Abortion


Abortion.com FaceBook Page

Abortion.com FaceBook Page

The other day I was reading all of the cool stuff that goes on on the Facebook page, “Abortion.com.”   If you haven’t “liked” that page, take a minute to do so.  There are some really interesting posts, good information and great responses.  They now have over 50,000 “likes.”

At one point on that page, someone from another country asked how we here in the good ole US of A define “baby” and “fetus.”  They obviously were trying to get more information on the never ending debate over what the hell that thing is that women carry when they become pregnant.

So, I chimed in and said that, yes, there are legal definitions for the two words but that the definitions really do nothing to resolve the dispute over when it becomes a baby and when it can be terminated.   I guess most folks feel that if we continue to call it a “fetus,” then it’s easier to have an abortion – versus aborting a “baby.”

IntraUterine Pregnancy

IntraUterine Pregnancy

But when it really comes down to it, my honest reaction is:  “Who the hell cares what we call it?”

A woman discovers she is pregnant.   Depending on her circumstance, she may have a number of reactions.  If she and her partner were trying for years to become pregnant, then she is jumping for joy, calling all of her friends, putting it on her Facebook page.  She is going to have a “baby!”  In this case, at no point – and I mean NO point – will she ever refer to that tiny little organism in her body as a “fetus.”  It’s her baby and as it grows and grows, she embraces it more and more as her baby.  “Wanna feel the baby?” she will ask her neighbor.   What should we call the baby?   You know the drill.

Now, if the pregnancy was a surprise and a not so welcome surprise at that, the woman will still not refer to it as a “fetus.”  When talking to her partner and/or her loved ones, she will admit that she “cannot have this baby.”  If she makes an appointment to have an abortion, she will talk to the counselor about not being able to bring this baby into the world at this time.

Baby, baby, baby.

The women who are in these situations really don’t care about legal definitions.  And they clearly never use the word “fetus.”

So, the question from my Facebook friend was an interesting one and I know they meant well but, in the long run, it really does not make that much difference what term the woman uses and, in more cases than not, they will call it a “baby.”

Kermitt Gosnell

Kermitt Gosnell

Kermit Gosnell. The name conjures up all forms of horror in the minds of so many. The arrest, trial, and conviction of Kermit Gosnell touches on a plethora of social, cultural, and public policy issues as few other high profile court cases do. The case has provoked a broad range of worthy discussions, several of which I will raise through a series of blog posts at Abortion.com and in a complete article at another source that will be accessible at a later time.  Hopefully the good to come from the evils of this man will be honest dialogue about some of these issues.

Media Coverage

To begin an honest dialogue, the controversy about the media coverage of the Gosnell case seems like a good starting point. Since the beginning of the trial and, now, after the conviction, the case is continually mentioned by conservative radio entertainers, anti-choice politicians, and anti-choice activists in every possible forum.  The mindset of many seems to be that media, in collusion with pro-choice advocates, has conspired to minimize any significance that the case brings to the abortion debate.  Their goal is arguably to saturate the public with incorrect messaging and try to use the Gosnell case to define the choice of abortion. Such a tactic is not likely to convert pro-choice people to an anti-abortion position. What it will do is keep the most radical anti-choice activists occupied with promoting misinformation.

The criminal case against Kermit Gosnell initially did seem to be a case about abortion or at the very least about bad abortion providers and clinics. For sure, a number of abortion-related political, moral, legal, and public policy issues were made relevant as a result of the case.  However, the case was not about abortion; the role of abortion in the case was limited to being a part of the evidence against Gosnell, a criminal. The indictment against Gosnell states, “…we realize this case will be used by those on both sides of the abortion debate…the case is not about that controversy; it is about disregard of the law and disdain for the lives and health of mothers and infants.”  The indictment was graphic; Gosnell was evil. (See http://www.phila.gov/districtattorney/pdfs/grandjurywomensmedical.pdf ) The prosecution actually did an excellent job throughout the trial in keeping the case focused on the legal merits and not the political debate about abortion.

As a licensed doctor who violated laws and professional standards of abortion care, as well as other areas of medical practice (including unlawful prescribing of pain medication), Gosnell has been tried, convicted, and sentenced to life in prison for murdering three babies. (There were other charges and mixed verdicts; the sentence was the result of a negotiation between the defense and the prosecution to avoid the death penalty.) He was not performing late term abortions in the cases for which he was charged. He was killing viable third trimester fetuses – babies – under the guise of providing elective second trimester abortions.  When a health-related later term abortion is performed, and results in a live birth, a competent professional doctor would follow protocol to provide or seek immediate medical attention for the baby. Gosnell did neither. Instead, he not only failed to check for signs of life, but he also ensured death and involved others in his crimes. He jeopardized the health and lives of his patients. He maximized his profits by hiring nonmedical staff. The clinic was also filthy and in violation of numerous laws and professional standards. In all probability, Gosnell would have been convicted of crimes regardless if he provided abortions.

It was not surprising that the Gosnell case continued to be perceived to be about abortion even after the trial. Virtually all news reports gave more attention to the reactions of the two sides of the abortion debate instead of the actual crimes he committed. When I recently asked news-informed people what they knew about the case, all could reference abortion. None could provide information concerning specific details about the charges against Gosnell. There continue to be claims that the media ignored the case; most basing their belief on their opinion that the majority of media professionals are pro-choice liberals. In reality, the media reported on the case similarly to other criminal cases. The charges filed against Gosnell in January, 2011 were reported by the media. After the initial charges were filed, there was nothing new to report until the trial began – in part because a gag order was imposed on the defense and the prosecution in April. It is as simple as that.

