Planned Parenthood doctor accused of doing forced abortion

[The Black Forrest]

I was thinking about rejoining this thread, but then I just said "Nah, not worth my time."

But you just did.

[Geilinor]

I see the title has been changed to a reasonable one.

[The Black Forrest]

I see the title has been changed to a reasonable one.

What was it before?

[Geilinor]

I see the title has been changed to a reasonable one.

What was it before?

"Planned Parenthood performs forced abortion"

[Oneracon]

CD, before you go charging further down the road about "TitleGate 2013," a quick Google search finds that even Pro-Life groups are referring to this as an "botched abortion" case. That includes LifeNews.com: "Planned Parenthood Botched Abortion, Left Part of Baby Inside Woman". See also Woman Sues Over Abortion Nightmare - WorldNetDaily.

I think the title should be changed to: "Planned Parenthood doctor accused of forced abortion". It's close to what CD wanted, and Fris said it was OK.

The Mods have spoken, so I would assume the title stays.

[Supermarionation]

I see the title has been changed to a reasonable one.

I don't think it is reasonable. The story told in Byer's civil suit puts the "botching" down to the abortion procedure being cut short on the patient's own request.

The lawyer (whom I'm thinking isn't much good) is trying to have it both ways: Byer was supposedly forced to have an abortion, but it wasn't tidied up properly because at some point during it she withdrew her consent. Should the doctor have continued as her objections became more and more apparent?

Or as it's put in the suit: "because she was crying".

[United Kingdom of Muffins]

Did the doctor know she really didn't want to? Most hospitals/clinics I've been to the doctors get a sheet and say do this and do it, was this the doctors fault or someone working for/with him? Also the stress caused by a surgery could lead to the last minute no I don't want to thing just being ignored.

[Supermarionation]

Did the doctor know she really didn't want to? Most hospitals/clinics I've been to the doctors get a sheet and say do this and do it, was this the doctors fault or someone working for/with him? Also the stress caused by a surgery could lead to the last minute no I don't want to thing just being ignored.

Yeah, I expect her signature is on something like that.

I'm not saying it's so in Byer's case because I don't know anything about her ... but women who profess to be pro-life do get abortions that aren't medically necessary, then go back to being pro-life when their personal problem is sorted out. Even more so if it's their partner or parent who is strongly pro-life and the woman only pays lip service to that. If hubby or daddy finds out she had it, she has good reason to say she was pressured into the decision or it was forced on her.

I think she has a Facebook page, but I'm not on FB and anyway I'm uncomfortable with prying into her private life. It does mention in the OP's pdf that she's 40 years old so odds are pretty good she already has children.

[Cannot think of a name]

I see the title has been changed to a reasonable one.

I don't think it is reasonable. The story told in Byer's civil suit puts the "botching" down to the abortion procedure being cut short on the patient's own request.

The lawyer (whom I'm thinking isn't much good) is trying to have it both ways: Byer was supposedly forced to have an abortion, but it wasn't tidied up properly because at some point during it she withdrew her consent. Should the doctor have continued as her objections became more and more apparent?

Or as it's put in the suit: "because she was crying".

This might be why the complaint at this point has only been handed to the anti-Planned Parenthood organization and not Planned Parenthood which, according to the OP, has not been notified of the suit yet.

[Desperate Measures]

I don't think it is reasonable. The story told in Byer's civil suit puts the "botching" down to the abortion procedure being cut short on the patient's own request.

The lawyer (whom I'm thinking isn't much good) is trying to have it both ways: Byer was supposedly forced to have an abortion, but it wasn't tidied up properly because at some point during it she withdrew her consent. Should the doctor have continued as her objections became more and more apparent?

Or as it's put in the suit: "because she was crying".

This might be why the complaint at this point has only been handed to the anti-Planned Parenthood organization and not Planned Parenthood which, according to the OP, has not been notified of the suit yet.

Sounds legit.

[Ceannairceach]

I see the title has been changed to a reasonable one.

I don't think it is reasonable. The story told in Byer's civil suit puts the "botching" down to the abortion procedure being cut short on the patient's own request.

The lawyer (whom I'm thinking isn't much good) is trying to have it both ways: Byer was supposedly forced to have an abortion, but it wasn't tidied up properly because at some point during it she withdrew her consent. Should the doctor have continued as her objections became more and more apparent?

Or as it's put in the suit: "because she was crying".

Indeed, reading the complaint I'm left wondering if the lawyer is competent or if he was merely selected by throwing darts at the ads in the daily.

[Supermarionation]

I don't think it is reasonable. The story told in Byer's civil suit puts the "botching" down to the abortion procedure being cut short on the patient's own request.

The lawyer (whom I'm thinking isn't much good) is trying to have it both ways: Byer was supposedly forced to have an abortion, but it wasn't tidied up properly because at some point during it she withdrew her consent. Should the doctor have continued as her objections became more and more apparent?

