Posted on 01/03/2005 6:54:54 AM PST by madprof98
Ten years after the bloody Brookline clinic attacks, one doctor explains why she still performs abortions.
Ten years ago this month, John Salvi sprayed bullets into two Brookline abortion clinics, killing two people and wounding five. Since then, the number of doctors willing to perform abortions has dwindled, increasing the workload for those remaining. One local obstetrician and gynecologist, whose clinic asked that she withhold her name for safety reasons, now performs as many as 10 abortions a day, twice a week.
One morning years ago, when I was working as a resident, a nurse brought me in to talk to a pregnant girl. When I walked into the room, there was this child -- an 11-year-old. She had come in for a procedure, and it soon became obvious that she had no understanding of sex -- she didn't really understand that she'd even had it, or that it had any connection to her pregnancy. We literally had to teach this girl about what it means to have sex -- about STDS, abstinence, and pregnancy. I remember thinking: In a world where people don't want kids to learn about these things, how can you not give them the choice to terminate a pregnancy? Even if she had chosen to continue the pregnancy and opt for adoption, what would that have done to her own childhood? How can we not provide a child with any education about sex, then force her to become a parent long before she's ready?
When I started medical school in upstate New York, I didn't want to do terminations of pregnancies at all. My mom is Catholic and my dad is Jewish, and the church we went to had a pretty strong stance on it: The message I got was that abortion was wrong. As a first-year medical student, I took an ethics class and we talked about abortion. I wrote a paper about how I believed in the right, but would never perform an abortion myself, because it was against the way I was brought up.
That all changed later on, when I had a crush on this guy who was a leader of Medical Students for Choice. At the time, I thought abortion was strictly a women's issue. But he convinced me that abortion is a civil rights issue, that if you have injustice for some members of your population, your whole population has injustice. I remember thinking that was really profound. Still, I told him that I didn't feel comfortable doing abortions, but I was pro-choice. So he gave me these two films to watch, and they changed my life. They were about different providers and patients, men and women, who talked about what life was like before abortion was legal. They really changed my views -- I suddenly thought, Yeah, I have to do that.
Today, though, there are so few providers who will perform terminations that the people who do agree to provide them end up taking the bulk of procedures. It can be hard. I'm a generalist -- I like a lot of different things about being an OB-GYN. But because sometimes I'm the only person around, I end up doing a lot of terminations.
Doing them over and over and over again can be really taxing. All of us who provide abortions believe in what we're doing and think it's a good thing and a right that needs to be available. But when you're in the clinic and in that group of people doing it, it can be tough, and you can get really tired. I don't think it'll ever make me stop doing terminations, but it can move people to tears. And it's not just me -- it extends to the nurses and the people who help us in the operating room. It's not unusual that you'll have only a couple of nurses who will help you out with it. There are nurses that will say, "No, I won't help you take care of this patient." I even know people who feel they can't tell their families what they do; their families think they work on labor and delivery.
It really frustrates me that there are so few providers. I've asked my friends who are doctors if they do abortions. Some women I knew were providers in residency, but they don't provide now because their current medical practice doesn't. It's upsetting that some friends don't fight harder to provide it. But I've also had friends who've stepped up and said, "I'm going to do medical abortions; would you teach me how?"
As providers, we give all options, including adoption and carrying the child to term. I always ask a patient "Are you sure about this?" I've had people change their minds, which is totally okay. We want that. Or sometimes we'll advise them that they have more time to decide what to do. I would feel worse terminating a wanted child than not being able to terminate at all. It's very important that a woman knows what she wants to do either way. I have no problem with a woman walking out. I always find those are good days -- when a woman walks out and says, "No, I'm keeping it."
I have the utmost respect for life; I appreciate that life starts early in the womb, but also believe that I'm ending it for good reasons. Often I'm saving the woman, or I'm improving the lives of the other children in the family. I also believe that women have a life they have to consider. If a woman is working full-time, has one child already, and is barely getting by, having another child that would financially push her to go on public assistance is going to lessen the quality of her life. And it's also an issue for the child, if it would not have had a good life. Life's hard enough when you're wanted and everything's prepared for. So yes, I end life, but even when it's hard, it's for a good reason.
Because of all the threats these days, doctors who have been doing this longer than I have are a lot more hesitant about things that I don't even usually think about. Things like, "Who is sponsoring this conference I've been invited to? Did this interview request come from a referral I trust?" They warn me to be more leery. I wasn't in Boston 10 years ago, during the Salvi shootings, but I recently talked with someone who had been around at that time, and she told me the incident essentially put her whole career on hold. That scares me.
