need you to encourage them to kill their offspring.
Oh, right. “Counseling.” By some of the same “providers” who staff your “crisis” “pregnancy” “centers,” I’m sure. Pastor Jimmy Bob Jo-Sue. Right.
Any of the former abortion counselors in this article will do, Megs:
http://www.lifenews.com/2012/09/13/conference-will-honor-abortion-workers-who-have-become-pro-life/
ninek says:
March 6, 2013 at 4:26 pm
Denise, your attitude is like the attitude of women and men who fought to legalize abortion: The mother’s feelings are more important to you than the child’s life. Rendering abortion illegal will save more lives than anything else. When abortion was illegal, less babies died. It’s so simple, but you, yes you, need to face the fact that you are so overwhelmed by your identification with pregnancy anxiety, that you fail to fully realize the importance of a small child’s life.
(Denise) As a female growing up, I well remember pregnancy anxiety. ”So-and-so is pregnant. She’s been such a disappointment.” “So-and-so had a baby out of wedlock as a teenager. I think it’s a tragedy.”
The fact is that emotions are MOTIVATORS. If you WANT to have a baby, what are you motivated to do? Carry to term and give birth!
Someone told me that how one stands on the legality or illegality of abortion depends a great deal on whether you identify with the unborn of the female who is pregnant and doesn’t want to be.
As a female growing up, I well remember pregnancy anxiety. ”So-and-so is pregnant. She’s been such a disappointment.” “So-and-so had a baby out of wedlock as a teenager. I think it’s a tragedy.”
I never bothered to listen to people or their opinions about other people when I thought they were being unfair. My own parents included. I think you really should have spent more time learning when and what to take to heart and when to discard the things being said around you.
The fact is that emotions are MOTIVATORS. If you WANT to have a baby, what are you motivated to do? Carry to term and give birth!
As someone who didn’t want a baby or to be pregnant at the time that I ended up getting pregnant and birthing my child anyway, let me give you another motivator: Not killing a child, and specifically not killing YOUR OWN child. Being considerate of others is not an unimaginable feat of outlandish accomplishment.
Someone told me that how one stands on the legality or illegality of abortion depends a great deal on whether you identify with the unborn of the female who is pregnant and doesn’t want to be.
We are women. We can take care of ourselves, it is not legal to kill us, and our existences do not continue at the mercy of someone larger, stronger, and more developed than we are. LIFE > “wants”.
The difference between the vast majority of pro-lifers and the opposition is that we do identify with BOTH mother and child. It’s a lie they we don’t care about the mothers, or about the children post-birth.
So many demand we be “all-inclusive” on issues. Well, by definition that is what we are when it comes to parent and child.
Blue Velvet,
I think Praxes was referring to professional mental health counseling (Prax?) but nice swing below the belt there. And I guess you don’t take issue then with Planned Parenthood having on-site trained political activists with no requirement beyond basic medical office clerical experience & a high school diploma doing “counseling”?
https://m.plannedparenthood.org/mt/https://plannedparenthoodext.hire.com/viewjob.html?optlink-view=view-84557&ERFormID=newjoblist&ERFormCode=any
http://clinicquotes.com/former-planned-parenthood-worker-describes-counseling-at-her-clinic/
Sorry about the misspelling of your name Praxedes (may I call you Prax for short?) :P
I think Praxes was referring to professional mental health counseling
Yes, I was Ladybug and I think BV probably knew that I was referring to professional mental health counseling for the suicidal tendencies. Although, the love part could come from the folks at prolife crisis pregnancy centers if the mom doesn’t have much in the way of family/friend support.
Feel free to call me Prax anytime!