Consider recent high profile criminal cases that have made the news.  After the initial cycle of “breaking news” headlines, there may have been a few special interest storylines but little else until a court proceeding took place. The mass killing at the theater in Aurora, Colorado comes to mind. For several weeks after the event, families willing to speak with the press enabled numerous human interest issues. The only news since has concerned court decisions, such as last week’s ruling that the accused will be allowed to plead insanity. The recovery of three women in Ohio who had been held captive for ten years was major news until there was nothing new to report. This week, it was reported that the accused was no longer on suicide watch – nothing else. In the Gosnell case, there were also medical privacy issues that posed significant challenges to reporters who might have been interested in presenting human interest storylines similar to other high profile criminal cases.

It seems that people opposed to abortion believe that if abortion is part of the evidence in a criminal case, or if the criminal is an abortion provider, the media should be obligated to continuously report something about the case. Ironically, even conservative media sources did not report on the case until the trial. And, even then, they hypocritically pointed to the lack of coverage as if they had no ownership of the so-called “failure” to cover the story. If there had been something new to report between the time of the initial charges and indictment to the time of the trial, the more conservative media sources at the very least would have reported.

Many of us, including pro-choice folks, wonder why the murder trials of Casey Anthony and Jody Arias as well as the upcoming murder trial of George Zimmerman warrant constant coverage but the Gosnell trial did not. One answer is that cameras are not allowed in Pennsylvania courtrooms. Other explanations include the sheer difficulty in presenting technical medical testimony through the filter of reporters or editors and protecting the privacy of medical records submitted as evidence.  Those two points alone had the potential to create enormous error which would be a disservice to all.

An objective look at the history of the coverage of the Gosnell case will confirm that there was no conspiracy to hide or minimize the atrocity of the crimes committed by Kermit Gosnell.  The passion and convictions many of us have about the abortion debate and other issues is often used by media to determine the coverage. But that coverage has to be responsible and factual.

Part 2 of this series will address issues of competency and professionalism among doctors who provide abortions.  In the meantime, no matter your position on abortion, at least consider that the Gosnell case was about crimes and not abortion. If you do a comprehensive online search, you will find that the case of Kermit Gosnell was thoroughly covered by the media.

I Won’t Back Down

David Gunn, Jr.

David Gunn, Jr.

Please grant me the indulgence of a slight digression before getting to the meat of my post.  I have never been one for personal theme songs, couples taking ownership of a particular song from a particular place and calling it “our song”, and  I never believed in the “soundtrack of your life” bullshit slogan we get sold by Apple or some other company asking we consume their individuized music player cutting us off from the music’s true power which is to be consumed—not in the sense of bought in some meaningless disposable manner—but to be collectively consumed as one consumes food, nourishing your being and providing limitless sources of inspiration rivaling the written and spoken word in its power to move people to “seek, to find, and not to yield” (thanks, Tennyson).

In fact, music is one of my first artistic loves though I am not a musician.  It rivals reading and the written word in my mind, and fuels a long standing self-debate which should not matter in any capital T truth sense, but I find the question haunting—for me at least—and I have found how one answers the question reveals something of the soul for lack of a better word since I do not believe in an eternal soul.  The debate topic, my friends, is which of the following is the purest art:  music, painting—or some other graphic design, or the word?  Pure is probably a poor choice of words as it is a relative term and has no meaning we do not assign it so in simplest terms, I struggle to determine which one is better and find others’ answers to the conundrum particularly interesting and revealing.

Joyce

Joyce

Joyce argued the written word is the most powerful, and therefore, the purest art.  If you ask any self- respecting Christian, told since time immemorial that God is the word and the word is God, I believe they would agree with Joyce; however, Tolkien imagined the world’s creation through the singing of angelic type beings which is kind of ironic when you think about it since Tolkien envisioned the choral creation in writing!

Over the years I’ve vacillated on the topic but more and more find myself falling on the musical side of the debate as its motivational power transcends language.  Though great works find global appeal via translations, any bilingual reader knows any particular work’s power diminishes when not digested in the original language.  Music, though, requires no translation or modernization:  there is no New English Version of Beethoven’s Erocia for example, and if you play “Imagine” or any number of excellent modern songs most folks respond much more positively than, say, if you read a passage from Macbeth to an alien.  One of the proofs for my side of the argument is Close Encounters of the Third Kind.  When, in the movie, we finally established first contact, we “spoke” through music, not the written or spoken word.

Abortion

Abortion

I apologize, again, for the theoretical introduction and want to get down to what in the world all of the above has to do with abortion and my story.

1)     Gonna stand my ground, won’t be turned around:

I Won't Back Down

I Won’t Back Down

Though I do not believe in a personal theme song, my dad became irrevocably associated with Tom Petty’s “I Won’t Back Down.”  I remember the first time I heard the song in 1989 and I owned a copy of “Full Moon Fever”.  I argue it is one of the greatest rock albums of the 80s for a number of reasons, but I have digressed enough and am not writing rock criticism.  Dad loved “I Won’t Back Down” and sang it to himself frequently.  Petty’s ode to personal strength and fortitude hit in the summer of 1989 which, oddly enough, is when Christian Terrorism was in its embryonic phase from the standpoint of most of their terror attacks, at this point anyway, were limited to physical damage to clinics and intimidation while also employing massive acts of civil disobedience.

