Abortion Clinic on probation for parental consent violations

Wade8813

Registered Member
#1
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_14373272?nclick_check=1

After the tape was released last year, state health inspectors reviewed clinic records and found that nine minors, ages 13-15, had received abortions without proper verification of parental consent since November 2008.

In one case, health officials said, a 15-year-old received an abortion even though the person claiming to be her mother did not appear to be and presented questionable records, including an expired Alabama driver's license. Inspectors said Alabama birth records show a different person as the girl's parent.

There were also concerns about reporting child abuse. One of the 13-year-olds who received an abortion reported starting having sex at age 12 and having three partners in the previous year. She was back at the clinic for another abortion four months later and said she had now had four sexual partners in her life.

"A reasonable person would suspect abuse or neglect of this 13-year-old child, based on the above," inspectors wrote. "Neither the Registered Nurse, the Medical Doctor, nor any other Center staff reported the suspected abuse or neglect to the authorities as required by law."
"They were doing stuff that they weren't required to do, but they weren't doing the one thing that they were required to do," Harris said. "That's why we say they didn't technically meet the requirements of the parental consent statute."
That seems pretty bad; more than just "they technically didn't meet the requirements..."
 

Merc

Certified Shitlord
V.I.P.
#2
First off, thank god we have some anti-abortion activists that don't burn the buildings done anymore :)

It is unfortunate to hear that this clinic has had these issues but I find it curious as to what degree this is. I'm sure there are problems like this in other states, it's why doctors pay such high prices on their malpractice insurance. People love going after doctors and when any mistakes are made even in a clinic people jump all over them. Some research on Alabama shows that they are quite the anti-abortion state and not surprisingly, Alabama enforces abstinence-only education despite it's extremely high STD rates and above average teen pregnancy rates.

To me, this speaks to a more severe problem the state faces since their methods clearly do not work. Don't get me wrong, I agree with the clinic being put on probation and getting in the trouble they are in, but I think if you have this many cases of teen pregnancy and sexual problems then your problem does not lie with abortions, it lies with your inability to curb teenage sexual habits which is obviously hard but not impossible. I've always felt abstinence only education breeds (no pun intended) negative results since it's quite clear that denying information in a day and age where information is everywhere is a pretty ineffective method of teaching. Trust me, you want to scare some kids? Just show 'em a few birthing videos around 5th-7th grade. My town has a very low pregnancy rate despite the number of kids admitting to sexual activity and I'd like to think an informative education is a better tool than simply turning your back and telling them to "go away, there's nothing to see here."
 

Wade8813

Registered Member
#3
It is unfortunate to hear that this clinic has had these issues but I find it curious as to what degree this is. I'm sure there are problems like this in other states, it's why doctors pay such high prices on their malpractice insurance. People love going after doctors and when any mistakes are made even in a clinic people jump all over them.
This seems a bit more shady than just making a simple mistake...

A 13 year old who'd gotten an abortion and had multiple partners? That's far beyond a red flag.
 

Scissorhands

Registered Member
#4
First off, thank god we have some anti-abortion activists that don't burn the buildings done anymore :)

I fucking laughed my ass off when I read this. I saw this thread and was coming to state the fact that if tomorrow I was diagnosed with a terminal disease I would go and burn down every mother fucking abortion clinic I could get to before my epic death by coat-hanger when a vigilante abortionist came after my ass. (Actually, would I be the vigilante or would he?) Either way, fuck 'em. My take- Abortion is absolutely fucked up. I pity the fool who killed my unborn daughter. Best believe I been keeping my pimp hand strong.
 

NINnerd

Survived a M&G with Trent
#5
I thought you didn't need parental consent for an abortion? Is it decided by state law or is this a federal law?

I fucking laughed my ass off when I read this. I saw this thread and was coming to state the fact that if tomorrow I was diagnosed with a terminal disease I would go and burn down every mother fucking abortion clinic I could get to before my epic death by coat-hanger when a vigilante abortionist came after my ass. (Actually, would I be the vigilante or would he?) Either way, fuck 'em. My take- Abortion is absolutely fucked up. I pity the fool who killed my unborn daughter. Best believe I been keeping my pimp hand strong.
Um...I am kind of at a loss for words. If you are joking - Haha. If you are serious - I've seen how you post in other threads. The fact that you are so free in your life is because this is a free country. How would like someone to take away your freedoms to do and say what you please? They aren't killing fucking toddlers or something. It's usually just a collection of cells. I will tell you what I tell all anti-abortion rights people - put your money where your mouth is and start volunteering to adopt all these unwanted babies. Go work for an orphanage and help out all those unwanted babies.

ETA: Notice I said anti-abortion rights, not anti-abortion. I think it's just fine to be anti-abortion, but don't take away other people's rights.
 
Last edited:

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
#6
I thought you didn't need parental consent for an abortion? Is it decided by state law or is this a federal law?
State law



I will tell you what I tell all anti-abortion rights people - put your money where your mouth is and start volunteering to adopt all these unwanted babies. Go work for an orphanage and help out all those unwanted babies.
Not really a good comeback though. Just because I don't think people should have the right to terminate their pregnancy doesn't mean I should be adopting their children. I think people should be accountable for their own actions, it's not my duty to be accountable for theirs.

