Posts Tagged ‘FOCA’

The most recent update is at the bottom of the article.

On Wednesday, a dear friend of mine sent me an e-mail about donating to “Susan G. Komen for the Cure” to help fight breast cancer.  She has a friend who has breast cancer, so she’s doing a walk for that organization.  I e-mailed her back telling her that I couldn’t help her with her cause because of the links between Komen and Planned Parenthood.  It turns out that, on their website, Komen has dedicated a page and several PDF’s to soften their Planned Parenthood link and to out-rightly dismiss scientific studies that link breast cancer with abortion.

I read the letter from Komen’s Chief Scientific Advisor Eric Winer that tries to downplay Komen’s relationship with Planned Parenthood.  That is exactly what he is trying to do.  The first three paragraphs don’t even deal with the subject, but promote their own “good nature”.

The best, or worst depending on how you look at it, line in the entire letter is “As part of our financial arrangements, we monitor our grantees twice a year to be sure they are spending the money in line with our agreements, and we are assured that Planned Parenthood uses these funds only for breast health education, screening and treatment programs.” (emphasis mine)

First off, they freely admit to giving money to Planned Parenthood!  If you had any doubts, there it is from Dr. Winer, himself, with no coverup.  His statement is naive at best and downright idiotic at worst.  This is like saying someone donates to the KKK, but it’s OK because they assure us they only use it for cake and punch, or they give money to neo-nazis, but that is also OK because they assure us they only use it for prostate exams.  This definitely reads more like some bad joke than what Dr. Winer believes, but, alas, it is true.  Even if they only used the money for cancer screenings, that means they don’t have to use their existing funds for those screenings, giving them even more resources to fund their abortions, contraception, “education”, and advertising.  If you donate to Komen, part of that, without a doubt, goes directly to Planned Parenthood.  Dr. Winer makes that unashamedly clear.

Nancy Brinker, who founded the Susan G. Komen Foundation, was, herself, on the advisory board of Planned Parenthood of Dallas, and has received the Gertrude Shelburne Humanitarian Award from them. Between April 2005 and March 2006, Komen affiliates gave $711,485 to Planned Parenthood.

After learning about the link between Planned Parenthood and Komen, Council Board member Eve Sanchez-Silver resigned.  She has gone around the country giving talks about Komen and the link between breast cancer and abortion.

Dr. Winer goes on to say that Catholics approve of the Komen foundation.  Well, some may, but many have issued statements against Komen and warned their congregations about participating with them.  Catholics also voted for Barack Obama, who is the most liberal, pro-abortion President in our nation’s history.  Several Cardinals have called for Obama voters to abstain from Communion until they repent for voting for him.

Dr. Winer also repeats their mantra of denying the link between abortion and breast cancer and that studies contradict other studies that confirm the link. A group dedicated to informing women about the abortion-breast cancer link is the Coalition On Abortion/Breast Cancer.  They have information specifically dedicated to abortion’s link to breast cancer including information about cancer fundraising groups’ dismissal of the link.

Life Issues Institute also has more information about the ABC link, such as information specifically about Susan G. Komen for the Cure and medical institutes that DO recognize the ABC link.

From the Coalition on Abortion Breast Cancer FAQ:

20) I know that abortion industry experts concede that women who have abortions lose the risk-reducing benefit of childbearing. However, apart from that effect, aren’t there studies showing that an abortion raises risk very little or not at all, in comparison to not having had that pregnancy?

Yes. There are several studies that report these results.  Unfortunately, when you read about it in the press, journalists often don’t understand the differences between the two cancer risks of abortion.

For instance, Valerie Beral and her colleagues published a paper in the British journal Lancet in 2004 that has been widely used to convince women that abortion is “safe.” [31]

The Beral paper only examined the debated breast cancer risk.  Its authors conceded the recognized risk of abortion – that childbearing protects women from the disease.

“Unfortunately, misinformation has circulated in the media following an article published last year in the British medical journal The Lancet,” noted Andrew Schlafly, General Counsel for the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.  “The article did not deny that increased abortions result in greater incidence of breast cancer.  Rather, the article merely claimed that abortion does not increase the risk of breast cancer, compared to the risk of someone who delayed pregnancy altogether.” [21]

Four experts, independently of one another, sharply criticized the Beral paper. [21,32,33,34,35]  Some of the criticisms include:

1) Beral et al. did not compare groups of women who were physiologically the same.  They should have compared pregnant women who aborted to pregnant women who carried their pregnancies to term.  Instead, they compared the effect of aborting with the effect of not having had that pregnancy. Pregnancy brings about permanent changes in the structure of the breasts. Pregnant women who choose abortion should be compared to pregnant women who give birth after a full term pregnancy.

2) Twenty-eight out of 52 studies (a majority of the research) contained unpublished abortion data. That means that scientists cannot double-check those studies to determine if they’re flawed or if the research is even relevant.  Women just have to take their word for it.

3) Beral et al. used unscientific reasons to exclude 14 peer-reviewed, published studies that reported risk increases for women who had abortions.

Ed Furton, MA, Ph.D., editor of the journal, Ethics and Medics, severely criticized the Beral paper.  He said:

“The Beral study is therefore cause for alarm.  When a leading scientific journal allows its pages to be used as a political platform, and sets aside objective standards of scientific research, we must begin to wonder whether the spirit of (Jacques) Derrida has infected even scientific discourse….