Screen Shot 2013-06-05 at 1.09.29 PMBy late 1992-93, antis targeted dad with wanted posters, stalked him, staged protests at his workplace, and otherwise eviscerated any shred of privacy he enjoyed—which wasn’t much given we lived in a very small Alabama town at the time where gossip ran through town like the river from which it took its name.  In a show of personal strength and defiance, during an anti-abortion protest on Roe v. Wade day outside of one of the clinics on his circuit, dad stood in front of the antis, sang “Happy Birthday to You” to the Roe decision, and then played Petty’s “I Won’t Back Down” to the antis as a means of showing his personal commitment to provide quality health care to women even in the face of intimidation and terror.  Of course, local media picked up on the event, and a local paper ran an article with a photo of dad antagonizing those who terrorized him, and his co-workers, for years.

2)     You can stand me up to the gates of hell, but I won’t back down:

Christian Terrorism

Christian Terrorism

Twenty days later, dad lay bleeding out on the ground outside a clinic in Pensacola, FL becoming the Abortion War’s first casualty.   Soon thereafter Petty’s anthem became a rallying cry for the pro-choice movement.  Folks played the song at vigils, protests, and speaking engagements.  What was a song I immensely enjoyed, became both a personal motivator and a painful reminder of death.  I quickly became a poor substitute for my father’s courage and attempted to act as his surrogate.  Though I was no doctor and could not actually fill his void, I tried, in my own small way, to keep the providers’ travails in front of a public who did not necessarily want to understand, for any number of reasons, what doctors and clinic staff experienced on a daily basis.

Christian Terrorism

Christian Terrorism

For six to seven years, I traveled to various cities—wherever I was asked to go—to tell dad’s, and by proxy other providers’, story.  My intent was to galvanize support for the providers and to tell those who thought “it can’t happen here,” that it can and will if you do not get involved, act, and act now.  Over the course of the 90s, Christian terrorists murdered more doctors, and violence spread northward disproving the widespread belief doctor murder was a Southern thing.  During the 90s, the choice movement grew and was highly visible.  We saw court and legislative victories in the form of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrance Act in mid-1994 as well as a positive ruling by the Supreme Court in the NOW v. Scheidler case which was subsequently overturned during the farce we now know as the Bush years.  We met each act of violence with a large public outcry and response.  Roughly 800,000 people attended the March for Women’s Lives on April 25, 1994 in Washington DC including myself as a speaker.

As the 90s ended and the Bush era began, abortion, though still a target of Christian Fascists, ceded ground to the now eternal War on Terror taking a backseat to Bush’s neverending wars, civil rights abuses, and war crimes.  Though the struggle—and Christian Terror–continued, it went largely ignored by a press preoccupied with terrorists abroad while those of the homegrown ilk were allowed to regroup and gain courage from the first admittedly Evangelical President.

3)     Well I know what’s right, I got just one life; In a world that keeps on pushin’ me around but I’ll stand my ground and I won’t back down:

Following a highly abridged overview of the past 20 years in an attempt to keep your attention and this post a respectably attention holding length, I ask you to look around you to see where we are as of mid-2013.  Many Republican controlled states—mine included—passed and/or are preparing to pass regulations designed to severely cripple a clinic’s ability to remain open while at the same time making it personally intrusive and harder than ever for women to seek the medical care they feel they need.  Whether being forced to undergo a rape-like act via vaginal probe, an onerous waiting period, propaganda influenced “counseling”, or being forced to watch an ultrasound, Christian Fascists have succeeded in making a legal medical procedure virtually unobtainable in many Red states via intrusive and overly restrictive regulations. It’s funny how the party of regulatory constraint never met a regulation it did not like when abortion—or birth control or sex education for that matter–is concerned, and how the “libertarian” Tea Party Racist/Terrorists love liberty as long as it doesn’t apply to women, minorities, or the poor.

Screen Shot 2013-06-05 at 1.14.59 PMHell, in my state alone, where there used to be multiple clinics in three of the major cities—or at least six to nine clinics statewide–according to abortion. com, there are only two clinics for the entire state.  These last bastions of reproductive freedom risk closure due to new regulations making their way through my state’s state legislature.  In Mississippi, were there were clinics in Jackson and Gulfport at the very least, there is now one in Jackson.  Likewise, Tennessee is served by only two clinics:  one in Nashville and one in Bristol (eight hours apart at least for the southern geographically challenged).  Also, there is only one operational clinic for the women of Arkansas.

Think of the implications of the above for a few moments.  Imagine yourself a minimum wage earner in rural Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, or Tennessee who elects to undergo an abortion; in order to get the medical care you desire, you must travel at the very least 60 miles to the nearest clinic and more than likely longer.  If you are unfortunate enough to live on the Gulf Coast of Alabama or Mississippi, your travel time to the nearest clinic exponentiates drastically and may be sufficient, on its own, to force you into motherhood.  Aside from the travel obstacle, you also have significant economic challenges if you elect to travel the underground abortion railroad as you must lose at least a full day’s wage, waste at least another few days’ wages and fuel, and then endure the cost of a hotel plus the cost of the procedure itself; therefore, your medical procedure—since it isn’t covered by insurance, Medicaid, or military insurance—can cost you a month’s salary.  Given the above, it is blatantly clear for many women in the United States, though abortion is technically legal, it is not available as a viable health care option.  These obstacles do not account for the ever reducing number of providers who do not view abortion services as a career option due to the threat of violence.  Again, though abortion is legal in the USA, the Christian Fascists through terrorism, regulatory intimidation, and simple misogyny have effectively banned the procedure for many women across the county.

4)     Hey, baby, there ain’t no easy way out; hey I will stand my ground and I won’t back down:

The above encapsulates a small number of the travails women seeking abortion in 2013 face.  There are many reasons for these developments.  One, choice groups cede the local fights in Red States and instead focus on a national agenda. Two, politicians and the media cannot say the word abortion much less report on it in a way that reflects the actual disposition of the nation on the topic.  If one simply watched corporate news, you would think most people are against abortion while the converse is obviously and undeniably true in poll after poll.  Three, and this is most important in my opinion, we lack grass roots direct action to counter the actions of the Christian Terrorists.  We do this for a number of reasons primarily out of a combination of fear and shame.  Fear of how a strong stance on abortion will impact our friendships, family relations, and children as well as a shame or guilt some may feel due to their own religious beliefs.  We must, though, have the courage to educate the public as to the true reality.  Namely, we significantly outnumber those against abortion, and we must have the confidence and perseverance to unabashedly engage the public, teach the scientific truth, and demonstrate our determination to win this war on women.  Not because it is, in simplest terms, the right action but because it is just.

In furtherance of these goals, we must reorganize and have the courage to “stand our ground” and “not back down” as our children’s rights depend upon what we do now, not what we might do in the future.  I have a personal stake in this not only due to dad’s death and my own personal involvement in the past, but I owe it to my daughter to ensure she enjoys self-determination and true liberation.  If the Christian Right has it their way, by the time my daughter hits puberty, after suffering through abstinence only sex education, should she be “legitimately raped” to quote Mr. Akin, she would be forced to bear the rapist’s child.  How utterly intolerable, ludicrous, and goddamned unacceptable is that statement?  How important, then, is it we re-energize, re-engage, and rejuvenate our conviction to win this fight and win it now—and we absolutely can and will win if we take proper action at this crucial moment!

To this end, I want to announce a project I’m supporting and ask that you support as well.  Two groups of activists embarking from San Francisco and New York City are planning a freedom ride style journey across the United States set to kick off with joint rallies at each city of origin tentatively set for July 23.  The riders will tour and engage the public in areas of the country impacted most by the draconian anti- abortion regulations currently making their way through state houses across the country.  Both groups will converge on Bismark, North Dakota by 8/1 to protest the effective date of North Dakota’s fetal heartbeat legislation which goes into full effect 1 August 2013.

I believe actions such as these are not only needed but required if we as a movement are going to regain the needed momentum to re-establish our strong and solid footing in our struggle against the well- funded and connected Christian Fascists.  If you have any sense of history, you know that only through mass direct action do the voiceless gain voice, the powerless gain power, and the professed ideals of our nation actualize in reality.  Building a national movement is paramount and failing to do so is tantamount to surrender; however, I know we will not surrender to threat, intimidation, and violence because we have righteous conviction to engage the armies of the night and prevail.  To this end, I urge you to review this statement published by the Riders’ organizing committee and lend your signature/support to the growing movement by following the attached link:

http://www.stoppatriarchy.org/abortionondemandstatement.html

Lastly, I appeal to everyone to reflect objectively on the statement, sign it, and lend what support you can.  Give money to fund the riders, join the caravan when they come through your town, and even if you simply donate your signature to the statement:  that alone is taking action.  There are those of us in the movement who have been engaged for a long time—many of you much longer than myself.  You know abortion is not a foul and dirty word.  You know attaching shame to the procedure only aids the antis by keeping it in the closet and attaching a scarlet letter type stigma to what should be a private matter between patient and doctor.  You understand the effectiveness and utility of direct action because you organized and led it in the past.  You also understand sacrifice because some of you do it daily by choosing to walk into a clinic under threat of death after witnessing many of your colleagues suffer death for continuing to make abortion services a safe option for women across the country.  I know all of the above from direct experience after suffering through what the Christian terrorists did to my family.  We cannot allow it to happen to another.  We must draw a line and we must not back down.

Walt Whitman

Walt Whitman

I started this post with a lighthearted philosophical debate and have framed my essay using song.  To be fair to both sides, let me offer the following words of Walt Whitman as a benediction of sorts:

O ME! O life!… of the questions of these recurring;

Of the endless trains of the faithless—of cities fill’d with the foolish;

Of myself forever reproaching myself, (for who more foolish than I, and who more faithless?)

Of eyes that vainly crave the light—of the objects mean—of the struggle ever renew’d;

Of the poor results of all—of the plodding and sordid crowds I see around me;

         

Of the empty and useless years of the rest—with the rest me intertwined;

The question, O me! so sad, recurring—What good amid these, O me, O life?

Answer.

That you are here—that life exists, and identity;

That the powerful play goes on, and you will contribute a verse.

Now is the time to ask ourselves about our verse and to determine what impact it has to the powerful play.  My dad’s was “I Won’t Back Down.”  Is it not time that we make it ours as well?

Live Action

Live Action

The “Live Action” activist wakes up thinking about how she is going to get that abortionist that day.  She can hardly contain herself as she mulls over how she is going to give back to society by trapping an unsuspecting doctor into saying something that, with good editing, will indict him and that entire industry he works for.

By now you no doubt have heard about these anti-abortion kids who are running around the country making phony appointments at abortion clinics and going in all wired up for sound and video.  They are engaging in a sting operation and they are oh-so-proud of what they are doing.  .

For example, this student-led group recently released footage taken surreptitiously inside Kentucky’s only abortion provider, EMW Women’s Surgical Center, where, according to the press release, the staff “ignored the sexual abuse of a child and gave misleading abortion counseling.” The footage was taken by Live Action President Lila Rose and actor Jackie Stollar who posed undercover as minors with Rose telling the staff that she was 14-years-old and impregnated by her 31-year-old “boyfriend.”

Abortion

Abortion

Then there is another brilliant piece of cinema of a conversation with Doctor Lee Carhart where he describes how the baby will die in the womb like “meat in a crock pot.”    Ouch.

These kids really are making their mark, aren’t they?   I mean, why should they be wasting their time organizing the soup kitchen in the Bowery when they can actually meet the “abortionist,” trick him and then become famous on numerous anti-abortion blogs?  Why should they volunteer to be a mentor for a child who is struggling in math when they can get their jollies sitting inside the abortion clinic waiting room?  Wow, their parents must be so proud!

Now, I’ll admit that Doctor Carhart needs to figure out a better way of describing the abortion process and no one who works in a clinic should be ignoring sexual abuse.  But I’ve seen some of the unedited videos of doctors and counselors and, of course, in that form they show the entire story.  And what they show is that the doctors and staff are competently and compassionately performing their job and helping women in need.  They are counseling them on all birth control measures and talking about the options – including adoption – that are available to the woman.  But you know that stuff is going to wind up on the editing floor.  I mean, after all, we would not want to show clinic staff in any kind of good light, would we?

I know hundreds and hundreds of doctors and clinic staff.  They love their job, they love to interact as much as possible with that woman who does not want to be there.  The conversations can be fascinating and at times very reassuring to the woman.   But in the future, every staff person is now going to assume that she is talking to a camera and so they will resort to being the ultimate bureaucrat, just telling the woman what she is required to know, not engaging in any conversation lest it be taken totally out of context.

All because of a bunch of sick brainwashed kids.

A Sort of Reintrodution

David Gunn, Jr.

David Gunn, Jr.

On a warm spring day in March of 1993, I sat outside the Humanities building of the University of Alabama at Birmingham studying for a Semantics final exam; meanwhile and probably simultaneously, my dad arrived at work, parked his car, started to head toward the door to the clinic where he practiced, and was assassinated by a Christian terrorist named Michael Griffin.  After pumping three rounds into my dad’s back, Griffin promptly walked around to the front of the clinic where the typical and regular antis were gathered, and turned himself in to the police who arrived on the scene to break up the protest which I always believed was contemplated and coordinated by the protest organizers to serve as the diversion Griffin needed to pull off his assassination unimpeded.

Since my dad has the bitter designation of First Abortion Provider Assassinated, a media circus ensured after his assassination, and I ended up fighting a battle on my dad’s behalf with the dual intentions of drawing the public’s attention to the Christian terrorists and their horrible tactics as well as doing whatever I could to keep another doctor’s family from experiencing what mine did.  I spent almost 10 years in the trenches, hitting any media outlet I could, speaking to whatever group would listen, and lobbying our government for action.  I certainly was not alone in these actions, and through the efforts of Pat Richard’s organization NCAP as well as other Pro-Choice organizations, we won a major victory with the passage of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Law which Pat and I watched President Clinton ultimately sign into law.  Along the way, I married, had a child, and I reached a point where I had to pause my activism to raise a family which evolved to include a second child eight years after the first.

Christian Anti Choice - Anti Life Terrorist - He Assassinated Dr. David Gunn

Christian Anti Choice – Anti Life Terrorist – He Assassinated Dr. David Gunn

I recently reconnected with my old friend Pat Richards.  We had a couple of phone conversations and swapped some emails which culminated in my being asked to provide some blog content which I am happy to do.  In fact it is the least I can do and I have some sense of duty insofar as doing it is concerned.  Now I’m a somewhat motivated person, but oftentimes I need a pressure point to get me off my arse.  The arrangement between Pat and I results in my monthly blog contribution.  Our project gives me the deadline I need to stress me to produce pages while at the same time gives me some encouragement to write the goddamned book I’ve been wanting to write for about 20 years now whose vague amoebic shapely mass lies somewhere between the brain cells you use daily, those that are reserved for recreational devastation, and those we can’t yet access but the Obama administration is currently making the Kennedian final frontier of R and D if you believe recent administration palaver.

I’m presently faced with the dilemma of which topics to cover, what salacious details to include, what to leave out to protect the guilty, how to make myself the Byronic hero shaking my fist at the heavens perched on a cliff façade, and where the hell to start.

I’ve been away for a few years so a reintroduction seemed like a decent initial post, but I do not know that I want to go the route of a typical linear biographical “I was the son of a share cropper” type format.  What I’d really prefer is to utilize this opportunity to inspire me to do what I’ve been delaying for 20 years now and that’s write the goddamn book—in fact, I think if I finish it, that will be my title:  The Goddamn Book by David Gunn, Jr.  I think the folks in marketing could work wonders with such an appellation.  It sure beats An American Tragedy or My Antonia or The Stand, or any title given to similar real-life tragicomic rehashing of events insofar as titles go in my opinion anyway.

Seriously, though, after my absence from the scene, if you will, and in light of Dr. Tiller’s recent assassination coupled with the renewed draconian Red State regulatory traps aimed at eliminating reproductive freedom by technicality rather than illegality, my desire to do something—and the something was some ambiguous uninformed action I could not label—led me to stumble upon Pat’s blog which allowed us to reconnect and brings us current while preserving the biographical fare for future posts which I hope will include some serial entries from The Goddamn Book I am now seriously starting to write and develop.

I am truly grateful for the opportunity Pat’s providing me and hopefully, we in the community who know the tragic and truly dangerous effects of living under constant threat while at the same time constantly remaining vigilant in our guarded responses to certain questions we get from normal folks—especially when you have kids cause you don’t want the response to negatively impact them indirectly—can become acquainted again, you’ll get something from my humble wordsmithery, and I may finally be able to cathart out The Goddamn Book I’ve been promising myself I will write for years.  I’m looking forward to this new venture and am already finding it difficult to stop writing now that I’ve finally started.  As of now, I resolve to contribute toward a solution to our problems in any small way that I can.  I’ve grown weary of lacking conviction, and it is now time to confront those of the worst who have the passionate intensity desperately lacking on our side (thanks WBY).

A short while ago, one of my regular readers expressed frustration over the tsunami of anti-abortion measures being considered (and passed) in various state legislatures across the country.  She then asked a logical question:  why doesn’t the pro-choice movement respond in kind?  “Why don’t we introduce our own legislation?” she asked.

Well, the real simple answer is that in most state legislatures we just don’t have the votes to pass anything.  But there’s more to it than that.

With the exception of a few right wing nut balls, no sane politician wants to vote on the abortion issue.  They don’t even want to talk about it.  That’s because these (mostly male) legislators are totally uncomfortable with the issue and are not interested in being lobbied by advocates on both sides of the debate.  Even if they are in agreement with the lobbyist sitting in front of them, they still don’t want to talk about the issue.  That’s why whenever there is a vote on abortion, the debates are not very long.  Sure, you always have your regular stalwarts willing to get up there to make their points but for the most part, everyone dodges the debate and would love to dodge a vote if possible.  This mentality is equally applicable to anti-abortion and pro-choice legislators.  Then, if the worst case happens and you are ultimately forced to vote, you know you’re gonna piss off half of your constituents – and no elected official wants to piss anyone off.  It’s a lose-lose situation.

Abortion

Abortion

But, let’s imagine there is a fervent pro-choice legislator in Virginia named George and he feels very strongly that the state should use its Medicaid funds to pay for all abortions.  The first thing George will do is consult with the pro-choice groups and, knowing the state of Virginia, they’ll tell George that he can’t win because the votes are just not there.  And any straight thinking lobbyist does not want to lose a vote.  But let’s say these lobbyists see things differently.  Say they think that it’s time to “make a statement,” to force everyone to vote which will help them identify those they want to try to get out of office.  So, they tell George to go for it.

The next thing George has to do is get the word out that he is going to propose that Virginia restore Medicaid funding for abortions.  Suddenly, everyone is chasing him down, wondering why the hell he would force people to vote when there was no chance the measure would pass.  And, remember, the buildings that the state legislators perform their work are not very big so it’s not easy for George to hide from the deluge of colleagues who want to wring his neck.

George suddenly is getting cornered in the cafeteria, at the poker table, outside of church.  “Geez, George, why the hell are you forcing me to vote on this issue when it’s not going to win anyway?”  is the common refrain.  Even George’s fellow Democrats, some of whom are anti-abortion, get on his case.  It’s a pressure packed situation that he never anticipated.

Now, if George was an elected official from New York or California, he might be able to go for it and possibly win – although many of his buddies would still resent his forcing them to vote on abortion.  But, in states like Virginia, Kansas, North Dakota and many, many others, it’s a simple thing to say why don’t we initiate pro-choice legislation?  It’s another thing to actually go through that grueling process.

The fact is that most pro-choice legislators do not wake up thinking of abortion, unlike many anti-abortion legislators who can’t stop thinking about bloody fetuses.  For the pro-choicer, who has a more global view of things, it’s a different animal and it takes cajones to pursue what you think it right in a sure-to-be losing effort.

I guess the answer is it’s easier said than done.

Dr. David Gunn

Dr. David Gunn

I met David Gunn, Jr. about ten days after his father was assassinated by an anti-abortion terrorist.

Doctor David Gunn performed abortions at several clinics throughout the Southeast.  He was what they called a “circuit rider,” driving every day through Georgia, Florida and Alabama to provide abortion services to women in need.  On March 10, 1993 his destination was the Pensacola Women’s Medical Services clinic.   After parking his worn out car, he climbed out and headed for the back entrance to the clinic to avoid the protestors out front.  But standing right there was Michael Griffin, a relatively new anti-abortion protestor, and as Gunn passed him Griffin took out a pistol and fired into Doctor Gunn’s back, killing him instantly.

The murder made instant national news because it was the first time that a doctor who performed abortions had been murdered because he was “killing babies.”

Abortion

Abortion

Of course, the news services put out a wide net to find anyone who was close to the players involved in this terrible tragedy.  And without hesitation, one of those people came forward:  David Gunn, Jr.  His message was very simple:  there was an anti-abortion conspiracy to kill abortion doctors and the Clinton Administration needed to do more to prevent this from happening again.

David was an instant “media star.”   His waist-length hair immediately caught your eye.  When he spoke to the camera, his soulful eyes enraptured the audience.  He was soft spoken, not a rabble-rouser and his pronounced stutter made him even more compelling when he spoke.  Over the next few weeks, he was a constant presence on all of the news shows.

Anti Choice Christian Terrorist

Anti Choice Christian Terrorist

I met David the day before we were scheduled to appear on “The Donohue Show.”  We had a nice dinner the night before and he struggled to talk about his Dad.  It was clear that by that time he was already exhausted from all of the media appearances, but he was willing to push on “for the cause.”   The next day we sat on the stage together, accompanied by Mr. Paul Hill, an anti-abortion activist who actually told David and the national audience that his father’s murder was “justified” because Michael Griffin was “protecting the babies from being murdered.”

Over the next few years, David Gunn, Jr. became a national spokesman for the pro-choice movement.  Indeed, pro choice organizations practically fought over him as they encouraged him to “endorse” their group.  He basically put his life on hold and he travelled the country warning the nation that there were more murders to follow.  And he was right.

David’s story is a story of relentless courage and persistence.  And I’ve always thought that his experiences needed to be shared with the public.   And that is why I am absolutely thrilled to announce that David Gunn, Jr. has agreed to become a “guest blogger” once a month on this page.  He recently told me that he always wanted to write about him and his father but, like so many other young people he got preoccupied with raising a family, getting a job, etc.   But now David will start writing that story in the form of a monthly blog.

We are honored to have David join us!

Anti Choice Christian Terrorist

Anti Choice Christian Terrorist

On a cold, sunny December day in 1994, a pro-life terrorist named John Salvi walked into two abortion clinics in Boston and killed two people and injured five.  Then, for some unknown reason, he jumped into his car and drove all the way down to Norfolk, Virginia where he pulled up in front of the Hillcrest Clinic, a facility that also performed abortions.  He jumped out of the car and fired randomly at the building with a semi-automatic rifle.  Fortunately, no one was injured and about a week later I visited the clinic and the clinic director, Suzette Caton, showed me the bullet holes.

The Hillcrest Clinic had always been a target for anti-abortion zealots.  But, despite John Salvi, years of picketing, a bombing and an arson, the Hillcrest Clinic served women in the Tidewater, Virginia area for four decades.  And now they are shutting down their doors because the Commonwealth of Virginia thinks they don’t have adequate parking and their hallways are not wide enough.

Anti Choice Christian Terrorists

Anti Choice Christian Terrorists

The Hillcrest Clinic closed its doors on April 20, 2013. There were two main reasons for the closure.  One was that their patient load had declined over the last few years from 2,116 in 2009 to 1,629 in 2012.  As any business owner knows, you always have a bottom line to pay the bills and a decline that dramatic certainly affects the income.   Of course, one could say that that is “good news” in that fewer women were having abortions.  Let’s just hope there were fewer abortions because the women just elected to not have them, versus being pressured by the state or anti-abortion zealots.

More Christian Terrorists

More Christian Terrorists

The second – and main- reason was that regulations had recently been passed by the Commonwealth of Virginia under the guise of “enhancing patient safety” and, according to Caton, it would have cost the clinic about $500,000 to comply with the new rules.  The rules generally require the clinic to meet hospital-like design guidelines, such as hallway size, the number of parking spaces and number of toilets.  As if the patients in the clinic were being forced to pee outside.  That was too much of a price tag for Hillcrest, so they elected to close – which is exactly what these regulations are designed to do.

If there is any good news, it is that according State officials, of Virginia’s 20 abortion clinics, Hillcrest is the only one not seeking to have their license renewed.  No doubt, the Planned Parenthood clinics will embark on fundraisers to come up with the money and the independents, well, it’s hard to say what their strategy will be.  One thing that at least one clinic is hoping for is to stretch out the process until Virginia can elect a pro-choicer Governor this November.

Abortion

Abortion

“It’s a little bit bittersweet,” said Caton.  “But I also feel like for 40 years we’ve had the honor of providing compassionate care to the women in Tidewater who are faced with an unplanned pregnancy.”

In 1983, a man broke in to the clinic, poured kerosene throughout the office and set it ablaze. A year later, a cluster of pipe bombs exploded nearby, breaking a plate glass window of the bank branch on the first floor.  In May, 1989, six activists pushed their way into the building.  Then Salvi paid them a visit.

Despite the violence, the clinic staff never talked about closing.

The pen may indeed be mightier than the sword.

Abortion

Abortion

Janelle Templeton was a 27 year old mother of two living in West Philadelphia.  Hers was a tough neighborhood, overrun with prostitutes, drug dealers and neighbors who, like her, barely survived on assistance from the government.  She dropped out of high school in her sophomore year and when she found herself pregnant, she welcomed her babies into the world in the hope that they would ultimately escape the cycle of poverty that had trapped Janelle and her family for many years.

