Archive for the Second Trimester Abortion Category

Ordained Minister turned Dallas Abortion doctor: ‘Am I killing? Yes, I am’

Posted in Abortion, Abortionist, Curtis Boyd, Late term abortion, pro-choice, Pro-Life, Second Trimester Abortion, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on November 5, 2009 by saynsumthn

Clinic expands, provides only late-term abortions in N. Texas

Boyd WFAA Article

WFAA November 4, 2009


November 4th, 2009

DALLAS – Dr. Curtis Boyd, who opened the first abortion clinic in North Texas 36 years ago, has expanded his practice and now provides a rare more controversial procedure known as a late-term abortion for women up to six months pregnant.

I’ve been working day and night to get this open,” he said when asked why he saw a need for such a procedure.

Dr. Boyd opened the Fairmount Center, Texas’ first abortion clinic, in 1973.

But, after 36 years, his practice has outgrown the small office at Fairmount Street and Cedar Springs Road near Uptown.

He merged the clinic with Aaron Women’s Health Center and then reopened them both under a new umbrella known as the Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center at Royal Lane and Greenville Avenue last week.

Unlike his other clinic, the new location is a surgery center, which means Boyd and his staff are now able to offer late-term abortions for women in their second trimester up to six months or 24-weeks pregnant.

For us, since we’ll be serving such a large area, we’ll probably see 2,000 second trimester abortions a year,” he projected.

This is the only place of its kind in North Texas. But, it’s controversial because the fetus in the second trimester is viable.

Before this opened, they’re flying to Albuquerque,” Boyd said of his patients. “They were flying to Kansas, flying to Colorado, sometimes they went to Atlanta. So, there are women who desperately need and want this service and it wasn’t available.

“It is not illegal,” conceded Karen Garnett, Catholic Pro-Life Committee. “But, just because something’s legal doesn’t mean it’s right. Slavery was legal and it wasn’t right. Segregation was legal but it wasn’t right. Abortion is legal but it’s not right.”

The Catholic Pro-Life Committee of Dallas relocated sidewalk counselors to the new clinic hoping to prevent women from going inside.

We feel that if people don’t see the other side then hearts will not be converted,” said Jackie Lee, a sidewalk counselor of seven years. “We’re here to convert hearts.”

Lee and her colleagues said their vigils at Dallas’ five abortion clinics have saved 3,500 pregnancies since 1997.

Boyd said he too has staggering numbers, especially since second trimester abortions. He estimates that since opening the state’s first clinic in 1973, his practice has performed 300,000 abortions.

At 72, Boyd is full of energy, vowing not to stop anytime soon. Those debating what he does vow the same.

At 4:30 p.m. Saturday, the Catholic Pro-Life Committee plans a prayer vigil and memorial outside Boyd’s old facility to remember the pregnancies women aborted.

Preventing two abortions Tuesday, Garnett said the sidewalk counselors have remained successful at the new location.

Watch Video Here

Abortion doctor: ‘Am I killing? Yes, I am’

DALLAS – Dr. Curtis Boyd is no stranger to controversy. In 1973, Boyd opened the Fairmount Center, which was the first abortion clinic in Texas.

Boyd is the only doctor in North Texas who will perform late-term abortions to women up to six months pregnant.

We see patients from Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana and across Texas,” he said.

Now, the doctor has made a jarring admission.

Am I killing?” Boyd said. “Yes, I am. I know that.

Boyd said he is an ordained Baptist minister who has now turned Unitarian. He said he prays often.

“I’ll ask that the spirit of this pregnancy be returned to God with love and understanding,” he said.

Those prayers are vastly different than the ones that are made by members of the Catholic Pro-Life Committee who gather outside his office in hopes to sway women seeking abortions.

Well, we’re certainly disappointed to hear any unborn child will be killed by abortion,” said Karen Garnett, with the Catholic Pro-Life Committee. “But, to hear it’s a late-term abortion in Dallas, once again, it’s particularly devastating.”

The doctor opened the Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center last week on Greenville Avenue. By law, Boyd must have a surgery center in order to abort a fetus more than 16 weeks along.

But, opposition to the late-term abortions doesn’t just come from religious groups. Rep. Jeb Hensarling, whose district is where the surgery center resides, told News 8 he is troubled by the facility as well.