What happens if something like that occurs again? Would I still be able to show up for work? It's unfair and depressing. I'm older now, but there was a time when I was going to sacrifice everything for the cause. But would I really sacrifice the well-being of my family? There are providers who have been shot at, who have been shot and still show up for work and still do their job, which is amazing.
Maybe I live in an idealistic world, but I believe in people being good and in trying to understand their opinion. I don't think I'm going to be easily swayed. Obviously, the threat of violence is something that's always in the back of my mind, that it could happen, but I feel like I'm doing something so right. How could people think it's wrong?
Ten years after the bloody Brookline clinic attacks, one doctor explains why she still performs BLOODY abortions.
We can't judge her soul. But from all outward appearances, she seems to be in deep, deep trouble.
Anyone familiar with the English language knows that whenever you use the word "but" it invalidates whatever was said previously.
Example: "I know I owe you $100, but ...."
it would be my guess that she is against the death penalty.
If you are so concerned about it being a good thing and a right.
THEN DO YOUR PART AND PERFORM THESE MURDERS FOR NOTHING. THE ONLY ONE WHO HAS NO VOICE IS THE MOST INNOCENT ONE BEING RIPPED APART FOR BLOOD MONEY.
Why does everyone ASSUME that pregnancy is the worst thing that can ever happen and abortion is the cure?
How do you know that a pregnancy will have an adverse effect on this kid and the abortion won't?
And before you begin to say ...."Well at that age..." don't bother. Pregnancy doesn't ruin anyones life no matter what age. Abortion does ruin - or more accurately DESTROY- life.
Its society's attitude toward pregnancy (at any age)that leads to these situations.
A pregnant eleven year old who didn't know she had sex? Why am I not believing this? It sounds more like this so-called doctor is reporting what she wants to believe to justify her own actions.
Not surprised at all. The most vociferous anti-baby crowd are men who want an "exit" for the the consequences of sex.
The most vocal pro-aborts I know are ALL men, many who express a profound disgust for the natural functions of women (pregnancy, childbirth, lactation). Breeders. Ickypoo. Get rid of that thing.
It's a man thing--more than a woman's choice. If there wasn't a boyfriend, husband or father pushing a woman to get rid of his problem, I wonder how many abortions there'd be?
Yup. Most often, young girls going in for abortions are accompanied by their mothers. How depressing is that?
No you don't.
Because, if you really had "the utmost respect" for life, you would see how this statement of yours contradicts your "utmost respect for life":
"I appreciate that life starts early in the womb, but also believe that I'm ending it for good reasons. Often I'm saving the woman, or I'm improving the lives of the other children in the family. I also believe that women have a life they have to consider."
Onw wonders if this doctor, who says she has "the utmost respect for life" would consider ending the life of a six-month old infant if it meant that doing so would "improve th e lives of the other children in trhe family."
My guess is that she would not. She has, I would suppose, the "utmost respect for life" -- but only if the life has been born.
She says that she has the utmost respect for life and she also says that she "appreciates" that life begins in the womb.
She is lying.
Uhhh, I though the procedure was to remove a fetus, not "terminate" a child. This so-called doctor has just admitted that she makes her living by killing children. Or, is she saying that the fetus is only a child if it is wanted? Either way, this is a very sick person.
I used to do prayer vigils in front of the Planned Parenthood slaughterhouse mentioned in the story. The young girls who came in on Saturdays were most often accompanied by their mothers or boyfriends.
The myth of the sexual revolution and the advent of "the pill" is that these things benefitted women. The reverse is true, as Pope Paul predicted in "On the Regulation of Birth":
Consequences of Artificial Methods17. Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.
Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife.
Dr Death here make one rationalization after another for her killing unborn babies. And this bubblehead thinks she's doing good. Amazing.
It's all about the money. Abortions are a quick and lucrative procedure that is often directly paid by the patient...no hassles with insurance, Medicaid etc. How many of these abortion docs are doing any of their work pro bono?
I expect that right now, she would be horrified at the possibility of doing this. HOWEVER, given a little more pro-death propaganda (and perhaps an affair with a dashing Dutch doctor to boot), she might salivate at the opportunity. The Culture of Death is relentless. Just a few years ago, nobody would have believed the doctors in the Netherlands would get society's blessing to kill off their patients. But today the elite in other societies (including our own) are demanding the same "services" from their physicians.
Exactly. She would be against the death Penalty because of the Socio-Economic condition of the killer and for Abortion because of the Socio-Economic condition of the mother.
Obviously, the threat of violence is something that's always in the back of my mind, that it could happen, but I feel like I'm doing something so right. How could people think it's wrong?
This is someone who is completely refusing to accept that abortion is a supremely violent act. Abortionists are perveyors (if that means what I think it means) of violence and death--nothing else.
This 'doctor' would have done well on Josef Mengele's staff.
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.