In a number of states, pro-life advocates are pushing for more regulations of abortion clinics. Their arguments make it sound like these clinics are running amok, that they do whatever they want free from any governmental interference.
While they argue that they are merely insuring that the clinics are safe, these proposal are really designed to impose regulatory burdens on the clinic to the point where they simply cannot afford to remain open. A few years ago, in the state of South Carolina, they passed a series of new rules that ultimately shut down two clinics.
First of all, I find it ironic that opponents of abortion want to impose regulations on facilities that they are committed to closing down. They are arguing that medical facilities that KILL BABIES need to be better regulated. Does anyone else see the hypocrisy in that?
Second, what the pro-life movement does not understand is that these clinics are already regulated by the state and federal government. These clinics have to deal with OSHA, CLIA, HIPPA, and a lot of other acronyms – just like any other medical facility. They have to deal with the Drug Enforcement Administration all the time. They are subject to regular inspections. Indeed, in the state of New York it is almost impossible to open up a new clinic anymore because of the stringent regulations. So, let’s dismiss the notion that the abortion providers are running a medical facility free from any state or federal oversight.
Third, over the years abortion providers have been very clear that they would be amenable to any other additional regulations if they were well thought out and not designed to just impose another burden on them. They, like any other medical practice, want to avoid lawsuits, right? So, if someone has a good idea, something that is actual constructive, they’d be open to that conversation.
Fourth, I find it interesting when pro-lifers make suggestions about the clinics when most of them have never even been inside of one! I mean, it’s not like they took a tour, talked to the staff and used that experience to make some constructive suggestions. No, they just assume that the clinics need more regulations. Interesting.
Don’t give us any crap. Just tell us you want to regulate the clinics to death. I’d have more respect for you if you took that approach.

May 6, 2010 at 6:41 am
Now Pat, you know better than this. Even though I believe that ultimately only force will make child-killing again illegal, I hope I’m wrong, and I am political, too. And isn’t politics hypocrisy in action? You say one thing in an attempt to accomplish something else? Of course these people want to make abortion illegal and of course they’d love to do that by regulating the business out of business — little pain, and gain too! As I say, I don’t think it will work, and I think your fear is unfounded, but that’s one of the reasons, and not the only reason, I love listening to you.
Another thing. I’ve been trying, in my weak and woeful way, to get invited inside one of those little auschwitzes for almost forty years. I even promise not to pull out a concealed baseball bat and smash a few machines. But no one will invite me!
LikeLike
May 6, 2010 at 6:50 am
Good morning, John!
Over the years, I have facilitated a number of visits by pro-life people to clinics and I would be happy to do the same for you. But, as you can imagine, it would be hard for me to approach Jen, for example, when you say you want to visit the “little aushwitz” and you’re outside her house on a regular basis. If you were her, would you let you into her clinic? But, actually, that is one of the things I’ve been meaning to talk to you about off line and just haven’t gotten to it.
One final thing – are you sick? Every once in a while I pick up a word or something that tells me you are sick (today you say in your “weak” way). Are you okay?
LikeLike
May 6, 2010 at 7:03 am
Pat
Thank you for that well done post..
If John above is as antagonistic as he sounds, I could understand why no one would invite him.
Most these laws are just hurdles constructed to stop abortion, it’s so obviou to the point of silly.
Many abortions are done in doctors offices, that do not have these new laws radar on them.
I have been with friends to clinics and they are always cleaner than a reg drs
office.
In fact I looked it up. Facility and clinic are funny words that mean different things by each person and State. The most common term we would all agree on is that they are Drs offices. And those special laws are just being applied to drs offices that do abortion along with a lot of Gyn and OB care.
In fact, now that I think about it, when I have walked in to a place where they did abortions I did not have to be invited, John why would you need such a formal gesture? I do not remember ever not allowed in, or an OBgyn office either? Am confused.
Take care
Thank you for a wonderful blog.
LikeLike
May 6, 2010 at 7:11 am
John
sorry, I think the comment above mine I did not see, when I wrote mine.
If my comment does not make sense I did not see the above,
apologies.
K
LikeLike
May 6, 2010 at 9:33 am
Isn’t kind of a nature law, as much as you prohibit something more you want to do it!!!
LikeLike
May 6, 2010 at 1:27 pm
A person just cannot walk into an abortion clinic because of security issues. And certainly if John walked in, since they know him as a protestor, he would be wrestled to the ground rather quickly.
LikeLike
May 6, 2010 at 1:37 pm
Pat, yeah, I wouldn’t expect Jen to invite me into the AWC and show me around, but what about Planned Parenthood in Reading? Got any pull there? About “weak” — I’m no weaker than any other old man. But I’m referring to the the fact that I’ve been trying to make baby killing illegal again for almost forty years, and I’m no closer to success now than I ever was.
Katerina, wouldn’t you be suspicious of an old man entering your building if you were working in a place where young women went to kill people? And, besides, around here they know me. Once, on a wet freezing day in Reading, a carrier had left her headlights on. I was by myself so I opened the front door and called in, “Somebody left her headlights on!” They called the cops.
LikeLike
May 6, 2010 at 1:58 pm
I didn’t see #6 before I posted #7
LikeLike
May 6, 2010 at 3:48 pm
Funny that the so-called “pro-lifers” don’t want to have their “crisis pregnancy clinics” held to the same standards of professionalism as they want real ob/gyn clinics held.
LikeLike
May 6, 2010 at 10:13 pm
So true, but not,sadly funny, ha-ha.