Boyd said he too has been troubled, but said his plight comes from the torment that drives patients to seek his services.

“The hardest ones are the young girls,” he said.

Girls as young as nine and ten have come to his clinic, he said.

Death threats have become a norm in Boyd’s life. He was a close friend of Dr. George Tiller, who was a Wichita, Kansas abortion doctor murdered in May.

I don’t want the fate that befell Dr. Tiller, but I’m not going to be deterred because what I’m doing is important,” he said.

Boyd said he tries to make his phone numbers and address as private as possible and has heavy security.

This Statement is recorded in a National Abortion Federation Document:
Dr. Curtis Boyd, MD, Albuquerque, New Mexico
As a physician it never occurred to me to do an abortion. I didn’t know how. But as I continued to work with the church groups and to refer women out of the U.S. for abortions, those desperate women kept pleading, “But, Doctor, can’t you do something?” At first, the answer was obvious. Of course not. In their desperation, I’m sure that those women had no idea what they
were asking of me. I would risk my medical license, my entire career, my young family’s well being, and my own freedom, if I performed an illegal abortion. Ultimately, I risked all those things which I held dear because I could no longer live with the knowledge that I could do
something and I was choosing not to. Many of the doctors of conscience who have provided abortions though the years were moved to
do so by the horrors of botched illegal abortions. I saw those ill and sometimes dying women in my medical training too. I was moved by their plight. But that was not what drove me to risk my career and sometimes my life. I was moved by the certain knowledge that women’s lives
could be ruined when they could not abort a pregnancy.

So – he was moved to tears for women but what happens to a person who sees this every day? ( Click Here) or this (Click Here)

Dr. Boyd – perhaps you should be concerned about the “Botched abortions” and “Violence by pro-choicers and abortion doctors still going on today:
– read here

and Here ( Be sure to click “Next Entries” ) and Here

Law & Order episode about the murder of an abortionist

Posted in Abortion, Anti-abortion, Late term abortion, pro-choice, Pro-Life, Second Trimester Abortion, Supreme Court, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 28, 2009 by saynsumthn

Law & Order episode about the murder of an abortionist

Vodpod videos no longer available.

more about "Law & Order episode about the murder …", posted with vodpod

Watch Full Episode here

Read Comments to NBC About the show : Here

OR: Seeking women who have had abortions in Ohio

Posted in Abortion, abortion clinic safety, Abortion death, Abortion Regulation, Anti-abortion, pro-choice, Pro-Life, Second Trimester Abortion with tags , , , , , , on October 27, 2009 by saynsumthn

Here is a Press Release from Operation Rescue:

Seeking Women Who Have Had Abortions In Ohio
October 27, 2009
Operation Rescue is asking women who have had abortions in Ohio in the past year to contact them.

We are conducting a research project and are encouraging women who are ready to share their stories about their abortion experiences in Ohio to contact us as soon as possible,” said Operation Rescue Senior Policy Advisor Cheryl Sullenger. “Of course, all communications with us will be held in strictest confidence.”

We are especially looking for women who had abortions at Women’s Med Center on Stroop Rd. in Kettering (near Dayton), or at Cincinnati Women’s Services on Jefferson Ave. in Cincinnati over the past 12 months.

If you had an abortion in Ohio in the past year, we would love to speak with you. Your communications will remain confidential and your identity will be protected. Contact Operation Rescue at 316-683-6790, ext. 112, or e-mail us at cheryl[at]

Part 1: Why Is Abortionist Haskell Deemed Above The Law?

Posted in Abortion, abortion clinic safety, Abortion death, Abortion Regulation, pro-choice, Pro-Life, Second Trimester Abortion, Violence against women with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on October 22, 2009 by saynsumthn

From Operation Rescue

“It’s ridiculous – and dangerous.”

[This is the first of a three part exposѐ on late term abortionist Martin Haskell’s special “variance” excusing him from complying with Ohio law.]

Dayton, OH — Operation Rescue has obtained two recordings of 9-1-1 calls made within seven days of each other for patients of an Ohio abortion clinic that has been specially exempted from complying with a safety law involving emergency transports.

The recordings, made on March 12 and 19, 2009, raise questions about the safety of the clinic and abortions done at Women’s Med Center, a Dayton area abortion mill owned and operated by late-term abortionist Martin Haskell.


