It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Lawsuit: Florida Clinic Botched Abortion, Threw Out Live Baby

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 05:14 PM
The baby getting killed isn't an issue. She wanted it to get killed, so it got killed. She shouldn't get any money for that. I can't really blame the owner for disposing of the child, unless the woman made it clear she wanted to keep it. Even then what would they do? They'd probably have to call 911 since I doubt an abortion clinic has the medical equipment necessary to keep a premature baby alive.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 05:26 PM
im glad this happened. this is what liberals want, they want choice. the woman chose to throw the baby away. i hope all you left wing nuts are happy now.

[edit on 5-2-2009 by Swatman]

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 05:28 PM
reply to post by HEroX

The maximum time is two trimesters. Yes a baby can survive at 21 weeks but NOT on it's own. It requires a lot of money, equipment, it needs to be intubated and cannot survive off machines because it's organ systems (lungs, digestive system, heart) are not strong enough yet. It's not until around week 30 that a baby can live without machines and IVs and all that.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 05:40 PM
reply to post by Swatman

Don't you just love the false outrage? I think it makes me even more sick than the story itself. Had this abortion been 'successful' and the baby died during the procedure, they'd all be defending her 'right to choose.'

If you cheapen the value of human life to the point that its a mere inconvenience, what the hell does anyone honestly expect? You reap what you sow, folks. Don't act all offended when someone else cares even less than you do.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 05:41 PM
reply to post by ravenshadow13

Ok so there is an upper time limit. But the end of trimester two is week 28. Yes you’re right that a lot of devices are needed to keep a 21 week fetus alive, but in most of Europe all those devices would cost you nothing. Kind of strange to hear that abortion laws in Europe are stricter than in the US. I didn’t even know that abortion was legal in all of the US but that’s just my ignorance ,i thought the states decided.

In my eyes the woman shouldn’t get any money. But she probably wasn’t well informed by the abortion clinic either.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 06:21 PM
the woman paid money to have her baby killed and her baby was killed. It is sad in America when people are outraged that the baby was killed by being thrown in the trash but would have saw nothing wrong if the baby had been killed that same day by being aborted. Same baby same result death.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 06:26 PM
Born alive is Born Alive.

Simple as that.

This is a case of negligence causing death.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 06:30 PM
What both sides did is disgusting.

What is very sad is that a 23-week-gestation baby probably won't live anyway

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 06:35 PM
Doesn't Obama in the 'choice' act,
(I can't remember the name)
want to disallow help for those born alive during an abortion?

Found it;
Born Alive Act

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 07:09 PM
I'm going to restrain myself from intensifying the "elephant in the room" (pro-choice vs. pro-life) but I would have to say I cannot find any more information on this story and there are indeed some missing pieces. Bottom line, a second trimester abortion induces dilation of the cervix (similar to labor but without the uterus working as hard) and unless this is a Hospital with a certain level of Neo-natal Care Unit the fetus will absolutely perish-even if you somehow quickly transported said fetus to a hospital with such facilities. Bottom Line: the fetus with almost completely certainty would not have survived; regardless of whether or not the "owner" took the actions they did.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 08:26 PM
I think the point is that even though the baby would have still died, you don't throw the remains out in the trash. I'm sure there are procedures that weren't followed of how it should have been handled with respect.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 08:51 PM
Again, regardless of what side of the issue you are on- fetal material, whether by abortion or miscarriage with D&C, is removed as "bio-waste" and treated as such. If a child was stillborn naturally then doctors give parents the right to take photography and say goodbye in their own way and prepare the body for a funeral. If you are having an abortion-why would you expect any other treatment than that regarding the first example?

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:01 PM

Originally posted by marg6043
So lets get a chill pill and debate the deplorable conditions that the fetus found its ultimate death.

After been born alive.

I will happily debate the OP topic only but will ignore the baiting and the self righteousness.

Sounds pretty self righteous to have someone throw out a live baby and then get a lecture from you on proper debate protocol because some humans actually react like humans.

Yep. Get a chill pill.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:10 PM
Born Alive is Born Alive. Regardless of the procedure.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:33 PM
I am actually in tears over this (im a mother) because a baby died - regardless of how it died.

In the womb, out of the womb. The baby was destined to be KILLED. That baby had no hope, no chance, no choice.

Why would there be outrage over it dying outside the womb, when it was there to be killed inside the womb. Shouldnt those outraged be JUST as outraged that the mother went to murder her child?

THIS prooves we live in Alice and Wonderland.

Im so saddened for that poor baby

At 23 weeks, an otherwise healthy fetus would have a slim but legitimate chance of survival. Quadruplets born at 23 weeks last year at The Nebraska Medical Center survived.

An autopsy determined Williams' baby — she named her Shanice — had filled her lungs with air, meaning she had been born alive, according to the Department of Health. The cause of death was listed as extreme prematurity.

"She came face to face with a human being," Pennekamp said. "And that changed everything."

UGGG. UGGG. UGGGHHHH. She came face to face with a human being that she was going to MURDER. Uggg.

[edit on 2/5/2009 by greeneyedleo]

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:41 PM
reply to post by dariousg

This is the OBAMA law he wanted in Illinois. The Mom wanted the baby gone so if the baby survives the abortion it dies.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:57 PM
This is sick, while I am pro-choice, I am only pro-choice for the 1st trimester... For her to even be allowed to do this at 23 weeks is utterly disgusting.

From what I found on the Google, Florida law is 24 weeks... so I guess it was technically legal, this is just sad...

posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 06:54 AM
reply to post by dariousg

Something to keep in mind amidst all the outrage: Things like this are literally an everyday occurrence. The strange and shocking aspect is merely that it's being reported, talked about, and perhaps might even lead to prosecution.

posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 07:09 AM
23 weeks is a long time to be going back and forth on giving birth vs. killing it. I wonder if this is just an incredibly indecisive woman or if her circumstances had suddenly changed.

For some reason the scenario I default to is that the "father" bailed and she wanted to be rod of the child to symbolically be rid of the father. I always tend to default to the more petty and pathetic side when considering peoples motivation. A learned response I guess.

Some clinics offer all around care from contraception to prenatal and as a matter of service perform the occasional abortion. Calling them "death-dealers" is a bit of a stretch I think. There are some clinics however that deal only with abortion and they are certainly in the business of death. It takes a special individual to vacuum out baby brains all day and still think they are doing "good" whatever "good" may be.

Maybe they decedents of Herod or convinced that any one of those babies could be the next Hitler?

I know If I had a pregnant dog and took newborn puppies and tied them in a bag and tossed them out with the trash I'd be in a load of legal trouble. Puppies deserve more protection under the law than a human baby? Presumably so.

posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 09:54 AM

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

For some reason the scenario I default to is that the "father" bailed and she wanted to be rod of the child to symbolically be rid of the father. I always tend to default to the more petty and pathetic side when considering peoples motivation. A learned response I guess.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in