I don’t know why, but this weekend I was thinking about Bob Packwood.
For those of you who don’t remember that name, Bob Packwood was the long-time U.S. Senator from the state of Oregon who was the first true Congressional “champion” for abortion rights. Elected in 1968, he actually introduced legislation legalizing abortion before the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v Wade decision. Unfortunately, Packwood got absolutely no support for his legislation but the Court ultimately came forward enshrining this important right.
Once abortion was legalized, Packwood became the point person for the pro-choice movement. He led the battles against the forces of evil that sought to restrict abortion rights, endearing himself to all of the pro-choice organizations. At a time when even pro-choice legislators were running from the issue, Packwood stood alone. He courageously stood on the floor of the U.S. Senate and defended the rights of women to have abortions. Of course, this also made him a target for virulent anti–abortion attacks, including hundreds of personal threats.
In the early 1980’s, Packwood was the lead pro-choice strategist in the fight against a proposed constitutional amendment that would have overturned Roe v Wade. As the chief lobbyist for the National Abortion Rights Action League at the time, I (along with my pro-choice colleagues) met with Packwood regularly as we discussed our vote counts, field strategy, how to talk to the media, etc. At one point, despite the fact that it looked like we would easily defeat the measure, Packwood suggested that he filibuster the proposal. We could not say no to him, so we went along with him, letting him have his day in the spotlight. Indeed, when we suggested that we could get other Senators to join him, he demurred, saying he could do it alone. So, we watched him read the U.S. Constitution with a catheter attached to his leg.
Ultimately, we handily defeated the constitutional amendment and today I have hanging on my wall a copy of that day’s Congressional Record signed by Senator Bob Packwood. It was a truly historic vote and the greatest victory ever experienced by the pro-choice forces on Capitol Hill.
Throughout this time, however, there were always rumblings that Packwood was having affairs with several women. He was indeed an attractive, articulate man who no doubt was approached by numerous aggressive women. In fact, I
remember the more cynical feminists suggesting that he was leading the way on abortion rights merely to get laid. I never had that impression, but it unfortunately was out there. I should add for a fact that one of my best friends confided in me that she had had an affair with Packwood.
Then, in November 1992, the Washington Post ran a story detailing the claims of sexual abuse and assault by ten women, mostly former staff people and lobbyists. In September 1995, he resigned from the U.S. Senate in disgrace. He then disappeared from sight for many years.
In 1998, when I was at the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, we were planning a 25th anniversary party for Roe V Wade in Washington, D.C. and we decided to invite all of the pro-choice “heroes.” My old friend, Susan Hill, suggested that we invite Packwood. I ran it by some others and got very mixed reactions so Susan simply said that she would bring him as her date. Personally, I was thrilled because, despite his private behavior, he was our champion for many years.
He came that night to the Mayflower Hotel, handsomely clad in his tuxedo. When I ran into him in the hallway outside the ballroom, he appeared very nervous, it being the first time in many years that he would be with his former friends and colleagues. He thanked me profusely for “inviting” him and I actually escorted him into the room. Much to my delight, he was immediately surrounded by well wishers, old friends and the generally curious. He was back in his element.
I do recall, however, that three or four female clinic owners were so offended that Packwood was there that walked out of the party in disgust. That, of course, was their decision but I personally felt like it was a bit of an overreaction. Still, it was their right although they missed one hell of a party.
In later years, Bob Packwood came back to Capitol Hill where he made some serious bucks as a lobbyist for numerous corporate interests. I haven’t seen him for years.
What Packwood did totally sucked, there was no excuse for his personal conduct. On the other hand, he was the only one there when we needed a champion. I wish him well.



March 15, 2011 at 2:28 pm
That was really interesting Pat.
Thanks for your perspective on Packwood.
I really enjoy your blog. You always have an interesting personal perspective to add to the story.
LikeLike
March 16, 2011 at 7:44 am
Thanks, Lisa. The years I spent at NCAP were fascinating, tense, heart-breaking, thrilling, you name it. And I think because I really just said was on my mind, I got into more “trouble” than other pro-choicer leaders.