But how is it that, of all the physicians and clinics in Ohio, that Haskell’s abortion clinic is the only one that does not have to comport with the law?

To answer that question, one must go back to 1996, when the Ohio Legislature passed a law requiring that all ambulatory surgical centers must be licensed by the state. That licensing required that the ambulatory surgical centers meet certain basic health and safety standards, including the requirement that each clinic must have a transfer agreement with a local hospital.

In 1999, it came to the attention of the Ohio Health Department (OHD) that abortion clinics were not in compliance with the law, having never applied for licensing. The OHD began the process of insuring that all abortion clinics came into compliance.

Haskell refuses to comply

Late-term abortionist Martin Haskell refused the ODH request that he apply for licensure for his Dayton abortion clinic, stating that it was a doctor’s office, not an ambulatory surgical center. The ODH disagreed and ordered Haskell to get a license.

Haskell appealed to the State Administrative Review Board in 2000, which also disagreed with Haskell and ordered him to get a license. The following year, he took his case to the Franklin County Common Pleas courts. The resulting order was the same. Haskell was ordered to license his clinic.

In 2002, six years after the law required Haskell to license his clinic and meet the same basic standards that every other similarly situated physician in the state had to meet, Haskell still had not licensed his clinic. Instead, he appealed to the Ohio Court of Appeals for the 10th Appellate District. Again, Haskell’s arguments fell flat, and he was ordered by the court to license his clinic.

Finally, in the fall of 2002, Haskell applied for licensure for Women’s Med Center, his flagship abortion mill in Kettering, Ohio, a suburb of Dayton.

License denied

On January 9, 2003, the ODH denied Haskell a license because he had no transfer agreement with a local hospital and could not assure “a continuum of care” for patients should a medical emergency arise. That same day, Haskell’s attorneys walked into Federal Court and obtained a restraining order from Judge Susan J. Dlott preventing the ODH from enforcing the law until the case could be adjudicated. Haskell’s abortion clinic remained open.

Six months later, the case was heard by Federal District Court Judge Algenon Marbley during a three day hearing. Judge Marbley ruled in Haskell’s favor and ordered the ODH to issue Haskell’s clinic a license.

But that certainly was not the end.

ODH wins again

The ODH appealed to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which took two and a half years to issue a ruling overturning Marbley’s decision. In February, 2006, the Court told the ODH that it could deny Haskell’s clinic a license, but that a hearing on the license denial must be held if Haskell requests one.

In April, 2006, the ODH informed Haskell of its intent to enforce the law. Haskell immediately filed a request for a hearing, as suggested by the Sixth Circuit.

More delays while Haskell mocks

That request bought Haskell nearly another year of noncompliance. Twice he delayed hearing dates, and finally persuaded the ODH to allow him to argue in writing that he should be exempt from the law.

During this time, Haskell continued to operate under a invalid license that had been issued on the order of Judge Marbley, which had been overturned by the Court of Appeals, making a mockery of the law.

On March 12, 2007, after reviewing Haskell’s case, an officer with the ODH recommended that Haskell’s license be revoked because he failed to comply with the legal requirement that he obtain a transfer agreement with a local hospital.

Inexplicably, it took ODH Director Dr. Alvin Jackson another year to finally issue the order revoking Haskell’s license. Ridiculously, the order gave Haskell 15 days to appeal.

Cease and desist

On February 27, 2008, an inspection showed that Haskell’s clinic still was not in compliance with the law. The ODH issued a cease and desist order, which should have closed Haskell’s clinic. However, that same day Haskell returned to the only judge to rule favorably on his case, Judge Algenon Marbley. He obtained yet another temporary injunction from Marbley barring the ODH from enforcing their cease and desist order.

ODH cries, “Uncle!”

After 12 years of Haskell’s illegal operations and nine years of playing legal games with women’s lives, the ODH finally gave up. It stopped all efforts to enforce the law, giving the excuse that Haskell has assured the ODH that he has three physicians on staff at Miami Valley Hospital in Dayton which have agreed to treat Haskell’s botched abortion patients.

Haskell was granted a “variance” from the ODH, and thus became the only doctor in Ohio to be exempt from a law passed in 1996 meant to ensure that clinics meet basic safety standards.

There’s a reason why no hospital will make a transfer agreement with Martin Haskell’s late term abortion mill,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. “If every hospital in the Dayton area agrees that Haskell should not be practicing in their facilities, then he shouldn’t be practicing at all.”

The only thing keeping Haskell operating right now is a temporary restraining order and a spineless health department,” said Newman. “Can you imagine anyone else trying to get a variance so they did not have to comply with the law? It’s ridiculous – and dangerous.”

READ: Part Two: 9-1-1 Calls Show Haskell’s Mill Remains A Danger
[Special thanks to our special investigative team in Ohio and to Dayton Right to Life for their contributions.]

Abortionist Reflects on Dismembering One Baby While Feeling Her Own Flutter in Her Womb

Posted in Abortion, Abortionist, Late term abortion, pro-choice, Pro-Life, Second Trimester Abortion with tags , , , , , , , , on October 15, 2009 by saynsumthn

Lisa Harris: Assistant Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Assistant Professor, Department of Women’s Studies, Director for Fellowship in Family Planning

By Kathleen Gilbert
ANN ARBOR, Michigan, October 15, 2009 ( –

There was a leg and foot in my forceps, and a ‘thump, thump’ in my abdomen. Instantly, tears were streaming from my eyes.” So writes abortionist Lisa Harris in a disturbing article relating her experiences as an abortionist, particularly her anguished and “brutally visceral” experience of dismembering an 18 week gestation unborn child, while 18 weeks pregnant herself.

In the article, entitled “Second Trimester Abortion Provision: Breaking the Silence and Changing the Discourse,” Harris, an abortionist and assistant professor at the University of Michigan, explains the ethical position that she says helps her and other abortionists continue practicing despite the moral and psychological hurdles involved in what she describes as an undoubtedly “violent” procedure.

Abortion is different from other surgical procedures,” Harris writes in her candid article. “Even when the fetus has no legal status, its moral status is reasonably the subject of much disagreement. It is disingenuous to argue that removing a fetus from a uterus is no different from removing a fibroid.”

Harris says that there is a need to “cross borders and boundaries (including seemingly inflexible ones like ‘pro-choice’ and ‘pro-life’)” in order to “reflect seriously on the question of how providers determine their limit for abortion,” and warned that the issues surrounding the question “may frankly be too dangerous for pro-choice movements to acknowledge.”

Harris then describes how she once performed an abortion on a woman whose fetus was at 18 weeks gestation. Ironically, Harris herself was pregnant at the time, and her baby was also at 18 weeks gestation.

Consequently, she explains how she was “more interested than usual in seeing the fetal parts when I was done, since they would so closely resemble those of my own fetus.”

I went about doing the procedure as usual,” she writes. “I used electrical suction to remove the amniotic fluid, picked up my forceps and began to remove the fetus in parts, as I always did. I felt lucky that this one was already in the breech position – it would make grasping small parts (legs and arms) a little easier.”

With my first pass of the forceps, I grasped an extremity and began to pull it down. I could see a small foot hanging from the teeth of my forceps. With a quick tug, I separated the leg. Precisely at that moment, I felt a kick – a fluttery “thump, thump” in my own uterus. It was one of the first times I felt fetal movement. There was a leg and foot in my forceps, and a “thump, thump” in my abdomen. Instantly, tears were streaming from my eyes – without me – meaning my conscious brain – even being aware of what was going on. I felt as if my response had come entirely from my body, bypassing my usual cognitive processing completely. A message seemed to travel from my hand and my uterus to my tear ducts. It was an overwhelming feeling – a brutally visceral response – heartfelt and unmediated by my training or my feminist pro-choice politics. It was one of the more raw moments in my life. Doing second trimester abortions did not get easier after my pregnancy; in fact, dealing with little infant parts of my born baby only made dealing with dismembered fetal parts sadder.

Harris concludes that the “visually and viscerally different” component of a second-trimester abortion, as opposed to a first-trimester one, leads to questions such as: “What kind of dissociative process inside us allows us to do this routinely? What normal person does this kind of work?

To answer the questions, Harris notes that the “violence” of abortion must be acknowledged, and relates a “bizarre” experience she once had of observing a premature baby struggling to survive immediately after dismembering an unborn child the same age:

The last patient I saw one day was 23 weeks pregnant. I performed an uncomplicated D&E procedure. Dutifully, I went through the task of reassembling the fetal parts in the metal tray. It is an odd ritual that abortion providers perform – required as a clinical safety measure to ensure that nothing is left behind in the uterus to cause a complication – but it also permits us in an odd way to pay respect to the fetus (feelings of awe are not uncommon when looking at miniature fingers and fingernails, heart, intestines, kidneys, adrenal glands), even as we simultaneously have complete disregard for it. Then I rushed upstairs to take overnight call on labour and delivery. The first patient that came in was prematurely delivering at 23-24 weeks. As her exact gestational age was in question, the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) team resuscitated the premature newborn and brought it to the NICU. Later, along with the distraught parents, I watched the neonate on the ventilator. I thought to myself how bizarre it was that I could have legally dismembered this fetus-now-newborn if it were inside its mother’s uterus – but that the same kind of violence against it now would be illegal, and unspeakable.

Harris then goes on to explain that she rationalizes the bizarreness of the situation by the “location” of the baby, whether it is “inside or outside of the woman’s body,” and “most importantly, her [the mother’s] hopes and wishes for that fetus/baby.” However, she says, “this knowledge does not change the reality that there is always violence involved in a second trimester abortion, which becomes acutely apparent at certain moments, like this one. I must add, however, that I consider declining a woman’s request for abortion also to be an act of unspeakable violence.”

Harris points out that the abortion lobby’s discomfort with “the violence and, frankly, the gruesomeness of abortion” has led to a pro-abortion discourse that she says “contradicts an enormous part of” the abortionist’s experience. While pro-abortion activists may claim abortions “don’t really look like” the graphic images often displayed by pro-life protesters, Harris notes, “to a doctor and clinic team involved in second trimester abortion, they very well may.”

Of course, acknowledging the violence of abortion risks admitting that the stereotypes that anti-abortion forces hold of us are true – that we are butchers, etc.,” she adds.

Harris also touches upon the psychological burdens second trimester abortion care lays upon its providers, including “serious emotional reactions that produced physiological symptoms, sleep disturbances (including disturbing dreams), effects on interpersonal relationships and moral anguish.

Harris tackles the “ethical and moral positions that allow for grey areas” in abortion provision by advocating the “gradualist perspective” – stating that “the respect owed to a fetus increases as pregnancy advances and the fetus becomes more like a born person.” This, she says, serves to “close the gap between pro-choice rhetoric and the reality of doing a second trimester abortion,” and “allows us to simultaneously acknowledge the value of early human life and be woman-centred, an ideal position for a second trimester provider.”

While the “gradualist” approach raises the spectre of later abortions being “more serious” than early abortions, says Harris, the concern is allayed by the fact that “women have all sorts of compelling and legitimate reasons for choosing abortion” – particularly, she says, in second trimester abortions.

Still, for Harris, there remains the problem of abortionists “caught between pro-choice discourse that, while it reflects our values, does not accurately reflect the full extent of our experience of abortion and in fact contradicts an enormous part of it, and the anti-abortion discourse and imagery that may actually be more closely aligned to our experience but is based in values we do not share.”

Harris conjectures that the needs of abortionists in this regard are not met because “frank talk like this is threatening to abortion rights.” “While some of us involved in teaching abortion routinely speak to our trainees about the aspects of care I’ve described, we don’t make a habit of speaking about it publicly. Essays like this bring the inevitable risk that comments will be misinterpreted, taken out of context and used as evidence for further abortion practice restrictions,” she writes.

We might conclude at this point that a provider who feels that abortion is violent is simply ambivalent, conflicted, is not really committed to women’s abortion rights, and just shouldn’t be doing this work,” Harris writes. “‘Pro-life’ supporters may argue that the kind of stories and sentiments I’ve relayed spell the end of abortion – that honest speech acts regarding the reality of abortion will weaken the pro-choice movement to the point where it cannot sustain itself any longer.

However, she contests the point, arguing that, rather than weakening the argument for abortion, facing abortion with “honesty” can “be the basis for a stronger movement – one that makes it easier for providers and the teams they work with to do all abortions, especially second trimester abortions.”