Or as it's put in the suit: "because she was crying".

Indeed, reading the complaint I'm left wondering if the lawyer is competent or if he was merely selected by throwing darts at the ads in the daily.

Doug Romero's law firm is the Colorado Christian Defense Counsel which he founded. He first tried to get his law degree at the University of Denver but dropped out and they wouldn't let him back in. But later he did graduate Thomas Cooley Law School (at the age of 45) and did pass the Bar exam on his fourth try. He's now 52 and his firm has taken cases to court before.

He IS a lawyer. Just not a very good one.

[Snafturi]

I don't think it is reasonable. The story told in Byer's civil suit puts the "botching" down to the abortion procedure being cut short on the patient's own request.

The lawyer (whom I'm thinking isn't much good) is trying to have it both ways: Byer was supposedly forced to have an abortion, but it wasn't tidied up properly because at some point during it she withdrew her consent. Should the doctor have continued as her objections became more and more apparent?

Or as it's put in the suit: "because she was crying".

Indeed, reading the complaint I'm left wondering if the lawyer is competent or if he was merely selected by throwing darts at the ads in the daily.

He was clearly selected because he prays with Santa Claus. Add to that the fact that his office manager graduated from Romanian law school and he has more Hispanic liaisons than the Spanish and Mexican embassies combined and how could anyone not choose him?

So who's responsible for the complaint?

Why, this guy! Seen here praying with Santa!
(Image)

See his whole 30 second add here... And ask yourself:

When was the last time you prayed with your lawyer?

[Christian Democrats]

I have made some changes to the OP, including making a logo change to reflect PP's philosophy.

Logo taken from:

http://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/issues/

[Tlaceceyaya]

I have made some changes to the OP, including making a logo change to reflect PP's philosophy.

Logo taken from:

http://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/issues/

Ah, taking things out of context.
Wonderful.

[Christian Democrats]

I have made some changes to the OP, including making a logo change to reflect PP's philosophy.

Logo taken from:

http://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/issues/

Ah, taking things out of context.
Wonderful.

"Act. No matter what." is an official motto of Planned Parenthood.

In this case, it seems to adhere to its philosophy.

[Condunum]

I have made some changes to the OP, including making a logo change to reflect PP's philosophy.

Logo taken from:

http://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/issues/

Ah, taking things out of context.
Wonderful.

Its just so lovely and convenient that the very first sentence under that makes the most intellectually dishonest allegation that I have ever seen against PP.

[Condunum]

Ah, taking things out of context.
Wonderful.

"Act. No matter what." is an official motto of Planned Parenthood.

In this case, it seems to adhere to its philosophy.

How so?

[Catness]

Ah, taking things out of context.
Wonderful.

"Act. No matter what." is an official motto of Planned Parenthood.

In this case, it seems to adhere to its philosophy.

So you're taking that motto and are twisting it to somehow apply to this case because it is clear that you're against abortion and, despite the fact that the courts haven't ruled on this, you're convinced PP did something wrong.

[Christian Democrats]

"Act. No matter what." is an official motto of Planned Parenthood.

In this case, it seems to adhere to its philosophy.

How so?

The woman had a change of heart on the operating table, yet they went ahead with the procedure anyway.

Planned Parenthood acted . . . no matter what.

[Christian Democrats]

"Act. No matter what." is an official motto of Planned Parenthood.

In this case, it seems to adhere to its philosophy.

So you're taking that motto and are twisting it to somehow apply to this case because it is clear that you're against abortion and, despite the fact that the courts haven't ruled on this, you're convinced PP did something wrong.

Of course they did something wrong. The woman ended up in the emergency room.

[Condunum]

How so?

The woman had a change of heart on the operating table, yet they went ahead with the procedure anyway.

Planned Parenthood acted . . . no matter what.

And how far into the proceedure were they? Did they make an attempt to stop? Was it too late to stop? These things all matter, you know.

[Catness]

So you're taking that motto and are twisting it to somehow apply to this case because it is clear that you're against abortion and, despite the fact that the courts haven't ruled on this, you're convinced PP did something wrong.

Of course they did something wrong. The woman ended up in the emergency room.

Circumstantial. This is all according to her. If I were you, before jumping to conclusions, I would await the court ruling on this.

[Condunum]

So you're taking that motto and are twisting it to somehow apply to this case because it is clear that you're against abortion and, despite the fact that the courts haven't ruled on this, you're convinced PP did something wrong.

Of course they did something wrong. The woman ended up in the emergency room.

On that note, it is the hospital's fault when a surgeon fucks up a routine operation.

[Catness]

Of course they did something wrong. The woman ended up in the emergency room.

On that note, it is the hospital's fault when a surgeon fucks up a routine operation.

I don't think so. I think it would be the surgeon's fault.

In thins case, if the doctor at PP fucked up (and I won't say he did or didn't since we're still waiting on a court ruling), it's not PP's fault but the doctor in question.