“Picking conclusions ahead of time, and arranging the evidence to support them, will only serve to undermine the respect that scientific inquiry deserves….

“The unwillingness of scientists to speak out against the shoddy research that is being advanced by those who deny the abortion-breast cancer link is a very serious breach…

“When the public learns that a causal link between abortion and breast cancer has been downplayed by the scientific community – for reasons that are ideological rather than factual – the feeling of betrayal will be strong.” [34]

Professor Joel Brind at Baruch College in New York concurs with Ed Furton.  He has documented widespread bias in the scientific community against the abortion-breast cancer link. In a major paper for the National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly, he cited flawed research that is being used in press reports to erase any notions in the public mind that abortion is unsafe. [32]

In a subsequent paper for the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons published in 2005, Brind reviewed ten recent, prospective studies and concluded that they are seriously flawed.  He wrote:

“Collectively, these studies are found to embody many serious weaknesses and flaws, including cohort effects, substantial misclassification errors due to missing information in databases, inadequate follow-up times, inadequately controlled effects of confounding variables, and frank violations of the scientific method.  These recent studies therefore do not invalidate the large body of previously published studies that established induced abortion as a risk factor for breast cancer.” [35]

Although these studies have been criticized in a medical journal for their flaws, the abortion industry and the cancer fundraising industry use them to convince women of the safety of abortion.  These studies include:

Melbye M, Wohlfahrt J, Olson JH, Frisch M, Westergaard T, Helweg-Larsen K, Andersen PK. Induced abortion and the risk of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1997;336:81-85.

Lazovich D, Thompson JA, Mink PJ, Sellers TA, Anderson KE. Induced abortion and breast cancer risk. Epidemiology 2000;11:76-80.

Tang NC, Weiss NS, Malone KE. Induced abortion in relation to breast cancer among parous women: A birth certificate registry study. Epidemiology 2000;11:177-80.

Goldacre MJ, Kurina LM, Seagroatt V, Yeates. Abortion and breast cancer: a case-control record linkage study. J Epidemiol Community Health 2001;55:336-337.

Ye Z, Gao DL, Qin Q, Ray RM, Thomas DB. Breast cancer in relation to induced abortions in a cohort of Chinese women. Br J Cancer 2002;87:977-981.

Newcomb PA, Mandelson MT. A record-based evaluation of induced abortion and breast cancer risk (United States). Cancer Causes Control 2000;11:777-781.

Erlandsson G, Montgomery S, Cnattingius S, et al. Abortions and breast cancer: Record-based case-control study. Int J Cancer 2003;103:676-679.

Paoletti X, Clavel-Chapelon F, E3N group. Induced and spontaneous abortion and breast cancer risk: Results from the E3N cohort study. Int J Cancer 2003;106:270-276.

Brewster D, Stockton D, Dobbie R, Bull D, Beral D. Risk of breast cancer after miscarriage or induced abortion: a Scottish record linkage case-control study. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2005;59:283-287.

Palmer J, Wise L, Adams-Campbell LL, Rosenberg L. A prospective study of induced abortion and breast cancer in African-American women. Cancer Causes and Control 2004;15:105-111.

For more information, see Dr. Brind’s review article in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons at: http://www.jpands.org/vol10no4/brind.pdf

In 2007, Patrick Carroll, a British statistician and actuary, reported that abortion is the “best predictor” of breast cancer rates in eight European countries (including the U.K.), and fertility is also a useful predictor of those trends. [39,40] Carroll demonstrated that he could predict future breast cancer cases for England and Wales for the years 2003 and 2004 with nearly 100% accuracy by using abortion rates and, to a lesser extent, fertility rates in his mathematical model.

They also state:


Most of the risk factors associated with breast cancer involve estrogen overexposure. Women who experience more menstrual cycles are exposed to higher levels of estradiol, a form of estrogen, over the course of their lifetimes. Women who reach puberty at an early age or menopause at a late age or who have fewer or no children, experience more menstrual cycles. Ergo, they are known have a higher risk of breast cancer. Women who have more children and who nurse them, on the other hand, experience fewer menstrual cycles and reduce their risk of breast cancer by doing so. Similarly, a low fat diet and avoidance of alcohol reduce a woman’s exposure to estrogen.

Estrogen is a secondary carcinogen. It promotes the growth of normal and abnormal tissue. In fact, estrogen replacement therapy, which is generally the same chemical form as the estrogen naturally produced by a woman’s ovaries, was included on our nation’s list of known carcinogens in 2001.

For an exhaustive explanation of estrogen’s role in the promotion of breast cancer, see the Web Site for the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute at and click on “The Estrogen Connection,” www.BCPInstitue.org.

Biological Explanation for the Link

The explanation for the independent link makes good biological sense. It remains unrefuted and unchallenged by scientists because it is physiologically correct.

A never-pregnant woman has a network of primitive, immature and cancer-vulnerable breast cells which make up her milk glands. It is only in the third trimester of pregnancy – after 32 weeks gestation – that her cells start to mature and are fashioned into milk producing tissue whose cells are cancer resistant.

When a woman becomes pregnant, her breasts enlarge. This occurs because a hormone called estradiol, a type of estrogen, causes both the normal and pre-cancerous cells in the breast to multiply terrifically. This process is called “proliferation.” By 7 to 8 weeks gestation, the estradiol level has increased by 500% over what it was at the time of conception.