LikeLike
March 17, 2011 at 4:19 am
I commented below…but I wanted to add:
Maybe…but honesty has always been one of the qualities that I have always admired about you!! One of many my friend!! That and then you judge someone on their “whole” and not just on one misstep…just like Bob Packwood…he may have had “poor judgement” in the dept. of “his PERSONAL life” but did an excellent job in trying to “saving the lives” of millions of women in the U.S. He deserved to be at that event..NO questions asked!! Just as Bill Baird deserved to be there…NO questions asked!! Some times I think the “die-hard feminist” don’t want to acknowledge that sometimes we need men!! Do you know what I mean???
LikeLike
March 17, 2011 at 9:20 am
You may be right about the feminists, Lorraine! And, while I was honest, as you well know it got me into a lot of trouble and I lost my job because of it. My spouse would always be upset with me that I was speaking too frankly and I know you should be careful when you have a family to support but that wasn’t me. That might be selfish, but what do you do?
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 9:33 am
Really enjoyed this post Pat.
Have you posted on Henry Hyde?
LikeLike
March 15, 2011 at 4:25 pm
I second that Pat!! I was very glad he was there…he was important to this movement…I didn’t know some women walked out!! Shame on them..I hink he is a good man and one of only a handful that was there for us!! Thanks for mentioning Packwood!!
LikeLike
March 16, 2011 at 7:46 am
You might recall, Lorraine, that it was a few folks who ran the “feminnist health centers” who walked out. I understood where they were coming from but no one knew they had walked out, thus no one got “the message” and then they missed an amazing party!
LikeLike
March 16, 2011 at 6:03 pm
Ah, feminists! Women’s libbers!! If it weren’t for Women’s Lib, I’d still be married. I can never thank them enough….
LikeLike
March 15, 2011 at 4:42 pm
Ah, if he’d only been a Republican, he’d still be in the Senate! (If he’s still alive, that is.) Look at Newt “I cheated on my first two wives for love of my country” Gingrich…. But Republicans have always held Democrats to a higher standard than their own, and they know how to fight dirty as well. When it came out, he was as good as dead.
“Pro-choice” women defending Packwood found themselves in more or less the same position as African-Americans defending Clarence Thomas, holding their nose while they stood by him.
The unofficial motto of the student pilots in the military is, “If you don’t f**k, you won’t fight,” and there’s a good bit of truth to that–the people who are bold enough to lead in any endeavor are quite often the ones bold enough to break the rules of personal conduct. We can’t all be Jimmy Carter, and so we should expect that when it comes to Congress, we should hate the sin but expect top performance from the sinner.
LikeLike
March 16, 2011 at 7:46 am
Packwood was a Republican….
LikeLike
March 16, 2011 at 1:27 pm
From what state?
LikeLike
March 16, 2011 at 1:39 pm
Oregon….
LikeLike
March 16, 2011 at 4:20 pm
Well that explains a lot.
LikeLike
March 16, 2011 at 3:58 am
there is good and bad in all of us.
fred phelps was once a civil rights attorney who would fight for justice when no other attorneys would.
i think it is important to separate the person from the act.
LikeLike
March 16, 2011 at 7:48 am
I totally agree, Rogie. I mean, I know Bill Clinton was wrong to do what he did (as was JFK I guess) but I choose to look past their personal foibles and focus on what they did in their job. EVERYONE has a past, has done something wrong. We are not all saints…
Meanwhile, someone told me that you are a regular at the Jacksonville Women’s Center or whatever their name is. Is that true? I know the owner well, visited there several times…
LikeLike
March 16, 2011 at 4:18 pm
It is impossible to be an attorney or politician and not be more of a dirt ball than your average person.
The professions sadly require the lack of professional conduct compared to less ignoble professions.
LikeLike
March 17, 2011 at 9:22 am
Actually, Evan, I worked for several members of Congress and there are a lot of honorable ones out there. Yes, they want to get re-elected and to do that you need to please the majority of your district but, after all, should you not be “pleasing” them? Is that not their job? It’s the sleazeballs that get the press. The ones doing their job and even being courageous dont get noticed….
LikeLike
March 17, 2011 at 3:38 pm
I agree with your last sentence!
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 8:18 am
Sad but true, isn’t it?
