Texas and Abortion: This is How Pro Choice Created Gosnell

Texas and Abortion: This is How Pro Choice Created Gosnell July 1, 2013

I’ve written before that Dr Gosnell is the monster that pro choice built.

Dr Gosnell is the recently convicted serial killer/abortionist who operated what some people have described as a “chamber of horrors” in Pennsylvania.

I knew I would catch some flak for saying that, and I did. But I had said it advisedly, based on my experience on both sides of the abortion wars. I knew what I was talking about.

We are seeing the dynamic I referred to acted out once again in Texas; pro choice people are going over the top to fight the regulation of abortion clinics in the name of “women’s health.”

About a week ago, Senator Wendy Davis of the Texas State Senate engaged in a 13-hour filibuster that resulted in a legislative train wreck for a good piece of pro life legislation. Her actions, along with some filibustering from the Senate gallery, effectively killed a bill that would have required that:

1. Abortion clinics provide the same kind of patient safety as any other ambulatory outpatient surgical center,

2. Doctors who perform abortions in clinics must have hospital privileges at a hospital that is within 30 miles of the clinic,

3. Abortion clinics provide their patients with a phone number which would be answered 24 hours so that they can call for medical follow-up to their abortions,

4. Abortion clinics give women the name and phone number of the emergency facility nearest to her home where she can go for medical care in the case of an emergency after her abortion,

5. Doctors, and not staff, prescribe drugs for a chemical abortion according to FDA guidelines, and that the drugs for chemical abortions may not be dispensed until after the prescribing physician has examined the patient and determined that she is not carrying an ectopic pregnancy.

6. Doctors who perform abortions who prescribe drugs for a chemical abortion also provide follow-up care, including a follow-up examination by the physician to determine that the abortion is complete and a 24 hour phone number in case the woman needs questions answered.

7. Doctors who perform abortions must report adverse affects caused by drugs used in chemical abortions to the FDA according to FDA guidelines.

These are the “outrageous” regulations that pro choice people are demonstrating to stop. In my humble opinion, there is not one thing on this list of requirements that even the most pro choice person would not want for their daughter if she was undergoing an abortion.

Doctors who do abortions — which are a surgery — should have hospital privileges?


Abortion clinics — which are outpatient surgical clinics — should comply with the same health and safety regulations that every other outpatient surgical clinic does?

Abortion docs should examine their patients before surgery and follow up with them afterwards? They should report side effects of the drugs they prescribe to the FDA? They should make sure that women they give abortion-causing drugs aren’t carrying an ectopic pregnancy, when giving those drugs to a woman who is carrying an ectopic pregnancy can cause her to bleed to death?

These regulations are exactly what anyone who is interested in “safe, legal” abortions should want. Frankly, I think the pro choice people should thank the pro life legislators who are pushing this bill for cleaning up their dirty little industry.

However, the pro abortionists have pulled out all the stops to kill this bill, including misrepresenting it to their own followers. I doubt very much that the many “pro choice” people in this country who are buying the stuff the abortion industry is putting out about this legislation actually know what the bill contains.

If they did, most of them would favor the legislation. Frankly, anyone who favors “women’s health” should favor this legislation. But they’ve been conditioned for many decades by the constant drum beat of pro abortion extremists to believe any stupid thing those extremists say. There is little actual thinking that goes into the positions they take on abortion.

I would imagine that even most of the legislators who oppose this bill think they are doing it because if they don’t women will be “sent to the back alleys.”

The Texas legislature can not overturn the United States Supreme Court. Roe is not in danger. What is in danger is the lives of the young women who go to clinics that are protected from providing good medical care by abortion zealots who are so caught up in their cause that they don’t have a genuine thought in their heads.

I read this morning that there are plans for celebrities to come to Texas and speak against the bill. The whole thing has turned into a cause celeb, both literally and figuratively. After all, it turns out that many of the clinics in Texas will have to close because they can’t comply with operating like regular outpatient surgical clinics do.

They want, they demand, that they be exempted from providing good medical care to women because if they do have to provide the same level of care that other outpatient surgical clinics provide, it will endanger women’s health.

Does anyone know who’s on first?

Lessee …

What are we making sure of?

That women’s doctors are free to not follow up with them, don’t have to provide the same health and safety for them that they would for any other surgery, don’t need to examine them before doing surgery on them or administering dangerous drugs to them, and … get ready for this now … don’t even have to have hospital privileges at a nearby hospital.

That’s “women’s health,” abortion style.

Remember Dr Gosnell and his chamber of horrors? This kind of folderol is exactly how pro choice built that monster.

They fight against any and all pro life legislation on the grounds that even safety standards “narrow” Roe. They tell poor deluded women that if laws like this one pass, they will be “forced into the back alleys” again.

So what happens to the women?

A lot of them end up suffering harm that would have been prevented by better medical care. I’m not even talking about what happens to the baby here. I am talking solely about women’s health.

I had to have a couple of surgeries last year. I came home the same day after both of them. Neither of them was as risky as poking around in a pregnant uterus.

