Sue abortionists for malpractice
Joseph P. Belk
sue her abortionist for malpractice.
This article doesn't get all the facts straight, but I thought it was
close enough for comment. I heartily wish Rosa Acuna complete success
in her quest for justice against another abortionist accused of
malpractice. From another source I found out that the original lawsuit
included a Wrongful Death allegation which the trial court and the
appeals court both rejected. The appeals court held that the trial
court was wrong to dismiss the entire suit, since it also included the
less problematic allegation of ordinary medical malpractice. The
amended suit goes forward, actually, without an allegation that the
child was killed. That finding, upheld, would conflict directly with
Roe v Wade. Now the suit focusses on the lie told by the abortionist
which may have resulted in that abortionist failing to obtain informed
consent. A jury will decide whether the lie constitutes malpractice.
If an abortionist cannot lie to his patient without losing a
malpractice suit, how many abortionists will there be? Maybe none.
From: The Pro-Life Infonet <inf...@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject: Woman Misled About Abortion Can Sue for Malpractice
Source: Associated Press; October 29, 2002
Woman Misled About Abortion Can Sue for Malpractice
Trenton, NJ -- A woman who was misled by an abortion practitioner to
have an abortion can sue for severe emotional distress, an appeals
court ruled Tuesday.
Rosa Acuna says she was incorrectly told by Dr. Sheldon Turkish that
she was not aborting a human life when she had an abortion in 1996,
according to court papers.
Turkish had told Acuna that the pregnancy was causing damage to her
kidneys and an immediate abortion was needed, according to court
papers. She then asked if "the baby was already there" and Turkish
replied that "it's only blood," court papers said.
In its 22-page ruling, the appeals court said Acuna's argument that
her doctor did not give her enough details before the abortion is a
question of medical malpractice. If Acuna can convince a jury that is
a fact, she can demand damages, the panel said.
"Based on the circumstances, background and beliefs of a mother,
inducing her to terminate a pregnancy, even at eight weeks, because of
the physician's failure to obtain an informed consent may also result
in severe distress and mental anguish," the court said.
Acuna's lawyer praised the ruling, saying a jury will now decide if a
baby is indeed a human life.
"This case exposes the conflict between a mother's fundamental rights
and a conflicting philosophy of an abortion doctor who devalues the
mother's interest," lawyer Harold Cassidy said.
Turkish's lawyer, John Zen Jackson, did not immediately return a call
seeking comment.
Acuna sued Turkish, saying the abortion caused psychological traumas
including depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and psychosexual
dysfunction.
A trial court agreed with the abortion practitioner and dismissed the
lawsuit. Acuna had no grounds to seek damages in part because the U.S.
Supreme Court has declared an unborn child is not a person, that judge
ruled.
I wonder whether malpractice could be proven and damages awarded
simply for an abortionist's lie, that the patient had no other choice
than abortion?
Joseph P. Belk
*****************************************************************
Listen to a woman whose "choice" was denied in favor of abortion:
"I didn't want to kill my child; I just made the decision to be
weak and not care about any of it. I made a decision not to make
a conscious choice at all. In fact, Planned Parenthood and all
the abortion mills tell you that you have NO CHOICE but to get
an abortion. This is the irony of the 'pro-choice' rhetoric."
Reardon, David C., _Aborted Women: Silent No More_
(Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1987) , p. 143.
List Price: $24.95. Buy this book. Call 1-888-412-2676.
*****************************************************************
Pat Winstanley
says...
> Subject: Sue abortionists for malpractice
> From: Joseph P. Belk <jpb...@fuse.net>
> Newsgroups: alt.abortion, alt.feminism, talk.abortion, alt.feminazis
>
> Let's have freedom of choice regarding a woman's decision whether to
> sue her abortionist for malpractice.
>
Already exists, just as it does regarding any medical treatment.
What's your problem?
Ray Fischer
>Let's have freedom of choice regarding a woman's decision whether to
>sue her abortionist for malpractice.
Already do, dimwit.
>This article doesn't get all the facts straight,
LOL! When have you been concerned about getting the facts straight?!?
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net