Baby's 'angelic' face haunts former abortion nurse

Brenda Pratt Shafer witnessed a partial-birth abortion. It was an experience she would rather forget, but cannot.

A registered nurse, Shafer in 1993 worked for three days in an abortion clinic in Dayton, Ohio, under abortion doctor Martin Haskell, who popularized the procedure.

Shafer's testimony before a U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee in 1996 helped strengthen the push to ban partial-birth abortion and has been recounted often by senators and representatives in congressional floor debates. President Bush signed the ban into law Nov. 5.

"[B]ecause of the strong pro-choice views that I held at that time, I thought this assignment [in Haskell's clinic] would be no problem for me," she told the subcommittee in her 1996 testimony, according to a transcript. "But I was wrong."

On her third day in the clinic Shafer said she witnessed three partial-birth abortions -- the first on a young mother with a Down syndrome baby, the latter two on healthy mothers with healthy babies.

She described in detail the procedure on the Down syndrome baby, which she said was six months (26 and a half weeks) along. The procedure startled both her and the mother.

"Dr. Haskell brought the ultrasound in and hooked it up so that he could see the baby," Shafer testified. "On the ultrasound screen, I could see the heart beating. As Dr. Haskell watched the baby on the ultrasound screen, the baby's heartbeat was clearly visible on the ultrasound screen.

"Dr. Haskell went in with forceps and grabbed the baby's legs and pulled them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby's body and the arms -- everything but the head. The doctor kept the baby's head just inside the uterus.

"The baby's little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors through the back of his head, and the baby's arms jerked out in a flinch, a startle reaction, like a baby does when he thinks that he might fall."

"The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening and sucked the baby's brains out," Shafer said. "Now the baby was completely limp. I was really completely unprepared for what I was seeing. I almost threw up as I watched the doctor do these things.

"... Dr. Haskell delivered the baby's head. He cut the umbilical cord and delivered the placenta. He threw that baby in a pan, along with the placenta and the instruments he'd used. I saw the baby move in the pan. I asked another nurse and she said it was just 'reflexes.'"

Shafer said she had been a nurse more than 10 years and had witnessed many graphic procedures, but described this as the most shocking.

"I have been a nurse for a long time and I have seen a lot of death -- people maimed in auto accidents, gunshot wounds, you name it. I have seen surgical procedures of every sort. But in all my professional years, I had never witnessed anything like this.

"The woman wanted to see her baby, so they cleaned up the baby and put it in a blanket and handed the baby to her. She cried the whole time, and she kept saying, 'I'm so sorry, please forgive me!' I was crying too. I couldn't take it. That baby boy had the most perfect angelic face I have ever seen."

Shafer concluded her testimony by noting the baby was "only inches, seconds away from being entirely born, when he was killed."

"What I saw done to that little boy, and to those other babies, should not be allowed in this country." --30-- Following is a partial transcript of Brenda Pratt Shafer's testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives' Subcommittee on the Constitution from March 21, 1996. A complete transcript is available at: http://www.house.gov/judiciary/215.htm.

"Mr. Chairman and honorable members of the Judiciary Committee, I am Brenda Pratt Shafer. I am here before you, at the request of the Committee, to relate to you my experience as an eyewitness to what is now known as the partial-birth abortion procedure.

"I am a registered nurse, licensed in the State of Ohio, with 14 years of experience. In 1993, I was employed by Kimberly Quality Care, a nursing agency in Dayton, Ohio. In September, 1993, Kimberly Quality Care asked me to accept assignment at the Women's Medical Center, which is operated by Dr. Martin Haskell. I readily accepted the assignment because I was at that time very pro-choice. I had even told my teenager daughters that if one of them ever got pregnant at a young age, I would make them get an abortion. They disagreed with me on this. And one of them even wrote an essay for a high school class that mentioned how we differed on the issue.

"So, because of the strong pro-choice views that I held at that time, I thought this assignment would be no problem for me.

"But I was wrong. I stood at a doctor's side as he performed the partial-birth abortion procedure -- and what I saw is branded forever on my mind.

"I worked as an assistant nurse at Dr. Haskell's clinic for three days -- September 28, 29 and 30, 1993.

"On the first day, we assisted in some first-trimester abortions, which is all I'd expected to be involved in. (I remember that one of the patients was a 15-year-old girl who was having her third abortion.)

"On the second day, I saw Dr. Haskell do a second-trimester procedure that is called a D & E (dilation and evacuation). He used ultrasound to examine the fetus. Then he used forceps to pull apart the baby inside the uterus, bringing it out piece by piece and piece, throwing the pieces in a pan.

"Also on the first two days, we inserted laminaria to dilate the cervixes of women who were being prepared for the partial-birth abortions -- those who were past the 20 weeks point, or 4 1/2 months. (Dr. Haskell called this procedure 'D & X', for dilation and extraction.) There were six or seven of these women.

"On the third day, Dr. Haskell asked me to observe as he performed several of the procedures that are the subject of this hearing. Although I was in that clinic on assignment of the agency, Dr. Haskell was interested in hiring me fulltime, and I was being given orientation in the entire range of procedures provided at that facility.

"I was present for three of these partial-birth procedures. It is the first one that I will describe to you in detail.

"The mother was six months pregnant (26 1/2weeks). A doctor told her that the baby had Down syndrome and she decided to have an abortion. She came in the first two days to have the laminaria inserted and changed, and she cried the whole time. On the third day she came in to receive the partial-birth procedure.

"Dr. Haskell brought the ultrasound in and hooked it up so that he could see the baby. On the ultrasound screen, I could see the heart beating. As Dr. Haskell watched the baby on the ultrasound screen, the baby's heartbeat was clearly visible on the ultrasound screen.