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 8:42 am
I do as well.
LikeLike
March 16, 2011 at 12:32 pm
Yeah, I get the point that a charming man can get things his “way” easily. But I do also get that the women who went to get “laid” with him did in the sense of getting something as well.
Please ladies; I am not defending his acts! I am stating that women, almost in general, when they get left aside they get very upset and they do whatever they can to defeat the man who had left her on the side.
Also, from where I see, the post that Pat just did showed a man who couldn’t care less about treats or words, he did care though about women having their rights on having a safe abortion.
If he did that to simply get laid and not to worry about the consequences is another story, but I personally don’t think anybody can say that for sure.
About those ladies, Pat, who left the Mayflowers’ party, besides losing a great time they showed that they were a small kind of person who “maybe” wanted to get laid with him and didn’t get the chance! Who knows?
I am sick and tired of people pointing fingers to others like they were the best of the best…
People need to understand that at the end, and I mean the real end, everybody will end at the same condition! DEAD… COLD… SOLID AS A ROCK… (That is what people say, I never touched one)
Get the example of soon-to-be former Miami Governor, he promised and promised and did nothing! So what happen to him now???? HA! He is to be taken from his luxury cabinet, removed of his position…
At least Mr. Packwood did what he promised.
LikeLike
March 16, 2011 at 1:42 pm
Very interesting comment, Anna! And you are right, Packwood at least delivered. I dont know where we would have been without him. What happened between him and his wife was their business. Just like Bill Clinton…
LikeLike
March 16, 2011 at 1:42 pm
And I dont know who puts the pictures on this site but the one of the “young” Bob Packwood is priceless!!!
LikeLike
March 24, 2011 at 1:34 pm
It’s so good I thought it was fake.
LikeLike
March 16, 2011 at 7:46 pm
Really interesting perspective – I think the same discussion is relevant in regards to Margaret Sanger’s racial politics. Can we give tribute to her for her important work and acknowledge that she was a flawed human being? I think so – in fact, I think admitting that our heroes are flawed is the only way to give an accurate accounting of history.
LikeLike
March 17, 2011 at 9:24 am
totally agree, Serena! Sanger lived in a different time when racial politics was totally different. But, of course, those who oppose her life’s work will point to that one thing. On the other hand, those of us on our side often do the same!!
LikeLike
March 17, 2011 at 12:24 pm
[…] letch senator okay because he was pro-choice Just read a fascinating blog post dated March 15 at Abortion.ws, once again showing how misogynist pro-aborts actually are, not to mention […]
LikeLike
March 17, 2011 at 3:41 pm
Whoever this Jill Stanek person is really does not get it, and is utterly clueless on the issue of abortion in my opinion after reading her comments.
Jill,
Is Abortion Ever OK?
LikeLike
March 17, 2011 at 7:50 pm
Jill Stanek is an internationally respect pro-life speaker and blogger.
All pro-life activists admit that abortion is never okay. There is always a better option than killing an innocent person.
The ancient Romans considered infanticide to be good (the father made the “choice”). Early Americans have insisted that slavery was considered good and necessary. Moslems under shariah law still insist that rape is good and necessary. And a portion of Americans insist that abortion is a good choice (however, they insist the the mother is the “chooser”).
We have to rise above all those barbarisms, and say that slavery, rape, infanticide and abortion always bad choices. The is a better way to live.
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 5:17 am
Another indication of aborticentrism: rather than militate for improved conditions for children, they bring up ways in which they can make themselves appear superior; in this case, comparing themselves to the paterfamilias of ancient Rome.
“Internationally respected [so-called] prolife speaker.” That in my opinion borders on oxymoronic.
So, what’s the most Jill has ever sacrificed for her cause?
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 7:46 am
Del,
Never heard of Stanek.
She’s not smart enough to answer the question?
I asked ten pro life people, they never heard of her. Stank must not be what you claim.
All pro life activists, do not share your perspective and have a wide variety of belief systems.
You are wrong on every important point you make.
Anyway, just answer a simple question.
What about a tubal pregnancy, is Abortion OK then? Is it OK to Kill the baby then?
