Posted on 01/04/2002 7:11:49 AM PST by Notwithstanding
In what may be the first case of its kind in the world, an Australian woman has reached a settlement with an abortionist whom she had sued for not telling her about research findings linking abortion to breast cancer.
The information was disclosed during a recent legislative session in the state of Tasmania, where lawmakers were debating abortion legislation. Attorney Charles Francis warned the legislature about the risk of future litigation against doctors who perform abortions.
Francis has represented several women suing abortionists for not warning them of the possible psychiatric consequences of abortion.
Last year, he represented a woman who included in her psychiatric damage lawsuit the additional failure to warn of an increased risk of breast cancer caused by abortion.
The landmark case was settled out of court, Francis said by phone from the state of Victoria Friday.
His client cannot be identified because of a confidentiality clause in the settlement, he said, but he believed it to be the first case of its kind anywhere. Another, similar case was pending in the neighboring state of New South Wales, he added.
While preparing the cases, Francis said, "I had to go into all the evidence and the expert medical views for the purpose of presenting the case. It seemed to me, looking at it as a lawyer looking at evidence, the evidence was fairly strong - certainly strong enough, we thought, for [us to have] a good chance at winning."
Francis said there was no indication one way or the other that the doctor had decided to settle because he was worried about the cancer link claim.
Still, the doctor had not insisted that the cancer link claim be dropped before agreeing to settle.
"My impression is there is a good deal of reluctance to see this litigated in public. Often you have conflicting medical views [in court cases]. Doctors are called, give differing evidence and then the court decides what it thinks it the most likely situation."
The question of a link between abortion and breast cancer is a major source of contention between pro-life and pro-abortion campaigners. Each side points to research it claims backs its stance, questions the methodology of the other's research, and accuses the opposition of using the issue to promote its cause.
According to the U.S.-based Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, 27 out of 35 studies published since 1957 have found a link.
Groups advocating abortion, backed up by some leading medical bodies, deny that such a link exists.
Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, welcomed news of the Australian settlement.
"The abortion industry and its medical experts know that it will be far more challenging for them to lie to women about the abortion-breast cancer research when they are called upon to testify under oath," she said in a statement.
"Scientists know that abortion causes breast cancer but are afraid to say so publicly in today's hostile political climate."
Dr. Joel Brind, president of the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute, is regarded by the coalition as a leading authority on the abortion-breast cancer link.
He believes there is a 30 percent overall increased risk of breast cancer after having an abortion, and an 80 percent increased risk for women with a family history of cancer.
Summarizing Brind's argument, Francis explained that upon conception, the level of estrogen in a woman's body increases dramatically. This results in the development of undifferentiated cells in the breast, which pose an additional cancer risk.
Late in the pregnancy, these cells become milk-producing cells, cease posing a greater cancer risk, and in fact provide added protection against cancer.
If a woman has an abortion before that stage - and the vast majority of abortions would occur before then - her body is left with a high number of undifferentiated cells which increase the risk of her contracting breast cancer, it is argued.
Francis said a woman who suffers a miscarriage well into a pregnancy - in a motor accident, for example - would face the same risk. However, in cases where a spontaneous, early miscarriage occurs, the woman would not have had the surge in estrogen in the first place, and therefore would not face the additional cancer risk.
The U.S. National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in Britain are among those who argue that there is no need to tell a woman considering an abortion that there may be an increased risk of breast cancer. Doing so would only add to the woman's anxiety at an already stressful time, representatives have said.
Brind and others have slammed the approach as "paternalistic."
"There is no other issue than abortion that would be so immune from the concept of informed consent," Brind was quoted as saying last month.
A court in Fargo, North Dakota will hear a case in March in which a woman is suing an abortion clinic for allegedly misleading women to believe there is no link between abortion and breast cancer.
Plaintiff Amy Jo Mattson says pamphlets distributed by the Red River Women's Clinic quote the National Cancer Institute as saying there is no evidence of a direct relationship between breast cancer and abortion or miscarriage.
"None of [the claims of a link] are supported by medical research or established medical organizations," the pamphlets reportedly stated.
FReeper activist extraordinaire Saundra Duffy has also sued Planned Parenthood (aka Planned WhiteNeighborhood or Planned DeadBabyHood) to keep them from lying to moms about breast cancer and abortion.
Click here for FR search for "breast cancer"
Better yet, click here for FR search for "abortion" and "breast cancer"
|
What a ridiculous conclusion. That's like saying we can't tell patients that putting their hearts on a bypass machine may kill them because the info would only add to the stress of the whole thing. Sheesh. Seems pretty transparent to me - information like this could jeopardize the abortion money mill, couldn't it.
MOMS HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW
|
When we allow law suits on the basis of "links", then almost any industry could face lawsuits over their products. And when it comes to cancer(and considering that the AMA changes its mind every year as to what contributes to or helps lower the risk of getting cancer), until science can SHOW what CAUSES cancer, then no lawsuits should be allowed.
This bothers me too. Any woman who claims that she did not think that killing her unborn baby would not cause emotional or mental problems is either full of crap, or is just plain stupid for listening to NOW, PP and others who say there is nothing "wrong" with abortions. I have no sympathy for their "emotions". This is common sense - Killing your own child SHOULD screw you up in the head, unless you were already screwed up to begin with.
NLM Citation ID:
11351314 (PubMed}
21248730 (MEDLINE)
Full Source Title:
International Journal of Cancer
Publication Type:
Journal Article
Language:
English
Author Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of South Carolina and South Carolina Cancer Center, Columbia, SC, USA. msanderson@sph.sc.edu
Authors:
Sanderson M; Shu XO; Jin F; Dai Q; Wen W; Hua Y; Gao YT; Zheng W
Abstract:
Studies of the association between induced abortion and breast cancer risk have been inconsistent, perhaps due to underreporting of abortions. Induced abortion is a well-accepted family planning procedure in China, and women who have several induced abortions do not feel stigmatized. The authors used data from a population-based case-control study of breast cancer among women age 25-64 conducted between 1996 and 1998 in urban Shanghai to assess whether a history of and the number of induced abortions were related to breast cancer risk. In-person interviews were completed with 1,459 incident breast cancer cases ascertained through a population-based cancer registry, and 1,556 controls randomly selected from the general population in Shanghai (with respective response rates of 91% and 90%). After adjusting for confounding, there was no relation between ever having had an induced abortion and breast cancer (odds ratio [OR] = 0.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7-1.2).
No doubt. Women who have abortions are more likely to be smokers, drinkers, do drugs, eat fattening foods, have an undisciplined spiritual life, take less precautions to avoid toxins, etc…
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.