I can tell you that I wanted a doctor with hospital privileges holding the knife when he went to work on me. I wanted him to examine me beforehand and make sure that he knew what he was doing and that I was a good candidate for the surgery. I wanted health and safety standards dutifully enforced in the place where he did this surgery. I would have been outraged if I had learned that I was on my own after the surgery with no support or follow up if something went wrong.

Nobody anywhere was out demonstrating for the doctor who cut into my foot to be free to practice dirty medicine, not have hospital privileges and dump me after the surgery. Not one person thought it was outrageous or a violation of my rights that my doctor was required to practice competent medicine on me.

But if I had been a woman who was seeking an abortion, they would have been jumping up and down, demonstrating, filibustering, importing celebrities to defend my “right” to incompetent medical practices.

That’s how pro choice built Dr Gosnell and his chamber of horrors. It’s how they endanger women’s lives all over this country.

Look at this carefully and tell me: What’s wrong with this picture?

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment

29 responses to “Texas and Abortion: This is How Pro Choice Created Gosnell”

  1. 1. Abortion clinics provide the same kind of patient safety as any other ambulatory outpatient surgical center

    2. Doctors who perform abortions in clinics must have hospital privileges at a hospital that is within 30 miles of the clinic,

    These aren’t laws now? Women’s health? Are you kidding me?

  2. They keep saying we need to keep abortion safe. How is it safe if clinics aren’t under the same rules as other surgical centers?

  3. This bill will pass. I believe my governor when he assures me that it will pass. Rick Perry is a good man and would have made a far better President that the one we are stuck with.

  4. Only 11 of the 37 licensed abortion clinics in Texas perform surgical abortions. Applying the standards of ambulatory surgical centers to those 11 clinics seem reasonable. I am not aware of any benefit for the other 26 clinics.

    When a similar bill was working its way through the Texas legislature this past spring, the sponsor (who is a doctor) said he would adjust the wording to make the proposal apply only to clinics which perform surgical abortions.


    Apparently that revision didn’t make it into the bill which failed to pass during the special session.

  5. No one wants to give any ground and common sense no longer prevails. There are extremists on both sides and everyone fears the proverbial “slippery slope”. It is no secret that many of the people supporting the bill would just as soon totally criminalize abortion. The other side doesn’t want to give them an inch in fear of them taking a mile. Even though it might be totally sensible to pass this bill, it sets a precedent for the states to gradually undermine the gains made for women’s access to low cost abortions.

  6. The health and safety measures may be very commendable. But a state cannot pass a law that restricts women’s access to abortions. I believe that if it is passed and signed, it will immediately be challenged and ruled to be unconstitutional.

  7. I agree that there should be nothing that restricts access. However, I don’t agree with women having surgical procedures in an unsafe place.

    Why are the rules different in an abortion clinic than any other outpatient surgical center?

  8. So? No one from the liberal left will succeed outside of their states either. I’m not sure of the purpose of that comment.

  9. “So? No one from the liberal left will succeed outside of their states either.”

    Except the next president.

  10. James, the states have always had the right to regulate health and safety measures. As to whether the Court would rule that this law shuts off “access” to abortion, I can not say. That said, I’m not sure why anyone would want “access” to an abortion that didn’t follow these guidelines.

  11. I put a link to the language in the bill in the article. Read it yourself, Mr Bill.

  12. The people who sponsored this legislation most likely had as their main objective to eliminate as many clinics as they could.

  13. After March 2004, I pretty much gave up that dream Bill. It quickly became obvious that the liberals don’t want to negotiate, they only want to destroy. Civil unions was my last attempt at negotiation, and to be called a bigot and a homophobe for supporting civil unions merely because I wouldn’t also destroy the sacrament, proved to me that your side just wants a scorched earth policy, eliminating the right wing from the planet.

  14. Yes. And they have the ability to brainwash those children, unfortunately. But kids can be deprogrammed and liberals are good at it and getting better with each new generation.

  15. Marriage is only a sacrament to Catholics. Non-sacramental marriage is still marriage in this country.

  16. You really have to decide whether you are liberal or conservative on an issue-by-issue basis. I can see someone who is liberal on social issues and also be pro-life. Its just that pro-life is anti-choice and that is not a very liberal stand.

  17. A person can be liberal and be pro life and I am Catholic as well. Are you talking about political conservatism vs liberal? That is something that could be debated for a long time here but I won’t start. The first thing though is not to be prejudice and label people.

  18. Lewiston, I agree that reliance on labels such as “liberal” or “conservative” is a mistake. The diversity of views among persons who might be put into either of those camps is immense. Dorothy Day, for example, was often considered a political liberal, even a radical. But she was vehemently pro-life.

  19. That’s precisely what I mean. We can’t put the whole person in a preset category such as liberal or conservative all the time. Although I think we can in extreme cases like myself vi know that I meet the stereotype of a Massachusetts liberal. But many people will take what is normally considered to be a politically conservative stand on an issue such as abortion while taking a politically liberal stand on an issue like the role of government, gay marriage, etc.