If the pregnancy is carried to term, a second process called “differentiation” takes place. Differentiation is the shaping of cells into milk producing tissue. It shuts off the cell multiplication process. This takes place at approximately 32 weeks gestation.

If the pregnancy is aborted, the woman is left with more undifferentiated — and therefore cancer-vulnerable cells — than she had before she was pregnant. On the other hand, a full term pregnancy leaves a woman with more milk producing differentiated cells, which means that she has fewer cancer-vulnerable cells in her breasts than she did before the pregnancy.

In contrast, research has shown that most miscarriages do not raise breast cancer risk. This is due to a lack of estrogen overexposure. Miscarriages are frequently precipitated by a decline in the production of progesterone which is needed to maintain a pregnancy. Estrogen is made from progesterone, so the levels of each hormone rise and fall together during pregnancy.

For a thorough biological explanation of the abortion-breast cancer link, see this second website for the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute, www.BCPInstitute.org and click on its online booklet, “Breast Cancer Risks and Prevention.”


The first epidemiological study was reported in an English language journal in 1957. Researchers found a 160% elevation in risk among women who’d obtained abortions. [Segi M., et al. GANN (1957); 48 (Suppl): 1-63]

The first study to examine the abortion-breast cancer link among American women was published in 1981 and reported that abortion “appears to cause a substantial increase in risk of subsequent breast cancer.” A 140% risk elevation was reported. [Pike MC et al., British Journal of Cancer (1981;43:72-6]

Howe et al. 1989, the only statistically significant study conducted on American women in which medical records of abortion were used, not interviews after the fact, reported a 90% increased risk of breast cancer among women in New York who had chosen abortion. [Howe et al. (1989) Int J Epidemiol 18:300-4]

Our bar graphs reveal the relative risk found for each epidemiological study. These graphs were developed for our website by Chris Kahlenborn, M.D., author of the book, Breast Cancer, Its Link to Abortion and the Birth Control Pill.

Let me give you the simple version of how the ABC works:

When a women has her monthly cycle, her breasts fill with a cancer causing toxin (estrogen). When she becomes pregnant, her cycle stops for the 9-month period. That in itself has always been an indisputable key factor to lowering breast cancer. The earlier a woman completes a full-term pregnancy, the better, and the more children, the better. Breastfeeding also helps stave off breast cancer.  But in addition, when a pregnancy is suddenly aborted, breasts that were preparing to nourish a baby are left with more undifferentiated, i.e., cancer-vulnerable cells, than before she was pregnant. The fact is, abortion can increase a woman’s risk factor up to 160%!

Update: 7/19/11

LifeSiteNews.com has published an article now detailing that Komen has been granting money for embryonic stem cell research.  The evidence comes from Karen Malec of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer.

Now, Karen Malec of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer has spent time examining Komen’s 990 Forms for the IRS for 2010 and she found that Komen has active relationships with at least five research groups or educational facilities that engage in embryonic stem cell research, which requires the destruction of unborn children in their earliest days for stem cells that have yet to help any patients.

Komen is careful in its documents to state that none of the funds directly support embryonic stem cell research, saying in its Group Return for 2010 under a section entitled “Grant Statement” that “While Komen affiliates do not fund research grants directly, a portion of the funds raised by every Komen affiliate (approximately 25%) go to support the research and training grants program at Komen’s International Headquarters.”

The return shows donations from Komen totaling $3.75 million to Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, $4.5 million to the University of Kansas Medical Center, $1 million to the U.S. National Cancer Institute, $1 million to the Society for Women’s Health Research, and $600,000 to Yale University.

Looking at those institutions, Yale not only engages in embryonic stem cell research but, in 2006, came under federal investigation for apparently mismanaging federal stem cell research grants. Also, a Johns Hopkins researcher also came under fire in December 2008 for trashing peer-reviewed research showing abortion’s link to negative mental health issues and problems for women. And the National Cancer Institute has been repeatedly blasted by pro-life advocates for denying the abortion-breast cancer link exists.

“Komen’s Parent Return for 2010 shows that millions of dollars in grants were given to research facilities that have policies supporting experiments on human embryos,” Malec says, adding that the list of schools is only a partial list of the facilities engaging in embryonic research that received grants.

Recent statements from the Catholic Bishop of Toledo, the Most Reverend Leonard Blair, bring up both abortion and the potential of Komen indirectly supporting embryonic research as reasons for Catholics to have misgivings about the breast cancer group. Malec says the statements from Bishop Blair “suggest that local Komen officials may have misled him and his associates with respect to the organization’s practices involving experiments on human embryos.”

“They are open to embryonic stem cell research and may well fund such research in the future,” the bishop noted.

Combined with the millions in donations to the nation’s biggest abortion business, Komen says the new information about the Komen ties to embryonic stem cell research centers makes it so the breast cancer group is not worthy of support. She says Komen needs to be honest with women about the abortion-breast cancer connection.

“It’s more than ironic that Planned Parenthood receives contributions from an organization allegedly dedicated to the eradication of breast cancer,” Malec says. “Abortion and the birth control pill – which Planned Parenthood sells – are risk factors for the disease. It’s certainly bad for business to tell women the truth about the abortion-breast cancer link. Knowledge of that risk would cause some to turn their backs on induced abortion and cut into Planned Parenthood’s profits.”