"The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening and sucked the baby's brains out. Now the baby was completely limp.

"I was really completely unprepared for what I was seeing. I almost threw up as I watched the doctor do these things.

"Mr. Chairman, I read in the paper that President Clinton says that he is going to veto this bill. If President Clinton had been standing where I was standing at that moment, he would not veto this bill.

"Dr. Haskell delivered the baby's head. He cut the umbilical cord and delivered the placenta. He threw that baby in a pan, along with the placenta and the instruments he'd used. I saw the baby move in the pan. I asked another nurse and she said it was just 'reflexes.'

"I have been a nurse for a long time and I have seen a lot of death-- people maimed in auto accidents, gunshot wounds, you name it. I have seen surgical procedures of every sort. But in all my professional years, I had never witnessed anything like this.

"I was present in the room during two more such procedures that day, but I was really in shock. I tried to pretend that I was somewhere else, to not think about what was happening. I just couldn't wait to get out of there. After I left that day, I never went back. These last two procedures, by the way, involved healthy mothers with healthy babies.

"I was very much affected by what I had seen. For a long time, sometimes still, I had nightmares about what I saw in that clinic that day.

"That's why, last July, I wrote a letter to Congressman Tony Hall of Dayton, in support of the bill, telling what I had seen. And that led to me being asked to tell others what I 'd seen, just as I am doing here today."

I was Pro-abortion at one time also.

Back when the original debate was going on in the Fla. Legislature I was watching the public TV channel.

A nurse was testifying before the legislature. She related in graphic detail what ensued in the procedure and that the 'fetus' was tossed in bucket to be thrown out with the trash.

It turned my stomach.

May God bless President Bush and our Nation for doing the right thing. He could have "hemmed and hawwed" and then done the wrong thing for political reasons.

Signing this bill separates him from the trash we've had heretofore.

He gets my vote in 2004.

I remember when I was in nursing school the instructors asked us if we had any problem with abortion as we were about to go to Labor and Delivery where a number of abortions were performed. I didn't object as I was young and dumb and didn't want to appear intolerant or holier than thou. I witnessed exactly one saline abortion and that was enough to convince me that abortion was a terrible crime. A teenager who was already half way through her pregnancy had a saline abortion and a perfectly formed tiny dead baby with its skin burned by the saline was the result. If the young girl had only held on a few more months the pregnancy would have been over and someone could have adopted that baby. How could any doctor inject saline into a pregnant womb? Its no different than firing a gun into the womb.

If the young girl had only held on a few more months the pregnancy would have been over and someone could have adopted that baby. How could any doctor inject saline into a pregnant womb? Its no different than firing a gun into the womb.

I am an adoptive parent. My daughter was destined for abortion until her biological grandmother intervened. Tomorrow, my daughter will complete her catholic religious studies by receiving the Sacrament of Confirmation. After receiving the Sacraments of Baptism, Reconciliation, and First Eucharist, tomorrow is indeed a day of joyous celebration for life!

There are countless souls in the world today, who desperately need a family to love and embrace them. God gives life. Adoption is simply another way of forming a family.

For those with love in their hearts, PLEASE consider opening your home and heart to one more, or several children. The love you give to one of these unwanted souls will be returned to you, throughout this life and beyond.

Yes I would agree. Perhaps we can ask folks on prolife chats to stop using "Partial Birth" and start using "Forced Dialation and Extraction, sometimes called Partial Birth"

you have got to be kidding me? "Forced Dialation and extraction" means nothing to a lot of people. To most young people, and probably most guys who aren't fathers, this term is just some dumb medical term. But Partial Birth Abortion is pretty easy to grasp. You hear "birth" and "abortion" in the same breath and realize something doesnt work, something intrinsically ugly. Its the worst oxymoron there is. Lets keep it partial birth abortion. Or Doctor Induced Birth and Slaughter Procedure. Much better.

It's even worse than that; it's evil for the sake of convenience. And I'm not one of those people who think you can have an abortion and then make all right with God by just crying and saying I'm sorry. It is impossible to make restituion for a life taken, it can't be a sin in the same league with larceny. The Old Testament (or maybe it's the New), bids woe to all those who harm the innocent, and who is more innocent than a baby?

The doctor perfoming the killing is definitely in league with the devil, but what can be said about the woman, any woman, who enlists his services?

She is sworn by all that is holy and primordial and natural to protect her unborn, but instead the baby's first and fearest enemy is her, not the doctor. The doctor doesn't seek the baby out, after all.

Even hell will not hold these people.

You advocate forcing women to bear children with serious genetic and developmental anomolies, no matter her personal situation? You think a woman should risk morbitiy and mortality from gestation and parturition under any circumstance?

You are welcome to your opinion. I don't think it's evil at all, depending on individual circumstances, to end a pregnancy when there are serious developmental anomalies.

Pregnancy is difficult and dangerous under the best of circumstances. In some cases these risks outweigh the benefit of continuing.

BUMP. May God bless our crisis pregnancy centers & all who work as counselors, giving them wisdom and discernment as they deal with these life and death choices.

An excellent book on post-abortion healing is A Season To Heal by Luci Freed.

I don't think it's evil at all, depending on individual circumstances, to end a pregnancy when there are serious developmental anomalies.

I guess your son dodged a bullet by developing vision problems after he was born. Similarly, my wife (born with Tetralogy of Fallot w/ pulmonary atresia and numerous associated congenital cardiovascular & lung problems) and I (born with a paralyzed limb) are lucky that our parents were not the kind of people to commit murders of convenience. Oh, depending on "individual circumstances", of course.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.