Then, about two years ago, Janelle learned that she was pregnant again.  It didn’t matter that she wasn’t sure who the father was.  What mattered was that she had been trying to eke out a good life for her two children and she knew – she just knew – that bringing another child into her world would make that dream all the more difficult to obtain.  So, she decided to have an abortion.

Abortion

Abortion

She did not have a computer, so she opened up the tattered Yellow Page directory that she had stored in the kitchen closet.  She opened it up and right at the front of the book she found the category “Abortion Services.”   Populating the page were several large ads for the several clinics in the Philadelphia area.  They all seemed to have the same picture of a pensive looking woman.  Among the items highlighted were the insurance plans they accepted (Janelle was on Medicaid), what kind of anesthesia they offered, and other miscellaneous services that meant nothing to her.  Looking at the addresses, she noted that most of them were in the downtown area but there was one that was just three bus stops away:   the Women’s Medical Center.

Since Medicaid did not pay for abortions, she knew she would have to pay cash for the abortion.  So, despite the proximity of that one clinic, she started calling the other clinics to price shop.  She soon learned that the price varied, depending on how many weeks pregnant she was.  She guessed that she was about 10 weeks pregnant at that point and was shocked to hear prices in the $400 range.  Then she called the Women’s Medical Center and was told the price was about one hundred dollars less than the other clinics.  It was a no brainer.  She quickly made the appointment without asking any more questions.  The clinic staff didn’t ask any either.

Abortion

Abortion

She ultimately borrowed the money and a few days later jumped on the bus to go to the clinic.  When she walked inside the facility, she didn’t take notice of the ripped carpet, the chairs with broken arms, the receptionist who didn’t make eye contact and just took the cash.  She didn’t realize how inexperienced the staff was, that they were working for $12 an hour and had little training in performing an ultrasound, administering anesthesia and handing out prescriptions.  Indeed, how was she to know that some of these staffpeople would ultimately plead guilty in court to numerous medical infractions?   Janelle basically was oblivious to the unsanitary conditions in this clinic.  She just needed that cheap abortion.

After a three hour wait, she was escorted to the back room.  Passing one room with an open door, she saw a woman on a table sobbing and noticed bloody gauze tissues tossed onto the floor.  She had a queasy feeling in her stomach but she knew it was too late to turn back.  The staff person escorted her into a small room with tattered wallpaper and was told to undress, put on a smock that smelled of urine and instructed to sit on the bare table.  She then started thinking about when she talked to one of the other clinics in Philadelphia and how nice the receptionist sounded and how it was a shame that her Medicaid would not pay for an abortion.  Then, her thoughts were interrupted…

“Hello, I’m Doctor Kermit Gosnell.”

Abortion

Abortion

My head has been spinning lately as I try to keep up with all of the anti-abortion legislation that has flying back and forth in various state legislatures.   For example, at this point fourteen states have trotted out measures to ban abortion prior to “viability” — the point at which a fetus could survive outside the uterus. These measures take three forms: banning all abortions, banning abortions at some point in the first trimester of pregnancy and banning abortions at 20 weeks after fertilization.

In addition, there are bills preventing employees of abortion clinics from providing sex education in schools, banning tax credits for abortion services and requiring clinics to give details to women about fetal development and abortion health risks. There’s also a ban on abortion based solely on the gender of the fetus.

The most interesting law to me is the one in North Dakota which prohibits abortions from being performed after six weeks.  Think about that one for a second.  Hell, how many women even know they are pregnant after six weeks?   And, I am not a doctor but I seem to recall that some abortion clinics would not perform an abortion that early for fear that they might not get all of the tissue.

The pro-choice movement has a right to be very concerned about this trend in the state legislatures.  The anti-abortion movement is feeling their oats and they are clearly consulting with each other, photocopying the bills that passed in other states and pushing it in theirs.  And in many of those states, they’ve got the majorities so there ain’t much that we can do about it (except fundraise).

Abortion

Abortion

There is hope, however.  And it comes from the offices of the Center for Reproductive Rights and the ACLU Reproductive Freedom project.

For 20 years, the Center for Reproductive Rights has used the law to advance reproductive freedom as a fundamental human right that all governments are legally obligated to protect, respect, and fulfill.  They are an aggressive bunch of lawyers who are usually the first to jump in when some whacky anti-abortion bill is signed into law.  Within 24 hours, they are at the court filing for an injunction in an effort to prohibit the law from taking effect.

The ACLU believes that the decision whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term is essential to women’s equality, autonomy, and dignity, with implications for every aspect of her life – her educational aspirations, career goals, economic status, and, more broadly, her ability to live the life she planned.   Like the Center, the ACLU’s cadre of attorneys is working on a myriad of issues related to abortion.

Make no mistake about it, folks.  The action is now swinging to the courts.  Most of the legislatures have done their dirty work for this year and these two groups will now challenge most of those laws as they have been doing for many years.

But I would be remiss if I did not mention that the work these groups perform costs money.  Lots of money.  Heck, didn’t you see “Erin Brockovich?”   Remember how much that case cost?   Well, these two groups face the same daunting task.  They go into these cases and spend a lot of money with no guarantee that they’ll win and/or get attorneys fees at the end.  And if anyone thinks that the abortion clinics have that kind of money to fight these laws, think again.

So, if you are thinking of sending a dollar to some pro-choice group, you might think about these two organizations because, until we can change the legislatures in some of these ass-backwards states, the only defense we have against these attacks is in the courts.

« Previous PageNext Page »