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 8:21 am
Jill Stanek has been in the public eye for a while. I dont really know her, can’t say what she is like. I wish she would post on this blog, however, would be cool to hear what she has to say!
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 8:44 am
She is too afraid.
Her mental capacity could not keep up with the mental cognition that goes on here.
It is clear from what she writes.
I bet she does not write anything that has any meaning. Let’s see if I am right!
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 8:04 am
Del,
I am a pro life activist.
I like to think of myself as not on the fringe terrorism side of pro life.
Our Lord and our Papal See here in our transient corporal existence agrees, as does Catholic Canonical Law that an Abortion for a tubal pregnancy is OK, and specifically addresses that killing the baby is OK under this special circumstance.
Are you saying that
Our Sweet Lord,
The Holy Father,
The Catholic Institution,
And one billion Catholics are wrong, and you are right?
That would be a very extra ordinary claim.
I believe the Catholic Church is right on the issue, and you are wrong.
P
LikeLike
March 20, 2011 at 7:02 am
Interesting! The typical aborticentric is stuck at Level Two of cognition: “received knowledge.” If an accepted authority says it is true, then it is true. This is the level at which children 5-12 operate: “Daddy says you don’t play with the sprinkler!”
LikeLike
March 24, 2011 at 1:48 pm
No, Masria, Del’s right and you’re wrong. You’re treating a grey area as if it were black and white.
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 8:19 am
Del: I am assuming that you are okay with abortion if the mother’s life is endangered, right?
LikeLike
March 24, 2011 at 1:45 pm
I’ll tell you who Jill Stanek is. She’s the one who made me aware of Chris Rock, the best in the USA.
LikeLike
March 24, 2011 at 5:06 pm
I’ll tell you who Jill Stanek is. She’s the person who got me to look at Chris Rock and realize he’s the greatest comedian in America.
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 7:58 am
Jill,
Tremendous job at misrepresenting fact.
Jill:
is Abortion ever OK?
Your compatriate says no. What is your opinion?
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 9:16 am
Jill Stanek is not a credible source of information.
She does not support her opinion very well.
As well she seems to like to chime in, but not answer a question.
Typical Pro Life terrorist Guerilla Tactics, just the like the Pro Life Terrorists.
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 9:23 am
Jill,
Why do you not answer questions?
You are against infanticide, yet the Bible has many, many references to infanticide. Do you believe the bible?
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 9:37 am
Jill is your standard no brain pro Lifer.
She won’t answer a good question.
She just lies, then gets out to not be heard from again.
I’m so bored with the pro lifers, they don’t have any brains to say anything intelligent.
Watch, I guarantee it.
LikeLike
March 20, 2011 at 7:05 am
Jill Stanek’s job is to generate publicity that will win the public to her point of view; that way, she’ll never have to care for a child she wants someone else to bear. No tax increases, no loss of income potential, no disruption of her planned daily schedule– but a lot of fame…
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 2:42 pm
The best evidence of a true parasite on humanity – they cannot answer a question.
LikeLike
March 17, 2011 at 5:19 pm
Margaret Sanger, who addressed the women’s auxillary of the KuKluxKlan, which incidentally was founded as the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party. How nice the ladies could take a day off from terrorizing black citizens and burning crosses to attend.
Bill Clinton accused of everything from exposing himself to rape.
Feminists were strangely silent when his accusers were attacked as liars, bimbos, and trailer trash. Feminists also seem to have no problem with his history of assault and abuse of women.
There’s even feminist columnist Ellen Goodman going through all sorts of semantic gymanastics to “explain” why Clinton flashing Paula Jones was not very nice, but it wasn’t illegal. That sent a couple of police officers I knew into fits of laughter.
Ted Kennedy spends his millions to get his nephew out of a rape charge, a charge stemming from a night of barhopping with Uncle Ted, who one would consider a tad long in the tooth to be out romping like a college boy, unless of course you think the senator went barhopping with the intention of conducting bible studies. Again feminists were silent. Let’s not forget the lady the good senator left to drown at Chippaquidick as well.
I have absolutely no surprise where Bob Packwood is concerned. Same pattern feminists have followed all along.
Your hypocrisy is rancid.
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 7:49 am
What does that have to do with Abortion rights?
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 8:23 am
Mary, when your all time pro-life champion, Congressman Henry Hyde, admitted to an affair years ago, did you and Jill condemn him as well? Or, if you said anything at all, was it the usual “God will forgive him” crapola?
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 8:46 am
The Pro Lifers are like one gigantic MiniMind. They believe things they cannot defend intelligently.
I am curious to Stanek’s post on Hyde.
Good point Pat.
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 2:26 pm
Hyde excused his own infidelity, saying it was a “youthful indiscretion,” which was a broad stretch, considering at the time he did it, he was 7 years older than Clinton.
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 2:36 pm
Typical pro life loser
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 9:34 am
The most Rancid thing will be the smell of you Mary, burning in Hell.
LikeLike
March 17, 2011 at 6:11 pm
Re: Jill Stanek in #8: “Pro-aborts”! One of the stellar clues to the fixation the so-called “pro-life” crowd has.
It’s not about whether a child is going to be nurtured; “pro-life” is about abortion, and those who demand that every pregnancy be carried to term are concerned not for the health or potential of the fetus, but whether the pregnant woman will disobey them and have an abortion.
Aborticentrism, pure and simple.
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 2:28 pm
Mary in #9: What’s the most you’ve ever sacrificed for the “unborns” you want “rescued”? So far, Helen hasn’t said, nor has Jill, nor has John Dingle. . . .
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 2:40 pm
Mary probably has done nothing. That’s why we never get answers from these pro life lunatics.
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 2:41 pm
The DingleBerry never did anything substantial just like these pro lifers.
They are so pathetic.
LikeLike
March 24, 2011 at 1:57 pm
I like Dingle better but my name is Dunkle.
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 3:42 pm
Pat 8:23am
You will have to ask Jill that question as she did not have a blog at the time.
If you read my post correctly I am talking of how feminists have overlooked sexual ABUSE and ASSAULT. Where were the feminists when the women accusing Bill Clinton needed their support? Where were they when these women were attacked as psychotics, bimboes,and traier trash? They were too busy supporting and excusing Clinton.
Where were feminists when Patricia Bowman went up against the Kennedy millions and power in an effort to prosecute Uncle Ted’s nephew for rape?
A deafening silence. Loyalty to Uncle Ted came first, despite his abuse of women, including leaving one to drown. Bowman was another example of the Kennedy power used to allow Ted& co. to abuse women and get away with it.
I have never excused Hyde’s behavior.
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 3:45 pm
Henry and Emory
LOL, I know this is pushing it, but how about an intelligent argument?
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 5:42 pm
Why argument?
Why not dialogue?
Is abortion OK for a tubal pregnancy?
LikeLike
March 19, 2011 at 7:54 am
Mary,
Is the Morning After Pill OK to use?
What about hormonal contraception?
LikeLike
March 19, 2011 at 11:47 am
Mary,
I am trying to understand your statements in these comments.
Del says above:
“All pro-life activists admit that abortion is never okay.”
I read that you are a pro Life activist?
You also think killing the baby in an ectopic pregnancy is OK?
You think Hormonal contraception, than can kill a baby cell is OK?
You believe that The Morning After Pill, again basically the same stuff as some hormonal contraception, that kills the implanting baby is OK?
You believe that killing an Anencephalic baby, since it can Kill the mother is OK?
You believe killing the baby part of a Partial Molar Pregnancy is OK?
That’s a lot of baby killing, and a lot more examples could fall into the very categories you describe.
Am I missing something?
You sound as Pro Choice as most the ProChoicers on this site.
What did I miss?
LikeLike
March 19, 2011 at 12:08 pm
Linda,
Mary is pro choice.
She said that she supports women making the choice to kill their baby in a lot of different circumstances.
Maybe I missed it, but I did not see where she denies women the choice to kill their baby.
LikeLike
March 19, 2011 at 4:20 pm
Clearly, Mary has no understanding of the issues she tries to discuss.
Perhaps it would be better if she just tried to do good works?
Her Fund of knowledge just harms people as she is clearly uneducated to the topics she tries to discuss.
LikeLike
March 19, 2011 at 4:21 pm
Mary, please try. You do not seem capable . . .