“On the other hand, warning women about the breast cancer risk of abortion would mean fewer breast cancer patients and, therefore, a reduction in donations for Komen. Telling donors that their previous abortions may have been responsible for their breast cancers is simply not a good fundraising tactic,” she concludes.

Before anyone starts formulating their arguments: does this mean that everyone who gets an abortion will get breast cancer?  No.  Did everyone with breast cancer have an abortion in the past?  No.  Does having an abortion increase the risk of breast cancer.  Undeniably, yes.

This is the simple truth:  Susan G. Komen for the Cure gives money and resources to Planned Parenthood.  That alone should give you cause for great concern, but they also deny critical information to women about the link between abortions and breast cancer.

If you support Susan G. Komen for the Cure, congratulations, you help support abortion.

Helpful Information: Fact Sheet by Life Issues Institute Linking Susan G. Komen with Planned Parenthood
The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer
Jill Stanek’s Blog
Life Issues Institute
OneNewsNow Reports On The Komen/Planned Parenthood Link


Read Full Post »

Operation Rescue is reporting they they successfully testified in court against George Tiller regarding his employees falsifying sonograms in order to perform abortions on babies who were older than the sonograms reported.

The head of the Tiller’s political action committee ProKanDo, Julie Burkhart, made a false report to police about the OR President Tony Newman making death threats.  Newman was removed from the hearing and detained in a locked cell only to be released minutes later after realizing what had happened.

Evidence Of Faked Sonograms Goes To Topeka

Newman removed from hearing and detained after Tiller lackey makes false report

Topeka, KS — On Wednesday, Cheryl Sullenger appeared before the House Federal and State Committee and gave stunning testimony about evidence gathered during an undercover investigation conducted by Operation Rescue that showed George Tiller’s Wichita abortion clinic is intentionally underestimating fetal age to avoid having to comply with Kansas laws banning late-term abortions.

Sullenger’s testimony was in support of HB 2076, a bill that would require that women be allowed to view their sonograms at least 30 minutes before having an abortion. “Will this bill solve all the problems we have uncovered? No, but it will help women make decisions based on accurate information that is now withheld from them. That will save lives,” said Sullenger.

Surveys show that over 75% of strongly abortion-minded women change their minds about having abortions after viewing a sonogram of their babies.

During the hearing, Julie Burkhart, head of Tiller’s political action committee, ProKanDo, made a false report to Capitol Security that OR President Troy Newman had made a death threat against her. Security removed Newman from the hearing room and detained him in a locked security room for several minutes. Once Newman explained that Burkhart was simply trying to harass him, he was released without further incident.

“She thought I was the one giving the testimony, and this was just an underhanded tactic meant to prevent our testimony. This just shows how low Tiller’s people will go to prevent the truth about their unscrupulous abortion business from getting out,” said Newman. “When things like this happen, we know we are making an impact.”

Read Full Post »

Operation Rescue is calling attention to a story where abortionist Alberto Hodari was given only probation for destroying abortion records and not even prosecuted for illegally disposing of aborted baby corpses in the trash.

After hearing the “verdict”, Jennifer McCoy has come forward with her story of how, in 1988, after getting caught up in a “relationship” with a teacher when she was 16, Hodari performed an abortion on her after her mother and the rapist conned Jennifer into getting an “exam” when Jennifer had no intention of getting an abortion.

Forced Abortion, Rape Victim Comes Forward After Abortionist Given Probation

Investigation reveals illegal record dumping was not isolated problem with Hodari clinics. List of injured abortion patients, including four abortion-related deaths, spans decades.

By Cheryl Sullenger

Detroit, MI – Outraged by what she considers a meaningless sentence and remarks by an attorney, that she says are insulting and untrue, a former patient of Womancare has come forward to tell of her horrific abortion experience with owner, abortionist Alberto Hodari.

Womancare, Inc., a Detroit area abortion clinic chain owned by Alberto Hodari, was given six months probation on one count of illegally disposing of abortion records last week. Eleven other counts have been dismissed. Womancare was charged after Citizen’s for a Pro-Life Society discovered abortion records along with the remains of aborted babies that had been illegally dumped in the clinic’s trash. The Health Department chose not to pursue charges for the illegal disposal of human remains.

After the sentencing, Hodari’s attorney, Victor Norris, told the press that Hodari had “never had any licensing violations or criminal allegations.”

“That’s not true,” said Jennifer McCoy. She should know. Her abortion at Hodari’s hands nearly ruined her life.

She was 16-years old in 1988 when she discovered that she was pregnant, news that she welcomed since she believed that she was in love with her baby’s father. She had no thought of abortion because she believed it was wrong.

However, the baby’s father was her 39-year old high school ROTC teacher who was married and had a family of his own, including a daughter that was Jennifer’s age. Their relationship qualified as statutory rape.

Jennifer’s mother found out about the relationship, but instead of reporting her daughter’s sexual abuse to the authorities, she called the teacher and threatened to expose him if he did not help her persuade Jennifer to have an abortion.

Jennifer was taken by her rapist to one of Hodari’s clinics in Southgate under the pretense of receiving prenatal care. “I didn’t even know what an abortion clinic was,” she said.

Once at the clinic, she was asked to sign some papers. She signed all the parts related to medical care, but refused to sign anything that discussed abortion. “That’s not why I’m here,” she repeatedly told the clinic staff.

Jennifer was then given an ultrasound examination. She asked to see her baby, but her request was refused. “It really isn’t necessary,” she was told.

