Home » Ethics » Botched Abortion, Murder or something else?

Botched Abortion, Murder or something else?

The following story caused quite an uproar, which the media calls a “botched abortion”, but is it really?

Eighteen and pregnant, Sycloria Williams went to an abortion clinic outside Miami and paid $1,200 for Dr. Pierre Jean-Jacque Renelique to terminate her 23-week pregnancy.

Three days later, she sat in a reclining chair, medicated to dilate her cervix and otherwise get her ready for the procedure.

Only Renelique didn’t arrive in time. According to Williams and the Florida Department of Health, she went into labor and delivered a live baby girl.

What Williams and the Health Department say happened next has shocked people on both sides of the abortion debate: One of the clinic’s owners, who has no medical license, cut the infant’s umbilical cord. Williams says the woman placed the baby in a plastic biohazard bag and threw it out.

The woman involved will of course sue, but for what? Abortion is designed to eliminate the baby, and the clinic did exactly that, in a similar manner had the “doctor” arrived on time. What legal case exists — services performed as expected resulting in the death of a baby?

Of course, it also must be noted Obama’s stance in these matters matches exactly what the clinic did — refuse medical care to babies born alive and allow them to die. So the clinic rendered the service they were supposed to do (terminate the baby), and with the President supporting the policy of denying medical care to new babies.

With all this in mind, our question remains why the uproar? How can anyone be surprised by these events?

Suppose the “doctor” arrived on time, what would the sequence of events have been? Depending on the exact abortion procedure, he’d kill the baby — perhaps by crushing the skull and vacuuming out the brain, or by dismembering it in the womb. He’d then re-assemble the pieces on the table to be sure he got them all, then pack them in a biohazard bag and throw it out.

Is that much different than what actually happened?

So the question remains, why the concern? For the pro-life crowd, it happens every day across the country — why is this case so different? For the pro-abortion crowd, the “doctor” would do almost exactly what the owner did — so why does it matter? And the President supports denying newborn babies medical care, resulting in their death, so the actions have the support of the President.

Why does this case matter?



  1. Bobkat says:

    This is not too surprising considering what normally goes on at these clinics. How in the world can a “doctor” crush the skull of a normal healthy baby and vacuum it out and still live with themselves? This is the result of years of rationalization and relative moralizing that goes along with “Liberalism”.

    P.S. I stumbled upon your blog while searching for info on Lane County government. I live in Eugene Oregon and follow local blogs when I can find them. Do you live in this area?

  2. mah29001 says:

    Er, I’m no big ideologue when it comes to the abortion debate, but this disgusts me.

  3. carolineannem says:

    I’m not sure were this “story” came from, but it is medically and factually flawed, so it is quite suspicious. First, a 23-week pregnancy cannot be terminated through the methods described in the story. It can only be done through labor and delivery (or c-section). Next, a termination through L&D would have been done in a HOSPITAL, not a doctor’s office (reclining chair??). Next, once the cervix is being artificially dilated, it does not take 3 days to dilate, it would be 24 hours AT THE VERY MOST. Next, if a 23-week baby had been delivered vaginally, it would more than likely not survived. The bones in the baby’s skull are so weak (still more cartiledge than bone), a vaginal birth would have caused an enormous amount of brain damage and the baby certainly would not have been “healthy” as claimed by the author. Next, any doctor or medical professional would tell you a 23 week fetus is NOT VIABLE, and, if the baby was born alive (which I doubt), it would have died within minutes or hours. Next, if there was no compelling health issue to baby or mother, I am shocked a doctor’s office (clinic) would even consider, much less perform, the procedure. Next, labor is not of sudden onset and the mom most certainly would have known she was in labor and told the staff. Finally, if the woman did not want to carry the pregnancy to term, why would she have waited until the 23rd week? If you are going to try to shock people about the issue of abortion, at least get your story and facts straight.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: