Forced abortions now legal in America

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/mar/04030910.html

Tuesday March 9, 2004 Printer friendly version Email to a friend

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Forced Abortion Legal in America
Woman awakes in a closet after coerced abortion
FRONT ROYAL, Virginia, March 9, 2004 (LifeSiteNews.com/pop.org) - The Population Research Institute has revealed that coerced abortion is a reality in America. A court ruled that a woman can be forced to submit to an abortion, if, in the opinion of the abortionist, the measure is necessary to "protect the health of the mother." The Jane Roe II vs. Aware Women Center for Choice, Inc. ruling was handed down in January.

The case arose when a young woman who entered an abortion clinic for an abortion changed her mind. The abortionist, William P. Egherman, who has committed over 10,000 abortions, instead of stopping the procedure, called in assistants to hold her down while he continued to dilate her cervix.

"My God, you're hurting me" the woman screamed. "You're killing me, I'll never be able to have babies... Stop!" Despite her pleas, Egherman went in with a forceps, an instrument in court he referred to as "the bear" and began prodding and pulling, and accidentally tore out a piece of her intestines. He advised the ambulance to go slow, without lights or siren, so as not to distress his other clients who were waiting for abortions. The hospital repaired the damage and removed the remains of a dead child.

The woman and her lawyer, former judge, Chris Sapp filed suit in the federal courts, arguing that the abortionist had violated the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE). FACE was passed to guarantee the right of women to receive reproductive health care. But if a woman had a right to enter a clinic to get an abortion, Sapp argued, she also has a right to leave a clinic in order to protect herself and her baby. The suit was lost, but an appeal is planned -- to the US Supreme Court if necessary.

According to Sapp, "This ruling does establish a precedent for forced abortion." An expectant mother receiving a routine gynecological exam, for example, could be held down and forcibly aborted. The abortionist would merely have to argue that the abortion was necessary to protect the mother's health or life, and this would not be a violation of the FACE Act.

PRI recently learned of another forced abortion in America. A 25-year-old Maryland woman, four months pregnant, changed her mind about having an abortion after being taken to the procedure room. She ran back to the clinic entrance where her boyfriend stopped her. "You have to get an abortion", he told her. "I've already paid for it". Three clinic workers and the abortionists surrounded the woman, sedated her by injection, and then took her back into the procedure room. After the forced abortion, she awoke in a closet.

Read the PRI report at: http://pop.org/main.cfm?id=215&r1=2....level=3&eid=54
Oregon coverage:
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/orego...8369629820.xml
Massachusetts and Maine coverage:
[link broken]
New Jersey coverage:
[link broken]
New York coverage:
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wi...,4806216.story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


(c) Copyright: LifeSiteNews.com is a production of Interim Publishing. Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*) but acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use LifeSiteNews.com).

NEWS TIPS to lsn@lifesitenews.com or call 1-866-787-9947 or (416) 204-1687 ext. 444

Donate to LifeSiteNews.com at http://www.lifesite.net/contribute/

[Rico]

If this is true it's terrible! And people wonder why people blow abortion clinics up.

[LadyCoonskinner]

Originally Posted by Rico

If this is true it's terrible! And people wonder why people blow abortion clinics up.

I'm with ya on that, Rico!!!

[FRINGE_NUTTER]

Where is the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for the unborn and for the women who changed their mind in this case???

[MissBrattified]

Ugh! How ironic that a ruling that supports the rights of the MOTHER over the rights of the CHILD would disregard the MOTHER's wishes on this matter!

It just goes to show that their true agenda has nothing to do with women's "rights."

[LadyCoonskinner]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Ugh! How ironic that a ruling that supports the rights of the MOTHER over the rights of the CHILD would disregard the MOTHER's wishes on this matter!

It just goes to show that their true agenda has nothing to do with women's "rights."

No joke!!!!

[Digging4Truth]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Ugh! How ironic that a ruling that supports the rights of the MOTHER over the rights of the CHILD would disregard the MOTHER's wishes on this matter!

It just goes to show that their true agenda has nothing to do with women's "rights."

Indeed...

[Rico]

This doesn't make sense to me. If a woman tells a man no at any time during intercourse, and he continues, it's considered rape. But, according to this article, if a woman tells the abortionist no at any time during the procedure it is legal for him to continue against her wishes. DISGUSTING!

WOW! She must been pretty far along if they had to use forceps on her. This story is so strange, is this being enforced on women who are not mental right? This is something to keep your eyes on.

[Rhoni]

There are some circumstances that it would be a difficult decision to make, i.e., if the mother had other children that needed raised and it would leave multiple children without a parent. I am so glad that I am not in the position to make such a decision.

Blessings, Rhoni