She was placed in an examination room, and after a long wait, Hodari entered the room. She told him that she was just there for an exam. She had been told by the clinic staff that she had to get an exam in order to determine how far along she was.

“He told me, ‘If you change your mind, then we can do whatever else you decide you want to do,’” she said.

Hodari began the exam. “Then all of a sudden I was in excruciating pain,” Jennifer recalled. “I tried to sit up, and I heard a machine turn on, like a vacuum, and I realized what was going on.”

“I tried to get up from the table. I actually tried to sit up, and he pushed me back down on the table and told me if I moved I could die. It would be over in five minutes and I could go on with my life. I was scared to death at that point that what he said was true, and so all I could do is lay there and cry.”

“And when it was over I remember being taken by a nurse into another room where I was crying violently, and I remember her saying, ‘Did you do everything you thought you could?’ I then remember throwing something at her because I could not believe that she would say something to me when there was nothing I could do from that point on.”

Hodari had forced an abortion on this unsuspecting teenager, then handed her back into the hands of her rapist.

Jennifer left the clinic and headed straight to the Southgate Police Department, just up the street from the abortion mill, to file charges against Hodari for aborting her baby against her will.

A few weeks later, she went to court. Hodari’s attorney produced papers from the abortion mill, and told the court that Jennifer’s mother had signed the necessary consent forms for the abortion.

“He said since I was a minor, that it wasn’t necessary for me to sign the paperwork, nor even know what they were going to do,” she said. To her frustration, the case was dismissed.

Jennifer later confronted her mother about signing the paperwork behind her back, but her mother would never say if she did. “To this day I have doubts that she did that,” said Jennifer. “She wasn’t even there.”

Through all of this, no one – including Hodari’s abortion mill – ever reported Jennifer’s sex abuse at the hands of her teacher, which continued for four years. Once the school discovered it, Jennifer’s teacher was quietly asked to resign, and the matter was swept under the rug.

Because of the abortion, Jennifer had thoughts of suicide. Her relationship with her mother remained strained for years. Her life spun out of control.

Finally, Jennifer found forgiveness and healing through her renewed faith in Jesus Christ. She is now living in Wichita, Kansas, is married and the mother of ten children. She spends what extra time her large family allows trying to help women who are considering abortion to chose life for their babies. She wants to warn others of abortion’s dangers.

“I know if he did this to me, he’s done it to others,” said Jennifer, who came forward so that people would learn the truth about Hodari and his disreputable abortion operation.

In fact, Hodari and his abortion mills have a long history of serious problems, including the documented abortion-related deaths of four women. He currently has open formal complaints against his medical license. (View his license)

Jennifer Nelson, a friend of Jennifer McCoy’s, was one of the women who discovered the bodies of aborted babies and the women’s medical records in Hodari’s trash that led to his recent probation. She has documented Hodari’s legal problems on a web site, voicesforwomen.org.

Nelson, along with other women, decided to create the web site listing the cases of injured women in response to what they consider a crisis in the abortion industry.

“We have found that sometimes, the very people who claim to have a woman’s best interest at heart, have anything but,” Nelson said. “After the deaths of Chivon Williams, Regina Johnson, and Tamia Russell, we united and decided that we can’t wait any longer. The list must stop here!”

Details of the abortion deaths are shocking:

Tamia Russell was only 15 years old in January of 2004 when her 26 year old boyfriend paid Hodari $2,000 in cash to abort her baby at over 26 weeks gestation. She died less than 24 hours after obtaining an abortion at Womancare of Southfield/Lathrup Village. Her guardian was unaware she was pregnant, and had no knowledge of the abortion – until it was too late.

Chivon Williams received a suction abortion by Hodari at an unknown clinic. An hour and forty minutes later, she was discharged even though she was complaining of pain in her stomach and chest. Soon after she arrived at her home, she “became unresponsive.” At 5:17, on the same day as the abortion, she was pronounced dead.

Regina Johnson received an abortion by Hodari, after which she suffered respiratory and cardiac arrest. Because the clinic staff failed to help her or call for an ambulance, she was deprived of oxygen for an extended time. She died a short time later.

A 17-year old woman died after in October, 2007, after an abortion at Womancare of Downriver/Southgate. Her family had no idea she was pregnant.

Nelson’s web site documents a whopping 49 lawsuits against Hodari and/or his abortion clinics. Descriptions of botched abortions read like the script of a horror movie. The following are just a small sampling:

• Hodari committed an abortion on a non-pregnant woman, perforating her uterus. She required surgery to repair the injury.

• One woman received a D&C abortion after which she suffered severe abdominal pain and nausea. Her repeated calls to the clinic were ignored. Two weeks later she was hospitalized where it was discovered that the abortion had perforated her uterus and small bowel. She required reconstructive surgery and remained hospitalized for two weeks.

• Hodari performed two “abortions” on a woman within one week’s time, telling her that her abortion was “successful” on the second try. Eight days later, the woman landed in the hospital suffering from a life-threatening ectopic pregnancy that Hodari had failed to properly diagnose. Other cases also list Hodari’s failure to diagnose ectopic pregnancies, placing women’s lives in jeopardy.