John I do not understand the above.
OBGyns do abortions in their offices.
I worked in one. I know many, many others.
They do not have security. . .
Same with family practice drs.
Now if you harass an office, well it appears that everyone gets that concept. Or an office that does a lot of abortions, but most those still do more gyn care, than abortions.
I think there are about 1,000,000 abortions/year, I could be wrong. Even your average office that does more abortions than most can do 10-20x as many/gyn services, as well as another 10-20x, ie 40x as many services.
They often due primary care, pediatrics, obstetrics, vaccinations, a subset combination. . .
This happens even in offices that are labeled Abortion Clinics.
The vast majority of women are not there for an abortion. Just simple fact, look up public insurance numbers or Guttanhimer (?) numbers on cash paying patients, medicaid/care or public health.
Most protesters end up screaming “murder” to a women just trying to get her yearly check up, a thyroid test, or a pap smear.
Help me understand. I don’t get it.
LikeLike
May 7, 2010 at 4:25 am
You gotta be clearer than that, here, Kelsi. What is it you don’t get?
LikeLike
May 7, 2010 at 5:36 am
Belinda, read Poe’s “The Imp of the Absurd.”
LikeLike
May 7, 2010 at 5:40 am
Oops — “The Imp of the Perverse”
LikeLike
May 7, 2010 at 6:16 am
Kelsi, I encourage you to get a whole different understanding of where the so-called “pro-lifers” are coming from. To begin with, they don’t want people to see that they by and large not only don’t, but CAN’T care for real human life; they only profess concern for that aspect of life over which they can exercise NO positive influence. For another, they would never let a complete stranger have their dog, but their business is to make complete strangers have a baby; for a third, they have successfully kept the public from seeing the self-serving nature of a dysfunctional self-help program.
Start here to see the tip of their iceberg– their inability to care for children not of their family, their church or their social circle.
http://web.mac.com/charlesgregory/ABORTICENTRISM/THE_CLOSEST_IT_GETS.html
LikeLike
May 7, 2010 at 8:05 am
John, going back to post #7 I can try asking the Reading folks. Planned Parenthood has lots of restrictive rules, however. I’d have to have your assurance that you would not be disruptive.
LikeLike
May 7, 2010 at 9:43 am
I promise I would not be disruptive if I were allowed to examine Planned Parenthood in Reading.
LikeLike
May 7, 2010 at 3:50 pm
Pat, allow me to say that if you want Reading to have this be an exercise in bridging, here’s what you want to avoid, and here’s how to avoid it.
Given where John is coming from, it’s quite likely that he will not be able to succumb to the temptation to try to convert staff by laying a guilt trip on them (in his mind, trying to turn them to God and love) or to prove the superiority of his side by dropping the occasional snide comment or subtle disparagement under the guise of “fair and balanced.” He will also have the temptation of reporting to his people on his trip beyond the Gates of Hell, painting it in as black a color as possible Finally, he runs the risk of their disapproval and “vilification” (to quote his words) if he comes out and says anything favorable or even neutral about it. So he might be compelled to do something untoward during his visit just to prove his manhood to the group.
Here’s how to avoid all that and make it a real bridge of communication: He goes through the same process as any woman who wants to have an abortion, but is conflicted about it. I think he could play the role well enough, since it would be mostly answering questions and filling out forms. No need to worry about the veracity of the information; he should just have the chance to put himself in her place as much as he wants to.
Then he goest through whatever counseling/lab work is done, and at some point he culminates his visit with his arrival in– what do they call it? The Aborti-something. And he’s done!
If at any point he breaks role and does what the staff most fears, the rules of the game says at that point he has– as a pregnant, conflicted woman– chosen not to have an abortion, and the staff conducts the closure protocol and shows him out the door.
I think John will agree to this because he really wants to be able to say to his pals that yes, he has ventured to Hades and returned. I think the staff will be more receptive to the idea of educating him, and they will have control over his general conduct and the length of his stay.
If, however, Hannibal Lecter is scoping out the facility for the Living Dead or the next James Kopp, my idea obviously isn’t going to work…
LikeLike
May 7, 2010 at 4:06 pm
The funny thing is, John, that if you were to go into a clinic you would be very, very bored. All you would see is a waiting room, a few surgery rooms, etc. It’s not like you’re gonna see “butchered babies” lying on the floor. Or maybe I’m wrong, what do you think you would see?
LikeLike
May 7, 2010 at 6:31 pm
Ok, I’ll tell you, because I’m such a big mouth. I would make sure the waiting room is where I think it is. I talk to the carriers there, with my loud voice amplified by both a megaphone and the alley walls, and I tell them about what I say here. If I had a friend there capable of helping me out, I’d have him talk in the alley while I’m in there to find out if I can be heard. See, as the feds have learned, ask me a question and I sing.
LikeLike
May 8, 2010 at 8:35 am
I think you were asked what you thought what you would see?
Your answer does not seem to answer.
When you say
“carriers”
what does that mean?
A pregnant women?
If so why use the word carrier?
LikeLike
May 8, 2010 at 8:39 am
Also just noticed that you said you would not be disruptive.
But your answer
that was not an answer to what you thought you would see
described disruptive behaviour?
What am I missing?
LikeLike
May 8, 2010 at 6:36 am
Well, so much for the possibility of THAT teachable moment!
LikeLike
May 8, 2010 at 9:11 am
John, I am totally confused by your last message. I”m not sure where we stand on this one.
LikeLike