Skip to comments.
Canadian Woman Compensated for Botched Abortion Leaving Her Pregnant
http://lifenews.com ^
| July 22, 2004
| Steven Ertelt
Posted on 07/22/2004 3:44:42 PM PDT by cpforlife.org
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 next last
To: SilentServiceCPOWife
Isn't it awful how the child is still unimportant?
It's ALL about money.
Can you imagine how the child must feel?
GEESH!
21
posted on
07/22/2004 4:11:02 PM PDT
by
nmh
(Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
To: visualops
I didn't know women still used a shield. That means her boyfriend isn't using condoms exposing her to diseases.
22
posted on
07/22/2004 4:11:31 PM PDT
by
cyborg
(http://mentalmumblings.blogspot.com/)
To: SilentServiceCPOWife; nmh
"Was the child okay after the botched abortion..."
"I was wondering the same thing."
Me three, but with the failure to remove the IUD I'm wondering if this doctor was truly a slacker and just maybe put her under and didn't even attempt to do an abortion. It seems silly in a way, but no stranger than other stories one hears.
23
posted on
07/22/2004 4:22:40 PM PDT
by
jocon307
To: cyborg
When IUDs were first introduced they were really hyped despite alot of side effects. They didn't totally disappear, and have made a comeback with some supposedly new "improved" versions. Don't confuse the IUD with cervical caps, diaphrams or "female condoms" (which all act by creating a barrier).
IUDs still have alot of dangerous side effects, despite claims of being safe.
To: visualops
i would not use an IUD as it is an 'after the fact' BC method, preventing the embryo from implanting. BC that prevents it in the first place is a better option.
25
posted on
07/22/2004 4:27:11 PM PDT
by
cyborg
(http://mentalmumblings.blogspot.com/)
To: TheBattman
And I have NO sympathy whatsoever for the woman.It doesn't bother me if abortionists are sued for any thing they do --- they're the lowest on the rung as far as doctors and most are incompetent and stupid --- which is why they choose a field that allows for the killing rather than the saving of lives --- not much mental challenge needed to kill someone.
I don't have any sympathy for her --- but I would think that she has to live with what she did everytime she looks at her child --- everytime the child gives her a hug or kiss, she has to realize she tried to kill her own baby.
26
posted on
07/22/2004 4:33:02 PM PDT
by
FITZ
To: FITZ
everytime the child gives her a hug or kiss, she has to realize she tried to kill her own baby.
Perhaps I'm just too much of a pessimist, but I'm not sure that she's entirely capable of making that connection.
27
posted on
07/22/2004 6:20:57 PM PDT
by
kyguy
To: cyborg
BC that prevents it in the first place is a better option. How is the keeping of a fertilized embryo, ie, a human being, from implanting different from an abortion? It's a human life, it's not allowed to live, about the only difference is that the time line of life is a little shorter, other than that, you still have an eternal soul and a human being who is being denied life... Sad, so sad, when we can be so blind to the Truths of life.
28
posted on
07/22/2004 6:27:27 PM PDT
by
Smocker
To: 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; annalex; ...
29
posted on
07/22/2004 7:22:47 PM PDT
by
Coleus
(Abraham Lincoln was a trial lawyer.)
To: Smocker
You didn't read my post. I prefer a woman use birth control that isn't abortive like an IUD.
30
posted on
07/22/2004 8:11:27 PM PDT
by
cyborg
(http://mentalmumblings.blogspot.com/)
To: AmericanFaith
Once a child killer - always a child killer.Maybe, maybe not.
If I tried to have an abortion and then ended up afterall having the baby that I tried to kill, I just may get the message.
31
posted on
07/22/2004 8:14:47 PM PDT
by
krb
(the statement on the other side of this tagline is false)
To: cyborg
I see. Pills, IUD, are all abortifacient.
32
posted on
07/23/2004 4:59:10 AM PDT
by
Smocker
To: visualops
"..and interferes with fertilization"Actually, the thing is designed to cause abortion by disallowing the fertilized egg to attach to the uterine wall.
33
posted on
07/23/2004 6:12:59 AM PDT
by
Designer
(Sysiphus Sr. to Junior; "It was uphill, all the way, both ways!")
To: cpforlife.org
Judge Glen Parrett decided in the woman's favor and awarded her $55,000 in damages and for "emotional turmoil." He also awarded her an additional $5,000 for loss of income as a result of taking time of from work for the birth of the baby. The CBC reported that Judge Parrett turned down her request for compensation for the baby's upbringing. He said the woman would have "the joy she derives from the presence of this child in her life." I guess even judges have their limits.
Disgusting.
34
posted on
07/23/2004 6:24:50 AM PDT
by
Aquinasfan
(Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
To: TheBattman
You must have missed the part about the abortionist doing the abortion without removing her IUD.... Reminds me of the fact that Planned Parenthood's abortionists frequently perform "abortions" on non-existent babies. This is why women frequently come into crisis pregnancy centers requesting free pregnancy tests. They don't want to lay down $300 cash for nothing.
35
posted on
07/23/2004 6:29:18 AM PDT
by
Aquinasfan
(Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
To: the Deejay
There is NO EXCUSE! since the 1960's, for ANY unwanted child. There are (and have been) all the birth control methods one can think of, available to anyone. "The Pill" sometimes works by causing abortion.
Look it up.
36
posted on
07/23/2004 6:31:14 AM PDT
by
Aquinasfan
(Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
To: Smocker
37
posted on
07/23/2004 7:31:21 AM PDT
by
cyborg
(http://mentalmumblings.blogspot.com/)
To: Spackidagoosh
Doesn't the last line of this story say that the abortionist did not remove the woman's IUD (aka birth control)? Contraceptives are not the answer.
38
posted on
07/23/2004 7:33:28 AM PDT
by
Joan912
(good grief already!)
To: cpforlife.org
A few things:
1. No mention of the father. Big surprise there.
2. How far along was the pregnancy when they tried to kill it? She waited three months before going back to say, "hey doc, you missed?" Hmmm...
3. The judge denied compensation for upbringing based on "the joy she derives from the presence of this child in her life." As usual, pro-aborts are unable to see even the most grotesque illogic in their get-rid-of-em beliefs.
To: cpforlife.org
I'm sorry ... but it makes me sick to my stomach the GOP has the temerity to frame itself as "pro-life."
40
posted on
07/23/2004 7:54:32 AM PDT
by
Askel5
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson