Life Links 7/10/13

The West Virginia abortionist being sued after he allegedly continued an abortion against a patient's wishes is denying the allegations and is claiming that leaving a pieces of the child in the patient wasn't his fault. 

Her complaint claims she came to the clinic for an abortion but that she wasn't given enough medication ahead of the procedure because the center and Stephens didn't know enough about her history with "use and/or abuse" of pain medication.

Stephens refused to stop the procedure when Gravely told him to and staff members restrained her while he finished the procedure, according to her complaint. She says she felt enough pain after the procedure to eventually go to Charleston Area Medical Center.

At the hospital, Gravely says the doctors removed more materials from her uterus, including a skull......

Stephens and the center also state they are "of information and belief" that CAMC removed "additional products of conception." But Gravely was told that "retained fragments and tissue" could remain after the abortion, which could lead to the need for further medical attention.

If any "products of conception" remained in Gravely, it wasn't because Stephens or the center didn't provide the proper care, according to the response.

At Slate, Jessica Grose is not happy with wrenching abortion stories.  Instead, she wants more stories from women who have abortions "and don't look back."

All of these essays describe how wrenching and horrible the choice to terminate a pregnancy is, and they also read as an attempt to change anti-choice minds about the necessity of a woman's right to choose. This is a noble goal, but as the years go by and state legislatures see more and more challenges to abortion rights, it's also a futile goal. Humane essays aren't going to change the entrenched anti-choicer. Instead they do something else: push the rhetorical battle even further rightward than it has already been pushed.

The Fairfax City Council has voted in favor of adding a new term to their zoning law which abortion advocates oppose because they believe it will prevent an abortion clinic from setting up in the city.

The Fairfax City council voted Tuesday night to create a new term in its zoning law, "medical care facility," delete the term "clinic" from the current definition of a doctor's office, and require all medical care facilities to obtain a special use permit at a cost of $4,800, along with a detailed approval process and a final vote by the city council. Pro-choice activists said the move was aimed at keeping abortion clinics out of Fairfax City, including an existing clinic in the city which was trying to relocate to meet Virginia's new hospital-style zoning standards for abortion clinics.