ETA: Notice I said anti-abortion rights, not anti-abortion. I think it's just fine to be anti-abortion, but don't take away other people's rights.
But isn't that what Roe did? Didn't it overturn a statute in Texas that was passed by the state legislature who are elected by the people and it completely ignore their wishes? Thus a violation of the rights of it's citizens?
 

NINnerd

Survived a M&G with Trent
#7
Oh ok, thanks.

Not really a good comeback though. Just because I don't think people should have the right to terminate their pregnancy doesn't mean I should be adopting their children. I think people should be accountable for their own actions, it's not my duty to be accountable for theirs.
They are being accountable - by having an abortion. This is assuming, by the way, that this is the woman's fault at all (aka: not rape). If you don't like how they take care of it, then YOU take the kid. It's really easy to say not to get an abortion when you aren't faced with that kind of situation. And 99% of the time, it's the hardest thing a woman has to do in her life. It's not something she WANTS to do. It's not used as "birth control" as much as one might think.

But isn't that what Roe did? Didn't it overturn a statute in Texas that was passed by the state legislature who are elected by the people and it completely ignore their wishes? Thus a violation of the rights of it's citizens?
I think that the country had the people's best interests in mind. Something like abortion is a law that doesn't affect those that don't ever get one. So if you are against it, you just don't have to have one. It's not a law that forces you to do something or anything like that. It isn't like a speed limit (this is merely an example) that will affect you every day. You have no part in it unless you get one. So I think it was best to make it legal for women in trouble that need one and that can't afford to go to another state (because if you can't afford a kid, you probably can't afford a cross-country trip to another state). It's like gay marriage - it has NO effect on anyone but gay people. So I can't understand why people are against legalizing it (I can understand how they are morally against it, I guess, but not against legalizing it).
 

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
#8
They are being accountable - by having an abortion. This is assuming, by the way, that this is the woman's fault at all (aka: not rape). If you don't like how they take care of it, then YOU take the kid. It's really easy to say not to get an abortion when you aren't faced with that kind of situation. And 99% of the time, it's the hardest thing a woman has to do in her life. It's not something she WANTS to do. It's not used as "birth control" as much as one might think.
By that logic then if you don't like the way Michael Vick killed his dogs then you take care of them. Nobody said it was easy to do only that it's not a right that should be recognized.


I think that the country had the people's best interests in mind. Something like abortion is a law that doesn't affect those that don't ever get one. So if you are against it, you just don't have to have one. It's not a law that forces you to do something or anything like that. It isn't like a speed limit (this is merely an example) that will affect you every day. You have no part in it unless you get one.
I've never killed anyone but I still think we as a society should have laws against it. I've never stolen anything yet I still think society should have laws against it. I'm never going to shoot heroin but I still think society should have laws against it. I'm never going to fight dogs yet I still think society should have laws against doing it.

The country didn't decide it, 9 judges in robes did.

So I think it was best to make it legal for women in trouble that need one and that can't afford to go to another state (because if you can't afford a kid, you probably can't afford a cross-country trip to another state). It's like gay marriage - it has NO effect on anyone but gay people. So I can't understand why people are against legalizing it (I can understand how they are morally against it, I guess, but not against legalizing it).
I disagree. I think it says a lot about a society that allows people to kill their children.
 

NINnerd

Survived a M&G with Trent
#9
By that logic then if you don't like the way Michael Vick killed his dogs then you take care of them. Nobody said it was easy to do only that it's not a right that should be recognized.
See, but the thing is - I would. If that was their two options (fight or go with me), I would take them in a heartbeat. And I have before. I've rescued tons of dogs from the streets and from bad people. So I HAVE put my money where my mouth is.

I've never killed anyone but I still think we as a society should have laws against it. I've never stolen anything yet I still think society should have laws against it. I'm never going to shoot heroin but I still think society should have laws against it. I'm never going to fight dogs yet I still think society should have laws against doing it.
Right, but those laws DO affect you, because they help from keeping YOU killed. And if you DO get killed, the law will punish whomever killed you.

I disagree. I think it says a lot about a society that allows people to kill their children.
They aren't kids. They're cells. And besides, it doesn't affect you personally (or does it affect you?). And those aren't cognizant beings, so it's not like it hurts them or like they know they are dying.

Anyways, my main beef with this thread was someone saying they would like to go kill a bunch of people who have different beliefs on the topic than they do. That is scary, no matter what.
 

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
#10
See, but the thing is - I would. If that was their two options (fight or go with me), I would take them in a heartbeat. And I have before. I've rescued tons of dogs from the streets and from bad people. So I HAVE put my money where my mouth is.
And there are people who are against abortion who have adopted. Your comment was that everyone who is against abortion should adopt every child.


Right, but those laws DO affect you, because they help from keeping YOU killed. And if you DO get killed, the law will punish whomever killed you.
Not the point though, one could argue abortion affects an entire society.


They aren't kids. They're cells. And besides, it doesn't affect you personally (or does it affect you?). And those aren't cognizant beings, so it's not like it hurts them or like they know they are dying.
That's what the crux of the argument comes down to, whether it is a child or not. If one accepts that they are then it would be murder.

By that logic we could kill the severely mentally disabled and it wouldn't be murder.

Anyways, my main beef with this thread was someone saying they would like to go kill a bunch of people who have different beliefs on the topic than they do. That is scary, no matter what.
Agreed.