• A woman received an abortion from Hodari in her 17th week of pregnancy. Her blood pressure dropped and her uterus was packed with hopes of slowing the bleeding. It took five hours for Hodari to answer his staff’s calls for help. Then, instead of calling an ambulance, Hodari loaded her into his SUV for her emergency trip to the hospital where it was discovered that her injuries included a perforated uterus with right broad ligament dissection, and retroperitoneal hematoma. She required reconstructive surgery, removal of damaged fallopian tube and ovary, and blood transfusions.

• After a botched saline abortion, a 27 week baby boy weighing 1lb. 13oz, and measuring 13 ½ inches in length was born alive. Due to the toxic saline used in the attempted abortion, he suffered respiratory distress, sustained brain injury, and suffered other severe bodily injuries and burns.

Hodari appears to be so confident that he is above any prosecution or consequences for his actions that he has given interviews and speeches bragging about his appalling abortion practices.

In one interview, Hodari stated that he would continue to use a late-term abortion procedure that he considered dangerous, rather than run the risk of being charged with violating the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. He later shocked listeners at Wayne State University when he told them that he seldom washes his hands between patients to prevent skin chaffing even though he knew that it increased risks to his patients. He also told the same group that he believes abortionists have a “license to lie.”

“How this man still has a medical license is beyond me. Hodari is a danger to the public and needs to be stopped,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. “In six months, Hodari will have to go before the court again for a final disposition of the illegal disposal of abortion records case. If Hodari’s attorney told the judge that the clinic has never had any problems, the judge — and the public — needs to hear the truth.”

Jennifer McCoy is doing her part to make sure that happens. On February 10, 2009, she sent Judge William Richards her personal story and those of other women who suffered at Hodari’s hands. She prays it will help him understand just how dangerous Hodari really is.

“Thank God for courageous women like Jennifer McCoy who are willing to speak out in spite of their pain about this dreadful injustice,” said Newman. “We pray that the truth comes out and that proper justice will be done before Hodari’s body count gets any higher.”

[If you or someone you know has been injured by Alberto Hodari, we urge you to call the chambers of Judge William Richards at (248)796-5830 and tell him your story.]

Read Full Post »

CNSNews is reporting that abortionist Pierre Jean-Jacque Renelique is under investigation after a baby was born alive and thrown in the trash by clinic owner Belkis Gonzalez after the abortionist failed to arrive in time for the abortion procedure.

Abortionist Under Investigation after Baby Born Alive Is Thrown Out Like Trash

Fla. Doctor Investigated in Badly Botched Abortion

Thursday, February 05, 2009
By Christine Armario, Associated Press

Tampa, Fla. (AP) – Eighteen and pregnant, Sycloria Williams went to an abortion clinic outside Miami and paid $1,200 for Dr. Pierre Jean-Jacque Renelique to terminate her 23-week pregnancy.

Three days later, she sat in a reclining chair, medicated to dilate her cervix and otherwise get her ready for the procedure.

Only Renelique didn’t arrive in time. According to Williams and the Florida Department of Health, she went into labor and delivered a live baby girl.

What Williams and the Health Department say happened next has shocked people on both sides of the abortion debate: One of the clinic’s owners, who has no medical license, cut the infant’s umbilical cord. Williams says the woman placed the baby in a plastic biohazard bag and threw it out.

Police recovered the decomposing remains in a cardboard box a week later after getting anonymous tips.

“I don’t care what your politics are, what your morals are, this should not be happening in our community,” said Tom Pennekamp, a Miami attorney representing Williams in her lawsuit against Renelique (ren-uh-LEEK’) and the clinic owners.

The state Board of Medicine is to hear Renelique’s case in Tampa on Friday and determine whether to strip his license. The state attorney’s homicide division is investigating, though no charges have been filed. Terry Chavez, a spokeswoman with the Miami-Dade County State Attorney’s Office, said this week that prosecutors were nearing a decision.

Renelique’s attorney, Joseph Harrison, called the allegations at best “misguided and incomplete” in an e-mail to The Associated Press. He didn’t provide details.

The case has riled the anti-abortion community, which contends the clinic’s actions constitute murder.

“The baby was just treated as a piece of garbage,” said Tom Brejcha, president of The Thomas More Society, a law firm that is also representing Williams. “People all over the country are just aghast.”

Even those who support abortion rights are concerned about the allegations.Mi

“It really disturbed me,” said Joanne Sterner, president of the Broward County chapter of the National Organization for Women, after reviewing the administrative complaint against Renelique. “I know that there are clinics out there like this. And I hope that we can keep (women) from going to these types of clinics.”

According to state records, Renelique received his medical training at the State University of Haiti. In 1991, he completed a four-year residency in obstetrics and gynecology at Interfaith Medical Center in New York.

New York records show that Renelique has made at least five medical malpractice payments in the past decade, the circumstances of which were not detailed in the filings.

Several attempts to reach Renelique were unsuccessful. Some of his office numbers were disconnected, no home number could be found and he did not return messages left with his attorney.

Williams struggled with the decision to have an abortion, Pennekamp said. She declined an interview request made through him.

She concluded she didn’t have the resources or maturity to raise a child, he said, and went to the Miramar Women’s Center on July 17, 2006. Sonograms indicated she was 23 weeks pregnant, according to the Department of Health. She met Renelique at a second clinic two days later.

Renelique gave Williams laminaria, a drug that dilates the cervix, and prescribed three other medications, according to the administrative complaint filed by the Health Department. She was told to go to yet another clinic, A Gyn Diagnostic Center in Hialeah, where the procedure would be performed the next day, on July 20, 2006.