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 3:56 pm
Angela,
Why not let me answer anonymous? Hasn’t anyone ever told you the best way to make a fool of yourself is to shoot off your mouth first and then get your facts?
For years I have cared for the children of single mothers, donated time and materiel to mother’s and infant’s home, volunteered as a mentor to single mothers, volunteered one on one with single moms, taken single mothers to and from doctor appts.,work, school, and counselling sessions, and volunteered on a crisis pregnancy hotline, which involved a lot more than answering a phone, like providing emergency assistance of clothing, shelter, etc.
I have also assisted families of children with special needs through volunteer work.
Oh and Angela, can you also dispense with the name calling and try an intelligent argument instead?
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 4:20 pm
Anonymous 2:26PM
LOL. Clinton had a very long history of sexual indiscretions. Remember the mistress he only had sex with once in 11 years?
What do you think the folks who handled the “bimbo eruptions” for Clinton were all about.
That’s not my point. If Hillary wanted to tolerate this behavior in her husband and he found willing companions, its no issue in my life.
My issue is sexual abuse and assault, which Clinton was accused of time and again and with which feminists seemed to have had very little if any concern. But then Clinton was a big supporter of the feminist agenda, mainly abortion.
LikeLike
March 19, 2011 at 7:52 am
Any of you nutty Christians going to vote for Newt Gingrich after all his poor moral character and behavior that he already has revealed on many an occasion?
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 4:29 pm
To sum it all up. Packwood is just another example, in addition to the above mentioned examples, of feminists ready to overlook the sexual abuse and assault of women so long as a politician supports abortion.
LikeLike
March 19, 2011 at 7:49 am
Christians have been the biggest institution of murder, torture, war known to civilization.
Are you Christians OK with that?
LikeLike
March 19, 2011 at 5:08 pm
Christians?
Not one of you have the willingness to reply to fact?
It reveals you know the truth about the horrors of Christianity.
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 5:17 pm
To Mary in #14: How many hours a year does that amount to? How much of your money do you put into that work? What has been your biggest sacrifice as a so-called “pro-lifer”?
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 5:47 pm
I bet it is insignificant compared to the beliefs and income!
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 6:10 pm
How many hours a year does it amount to? Are you serious? Plenty of hours. What matters is that I have been involved in such work for years.
What exactly do you mean by sacrifice? What is more valuable than one’s time? I can’t give you a dollar amount, because it is largely been material donations and time. I have no idea what the crib I donated to a single mother cost. What do you think a barely used crib is worth? The infant and maternity clothes I donated? No idea. Should I give you my gas bill for transporting women and their infants to doctor appts and counselling sessions? How about the time spent supporting a woman throught a crisis pregnancy? The time I spent mentoring and one on one with women facing crisis pregnancies? Can’t put a price tag on that. What is free child care worth so that a single mother can attend a class or counselling session? You tell me.
Kind of hard to give a dollar amount.
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 6:14 pm
Karl,
Why don’t you check out my post to
Angela where I advise her that getting one’s facts before shooting off one’s mouth can keep one from looking very foolish. Its post 14
LikeLike
March 19, 2011 at 7:37 am
How many children have you adopted?
LikeLike
March 19, 2011 at 5:05 pm
From reading this thread Mary,
You are the one most responsible for shooting their mouth off without an education.
You are a sad reflection of whatever you represent, as I cannot see where you have clearly stated a good opinion, with objective data to back it up.
Plus you dodge the hard questions.
People like you make me I’ll.
LikeLike
March 18, 2011 at 6:18 pm
Carolyn,
For heaven’s sake, a tubal pregnancy? A tubal pregnancy is a life and death situation and of course immediate surgery will be performed to save the woman’s life.
I worked for years in Catholic hospitals and saw plenty of surgeries performed on women with tubal pregnancies. There is absolutely no question here as to whether or not surgery should be performed to save the woman’s life.
LikeLike
March 19, 2011 at 7:38 am
What about a Partial Molar Pregnancy?
Is it OK to abort that pregnancy?
LikeLike
March 19, 2011 at 7:46 am
I’ve worked in Catholic hospitals that made women be treated expectantly for tubal pregnancies, endangering their lives.
LikeLike