Williams arrived in the morning and was given more medication.

The Department of Health account continues as follows: Just before noon she began to feel ill. The clinic contacted Renelique. Two hours later, he still hadn’t shown up. Williams went into labor and delivered the baby.

“She came face to face with a human being,” Pennekamp said. “And that changed everything.”

The complaint says one of the clinic owners, Belkis Gonzalez came in and cut the umbilical cord with scissors, then placed the baby in a plastic bag, and the bag in a trash can.

Williams’ lawsuit offers a cruder account: She says Gonzalez knocked the baby off the recliner chair where she had given birth, onto the floor. The baby’s umbilical cord was not clamped, allowing her to bleed out. Gonzalez scooped the baby, placenta and afterbirth into a red plastic biohazard bag and threw it out.

No working telephone number could be found for Gonzalez, and an attorney who has represented the clinic in the past did not return a message.

At 23 weeks, an otherwise healthy fetus would have a slim but legitimate chance of survival. Quadruplets born at 23 weeks last year at The Nebraska Medical Center survived.

An autopsy determined Williams’ baby – she named her Shanice – had filled her lungs with air, meaning she had been born alive, according to the Department of Health. The cause of death was listed as extreme prematurity.

The Department of Health believes Renelique committed malpractice by failing to ensure that licensed personnel would be present when Williams was there, among other missteps.

The department wants the Board of Medicine, a separate agency, to permanently revoke Renelique’s license, among other penalties. His license is currently restricted, permitting him to only perform abortions when another licensed physician is present and can review his medical records.

Should prosecutors file murder charges, they’d have to prove the baby was born alive, said Robert Batey, a professor of criminal law at Stetson University College of Law in Gulfport. The defense might contend that the child would have died anyway, but most courts would not allow that argument, he said.

“Hastening the death of an individual who is terminally ill is still considered causing the death of that individual,” Batey said. “And I think a court would rule similarly in this type of case.”

Read Full Post »

The Alliance Defense Fund and Christian Legal Society are gearing up to defend the rights of doctors and other health care workers to refuse participation in abortions.  To no one’s surprise, Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and other pro-abortion groups are challenging three laws, 45 CFR Part 88, that currently protect doctors and other health care workers who refuse to participate in abortions.  They claim that it is a “woman’s right” to do what she wants with her body, but they refuse that right of “choice” to unborn babies, doctors, or other health care workers.

Obama has already signed an executive order lifting the ban on public funding for international groups that advocate or perform abortions overseas.  Thank you Mr. Obama, members of Congress, and the American people who voted him into office for making me pay for the murder of thousands of unborn babies.   You all wanted change, well here it is.  So where is my “choice” in this matter, eh?

The March for Life has issued a challenge to Mr. Obama to witness the abortions he so adamantly defends, talk to women who have been through abortions, and to talk to men and women who have survived abortions (the same ones that he refused to legalize medical help to while he worked for the Illinois Senate).

No choice: Doctors forced to perform abortions or else?

CLS, ADF attorneys seek to defend federal law that protects medical professionals from mandatory participation in abortion
Thursday, January 22, 2009, 12:55 PM (MST) |
ADF Media Relations | 480-444-0020

HARTFORD, Conn. — Attorneys with the Christian Legal Society and the Alliance Defense Fund filed motions to intervene Wednesday in three lawsuits that seek to invalidate a federal law protecting medical professionals from discrimination because they refuse to participate in abortions.  Three pro-life medical associations are seeking to defend the law against challenges by some state officials, Planned Parenthood, and the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union.

“Medical professionals should not be forced to perform abortions against their conscience.  Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and their pro-abortion allies are seeking to punish pro-life medical professionals for their beliefs,” said Litigation Counsel Casey Mattox with CLS’s Center for Law & Religious Freedom.  “Far from arguing for ‘choice,’ these lawsuits seek to compel health care workers to perform abortions or face dire consequences.”

“For over three decades, federal law has prohibited recipients of federal grants from forcing medical professionals to participate in abortions.  The arguments in the lawsuits themselves demonstrate lack of compliance with these laws and the necessity of the regulation they are challenging,” said ADF Legal Counsel Matt Bowman.  Attorney Andrew Knott of Cheshire is assisting as local counsel.

The Christian Medical Association, Catholic Medical Association, and American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, represented by CLS and ADF attorneys, are asking to be allowed to defend the law, 45 CFR Part 88, enacted in December 2008 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  Noting a pattern of grant recipients unaware of or flouting existing laws protecting medical professionals’ rights of conscience, HHS enacted the new law to require grantees to certify compliance with them in order to receive funds.  The three long-standing statutes are the Church Amendment, the Coats-Snowe Amendment, and the Weldon Amendment.

The three pro-life medical groups point out that denying rights of conscience could harm access to healthcare for all by forcing medical professionals who refuse to perform abortions to either relocate from jurisdictions that force them to do so or leave the profession altogether.

Many of those challenging the HHS law failed in previous efforts to have the Weldon Amendment struck down.  CLS and ADF attorneys representing the Christian Medical Association and American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists successfully defended that law (www.telladf.org/news/story.aspx?cid=4432, www.telladf.org/news/story.aspx?cid=3918, and www.telladf.org/news/story.aspx?cid=3542).

The briefs in support of the motions to intervene in Connecticut v. United States, National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association v. Leavitt, and Planned Parenthood of America v. Leavitt filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut are available at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/HHSinterventions.pdf.

ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith.  The CLS Center for Law & Religious Freedom is a team of Christian attorneys allied with ADF to defend religious liberty and human life.

www.telladf.org www.clsnet.org

Note: Facts in ADF news releases are verified prior to publication but may change over time. Members of the media are encouraged to contact ADF for the latest information on this matter.

Related Posts: Scripture: Life Begins at Conception
The ‘Unaborted Obama’ Ad
Court Rules Pro-Lifers Can Publicize Abortion Industry Horrors
“Operation Rescue” Submits Evidence to Kansas AG on Tiller’s Clinic

Read Full Post »

WorldNetDaily reports that CatholicVote.org has a new ad promoting the pro-life stance.  It features a sonogram of a baby who grows up to be Barack Obama.

Watch the ad showing ‘unaborted Obama’ in womb

‘This child will become the 1st African American president’

Posted: January 22, 2009
12:45 am Eastern

By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A pro-life ad is celebrating President Barack Obama’s mother’s decision not to abort the first black American president, and the video has already caught the attention of more than 200,000 viewers.

The commercial begins with an ultrasound image of a baby moving in his mother’s womb.

“This child’s future is a broken home,” it says.

“He will be abandoned by his father.”

“His single mother will struggle to raise him.”

“Despite the hardships, he will endure,” the ad states. “This child will become the first African American president.”

It features a photo of President Obama and concludes, “Life. Imagine the potential.”

The ad comes just as a number of events are scheduled in Washington to mark the 36th anniversary of the 1972 U.S. Supreme Court Roe vs. Wade opinion that struck down state restrictions on abortion, essentially installing that “right” in the Constitution.

The promotion is sponsored by CatholicVote.org, a faith-based educational program. The organization website states that it launched its “Life: Imagine the Potential” campaign “to reach Americans who are either indifferent, or who have not yet thought about the great potential of every human life.”

President Obama’s agenda regarding “reproductive choice” has been posted on the White House website.

It states, Obama “has been a consistent champion of reproductive choice and will make preserving women’s rights under Roe v. Wade a priority in his Adminstration.”

Related Posts: Scripture: Life Begins at Conception

Read Full Post »

WorldNetDaily has an exclusive story detailing an undercover operation by Operation Rescue exposing illegal abortion tacticts by George Tiller’s clinic, Women’s Health Care Services, P.A.  Tiller is already under investigation for aborting 19 babies illegally.

“Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee.” — Jeremiah 1:5a

Stung! Abortionist fakes sonogram to avoid age limit

Undercover investigation reveals business skirting state law

Posted: January 12, 2009
9:35 pm Eastern

By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

While Kansas doctor George Tiller is still fighting accusations of illegally aborting 19 viable babies, an undercover sting operation conducted by a pro-life organization revealed his clinic intentionally underestimating fetal age and viability to dodge state laws.

According to a sworn statement, a pregnant mother calling herself “Shaye” received a sonogram from Tiller’s clinic determining her baby was beyond the allowed legal age of abortion, but the test’s administrator “threw it into a trashcan” and recalculated a lesser gestational age. The clinic scheduled Shaye for an abortion four days later.

Shaye, working undercover with the pro-life organization Operation Rescue, later that day received two additional sonograms from other medical centers, both showing the baby beyond the legal abortion age. Further, even at the age recalculated by Tiller’s clinic, the abortion four days later would have still been beyond the age of viability.

“This evidence warrants further investigation by law enforcement authorities,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman in a statement on ChristianNewsWire. “This is convincing proof that, in spite of already facing 19 criminal charges, Tiller continues to flout the law to the danger of women and their babies.”

As WND reported, Tiller, whose abortion work was featured in a recent profile by WND columnist Jack Cashill, faces accusations for aborting viable babies without obtaining the legally required, independent second opinion affirming the medical necessity for late-term abortions.

According to Kansas law, if a clinic determines a fetus past the age of viability – a gestational age of 22 weeks, or 23 with sonogram equipment – a second, independent physician must agree that the abortion is medically necessary.

When Shaye entered Tiller’s Women’s Health Care Services in Wichita, however, the sonogram showed her baby to be nearly 25 weeks. According to Shaye’s statement:

The woman who gave me the ultrasound at WHCS was Lindsey Alejandro. She informed me that my baby was 24 weeks, 6 days gestation. I told her that I did not think I could be that far along, so she told me she was going to try something else.

At that point, Ms. Alejandro tore off the ultrasound photo that showed 24 weeks, 6 days gestation and threw it into a trashcan. She remeasured the baby from another angle and the measurements came up as 23 weeks gestation.

Ms. Alejandro told me that I could have the abortion because it is a woman’s choice up until 24 weeks.

A video created by Operation Rescue detailing Shaye’s account can be seen below:

“The evidence shows there is no doubt,” said Newman, “that fetal ages and viability are being intentionally misstated by WHCS in order to do abortions that would otherwise be illegal.”

Shaye did not receive the abortion, only because she did not keep her abortion appointment.

In court testimony last week, following a six-week break in the Tiller case, former Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline said that he had discovered evidence that Planned Parenthood had conspired to circumvent Kansas abortion law by referring women to Tiller for late-term procedures, even though the women were over legal threshold of 22 weeks gestation.

If convicted in the ongoing case, Tiller could face 19 years in jail.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »