Cheryl Sullenger

Courts continue glacial pace as Kansas abortion clinics run amok

Cheryl Sullenger
By Cheryl Sullenger

Topeka, Kansas, August 1, 2012 (OperationRescue.org) – The State of Kansas will ask for summary judgment at a hearing on Friday, August 3, 2012, in a suit brought by Kansas abortionists challenging a clinic licensing law passed last year.

“We will be watching that hearing very closely,” said Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue and Pro-Life Nation. “Given the history of abortion abuses in Kansas, the enforcement of the new law cannot come soon enough.”

Pro-life groups in Kansas have been trying to pass clinic licensing requirements since 2003 in order to add a layer of protection for women seeking services at abortion clinics that have never been inspected or accountable to any safety standards.

But for years, during the radically pro-abortion administrations of Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, who now serves the Obama Administration as Secretary of Health and Human Services, and her hand-picked successor, Mark Parkinson, common sense regulations meant to protect women from exploitation by unaccountable abortion clinics were repeatedly vetoed even though they had the overwhelming support of the public and the State Legislature.

Under the Sebelius/Parkinson administrations abortion clinics ran amok while they were politically shielded from accountability under Kansas law.

Finally, a sweeping change in the composition of state government in 2010 enabled the long-sought clinic licensing legislation to be signed into law. Just as the law was to go into effect, it was blocked by a Federal Court judge in a case filed by abortion clinics that have histories of resisting oversight and engaging in abortion abuses.

“This is a case of the inmates running the asylum,” said Newman. “Abortion clinics have been caught red-handed breaking the law or admitting to abuses, yet they have managed to keep the authorities, who have the law on their side, on the defensive.”

The court delays have been insufferable. The challenge was first filed in Federal Court in June, 2011, where the court blocked enforcement of the law. When it appeared that the Federal Court would not rule in their favor, the abortion clinics involved in the case dropped their Federal suit and refiled in state court. This reset the case and caused almost a year of delays.

Regulating abortion clinics

Clinic licensing and safety regulations have been passed in several states, including more recently Virginia, Maryland, and Mississippi. In Pennsylvania, several abortion clinics closed rather that bring their clinics up to standards when inspections conducted after an 18-year hiatus discovered massive deficiencies. Such inspections, like those required by the Kansas law, have been found to be constitutional and a vital function of the state, which is tasked with the duty to protect the public’s health and safety.

A requirement that abortionists maintain local hospital privileges has passed Constitutional muster in Missouri, yet remains inexplicably under injunction in Kansas.

There are three abortion clinics left in Kansas and each has its own set of problems, which abortion clinic licensing will only partially address.

Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood

The largest abortion clinic in Kansas is Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood. In 2003, it came under investigation for failing to report child rape. In May, 2009, Operation Rescue again documented Planned Parenthood’s willingness to ignore suspected child sex abuse. Yet, political interference ensured that Planned Parenthood was never charged.

In 2007, Planned Parenthood was finally charged with 107 criminal counts related to illegal late-term abortions and manufacturing evidence to conceal their crimes. The case languished in the State Supreme Court for years on Planned Parenthood appeals. Last fall, it was revealed that evidence critical to the state’s case was shredded under the Sebelius administration without notice to the appropriate authorities, causing the judge to dismiss the most serious charges. However, 58 criminal counts remain pending. Just three weeks ago, District Attorney Steve Howe announced that he had lost his expert witness in the case and was struggling to replace him. A status hearing is set for August 20, 2012, with no trial date in sight.

After five years, District Attorney Howe, who was a political rival of the prosecutor who initially brought the charges, has failed to bring the criminal case against Planned Parenthood to trial.

“Howe’s lack of will to prosecute crimes against Planned Parenthood is more than troubling and may be motivated by political animosity against his predecessor,” said Newman. “In the meantime, Planned Parenthood is making a monkey out of him. It’s embarrassing.”

This case only serves to re-emphasize the need to enact clinic licensing and safety requirements that are enforceable by medical regulators who understand that patient safety should come before politics. In the meantime, Planned Parenthood remains out of control and unaccountable.

Central Women’s Services, AKA Aid for Women

Earlier this year, a confidential informant leaked documents to Operation Rescue from Central Family Medical, also known as Aid for Women, that indicated the abortion clinic had illegally dumped private patient medical information and bloody refuse from abortions. Additional documents indicated that the Kansas City abortion clinic never reported incidents of suspected abuse. Videos taken outside the clinic showed women who were unable to walk without assistance being dangerously released after abortions.

Operation Rescue filed complaints with various state agencies demanding an investigation and enforcement of Kansas laws. While the Kansas Board of Healing Arts was quick to launch such an investigation, the Attorney General’s office has remained disturbingly unresponsive.

“It has been three months since we reported the violations at Central Family Medical and revealed the fact that disgraced abortionist Malcom Knarr, whose medical license was revoked for dangerous abortion practices in 1994, owns and operates the clinic. Yet it continues to operate doing business as usual. It appears that there is no sense of urgency to protect women from this predatory abortion business,” said Newman.

Central Family Medical was the first clinic denied licensure before the Court halted enforcement. It has joined with abortionist Herbert Hodes in his suit challenging the law.

Center for Women’s Health

The father-daughter team of abortionists, Herbert Hodes and Traci Nauser, originally brought suit to block the new clinic licensing law, refusing to submit their Center for Women’s Health abortion clinic to state inspection.

Hodes is no stranger to headlines in the Sunflower State.

According to the Wichita Eagle, Hodes testified on March 9, 2011, before the House Committee on Federal and State Affairs. The Eagle reported, “[Hodes] estimated that Kansas has seen ‘five deaths in the last five years’ because of abortion procedures.” Hodes later changed his tune and denied any abortion-related deaths occurred during that time span after his comments prompted demands from Operation Rescue that the Attorney General’s office investigate the spate of unreported abortion deaths.

Hodes and AFW also were part of a Federal lawsuit tried in 2006 challenging the state’s mandatory child abuse reporting requirements. They argued that abortion clinics should not be required to report suspected cases of child sex abuse when girls under 14 come to them for abortions. While initially the judge ruled that abortion clinics could report at their discretion, a change in the law later rendered that absurd ruling moot.

Other Kansas abortion abuses

The Kansas State Board of Healing Arts revoked the license of abortionist Ann Kristin Neuhaus last month after it was determined that she had for years improperly referred women for late-term abortions for mental health reasons after conducting negligently inadequate patient interviews that she attempted to pass off as mental health evaluations. The revocation was the result of a complaint filed by Operation Rescue. The abortion clinic she worked at had no oversight nor had it ever been inspected to ensure compliance with Board regulations or other laws.

The license of another Kansas abortionist, Krishna Rajanna in 2005 after it was documented that he ran a filthy abortion mill that was so nasty that one police detective later testified before the Legislature about the horrific conditions he experienced. The clinic had never been inspected and would still be operating if not for pro-life activists who documented and exposed the filth.

Operation Rescue’s own headquarters is now located in a former abortion clinic where appalling conditions existed, including mold and pest infestations, leaky roof and plumbing, a clogged drain in the room where abortion equipment was washed, and dangerously out of code electrical. It operated for 23 years without a state inspector ever darkening its doorway.

Need for another enforcement avenue

Gaining enforcement of the law by elected politicians in abortion-related cases has always been the weak link in Kansas, with the exception of former Attorney General Phill Kline.

“Politicians as prosecutors have never worked well in Kansas,” said Newman. “They either protect the abortion clinics as their ideological soul-mates or are too concerned about their political careers to aggressively take on the abortion cartel. Either way, they have left vulnerable women open for exploitation by abortion clinics that have been able to so far get away with defying the law.”

Clinic regulations would add another avenue of enforcement by regulators that have the legal authority to close dangerous abortion clinics that cannot or will not comply with the law. That is a level of oversight that has never existed in Kansas.

“We are praying the State’s motion is successful,” said Newman. “Women in Kansas simply cannot afford the risk to their lives and health that comes with more delay.”

Take action

Operation Rescue continues to ask the public to express concerns to District Attorney Steve Howe, asking him to aggressively prosecute Planned Parenthood.

Johnson County District Attorney Steve Howe
Voice: (913) 715-3000
E-mail: [email protected]
The public is also encouraged to contact Attorney General Derek Schmidt and ask for an investigation into complaint against Central Family Medical for the non-reporting of abuse and other violations.

KS Atty. Gen. Derek Schmidt
Voice: 1-888-428-8436
Fax: (785) 296-6296
E-Mail form: Click here

Help us expose Planned Parenthood

$5 helps us reach 1,000 more people with the truth!


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Dr. Miriam Grossman speaks to large audience in Mississauga, Ontario Steve Jalsevac/LifeSite
Lianne Laurence

VIDEO: How DO you to talk to kids about sex? US sex-ed critic gives practical tips

Lianne Laurence
By Lianne Laurence

MISSISSAUGA, ON, August 27, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) – Talking to their children about sex is “anxiety provoking to say the least,” for parents, says American sex-ed expert, Dr. Miriam Grossman.

“Some people just can’t even do it, and that’s okay,” the New York-based psychiatrist told the crowd of 1,000 who packed a Mississauga conference hall August 18 to hear her critique of the Ontario Liberal government’s controversial sex-ed curriculum.

After Grossman explained how the Liberal sex-ed curriculum is dangerously flawed and ideologically driven, she used the question-and-answer session to give parents much appreciated and sometimes humorous practical advice on how to teach their children about “the birds and the bees.”

“If you feel you can’t do it, maybe there’s someone else in the family or in the constellation of people that you know you can trust that could do it,” said Grossman, author of “You’re teaching my child WHAT?” and an internationally sought-after speaker on sex education.

A child, adolescent and adult psychiatrist with 12 years’ clinical experience treating students at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) clinic, Grossman said explaining sexuality and procreation to children is “a process,” that “shouldn’t ideally happen all at once. A child is not a miniature adult, and absorbs…new information differently than adults do.”

And parents need to be sure just what their child wants to know.

To illustrate this, Grossman referred to her earlier story about a father who gave his son every detail on human procreation after the boy asked him, “Dad, where do I come from?”

After the father finished, his son replied, “Well, that’s funny, because Johnny told me that he came from Montreal.”

“Try to find out what your child is really getting at, and, don’t give it all at once,” Grossman said. “You start with a little bit at a time…and you know, there’s so many variables here, and people have their own traditions and their own ways of explaining things, and something that might be right for my family might not be right for your family.”

She also advised that, when confronted with a four, five, six or seven-year-old asking about a pregnant woman, or where babies come, a parent can ask, “What a good question that is. What do you think?”

And parents can also legitimately put off the discussion when appropriate, telling the child, “That’s really not something you need to know about right now.”

“Wow, what a novel idea: Telling a child that they could wait until they’re older to discuss that subject,” Grossman said, adding that parents wouldn’t brook a six- or even fifteen-year-old child asking how much money they made or had in the bank. “Excuse me? Not every subject has to be an open book.”

However, the time will come when a child needs to know “about how her body’s going to change, about reproduction, about how a new life is created.”

That time, Grossman advised, is puberty, or “as puberty is beginning,” and this is especially so for girls, who, if unprepared for the surprise onset of menstruation “might think [they’re] dying.”

“The actual nitty-gritty about the birds and the bees and intercourse” can “be told in bits and pieces, or it can be told all at once, if you feel it’s necessary,” she said, adding that it’s beneficial if the parent acknowledges his or her awkwardness, because the child will think: “This must be such an important subject that my mother or my father is sitting there squirming, but he’s doing it anyway. I’m really loved.”

“And the children need to understand that as you grow up, you change a lot, not only physically but emotionally,” Grossman said, “and what may seem odd or disgusting when you’re ten years old, or whatever age, it becomes something very special and beautiful when you’re older and you’ll understand it later. You don’t have to understand it now.”


Know your child and guard your home

But as an essential foundation for this discussion, parents must both know their children and guard their home from the encroachments of a culture that Grossman described as “very, very sexualized” and “really horrible.”

“Children need parents who are loving but are also firm and authoritative,” she asserted.  “They don’t need best friends. They need us to guide them, to know what they’re doing, to be on top of what they’re doing.

So parents need to be aware of whom their child is “hanging around with, and what kind of movies are they watching…what’s going on with your child.”

“You need to know that anyway, even if it’s not about sex education,” she pointed out. “Try and know your child. Every child is different.”

And Grossman emphasized that it is “extremely important to be careful about what your child is exposed to in the home, in terms of television and Internet, obviously.”

Children need to understand that “just like you have garbage you take out of the house, you put it in the garbage bin, it’s dirty, it smells…there are other things that also don’t belong in the house.”

And children learn quickly what is, and is not, permissible inside the home, Grossman said. “Me, I keep kosher…If I go into a store, my kids know from a very young age, we don’t eat that.”

So they are used to the idea of “the world outside and the inside world, of inside your home, and inside your heart as well.”

Parents can also convey this by telling their children that “the world is an upside-down place, and sometimes the most special, holy subjects are…just thrown in the gutter. And that’s a bad thing. In our family, in our tradition, we don’t do that.”

“Sexuality is one of the subjects that in this upside-down world, it is sometimes just in the gutter,” she said. “And so I want you to tell your child to come to me when you have questions, I will give you the straight story about it.”

Grossman herself is “not even sure,” as she stated in her seminar, that sex education should be in the schools: “I believe sex education should be at home for those parents that want to do it.”

She also noted that parents “can make mistakes. We all make lots of mistakes but it’s okay, you can always come back and do it differently,” adding that this is “another wonderful message for your child. You know what, it’s okay to make mistakes, you can always go back and try and fix it.”

Grossman urged parents to visit her Facebook page, website and blog. “I have so much information you can get there that you’ll find useful,” and added that she will be publishing books for children, and has posted her critique of New York City’s sex-ed curriculum, which is similar to Ontario’s.

The parental backlash to that sex-ed curriculum, set to roll out in the province’s publicly funded schools this September, has been “amazing” Grossman noted.

Grossman’s seminar was sponsored by Mississauga-based HOWA Voice of Change along with the Canadian Families Alliance, an umbrella group representing more than 25 associations and 200,000 Ontarians opposed to the curriculum. The report on her devastating critique of the sex-ed curriculum can be found here, and the video here.

Ontario readers may find information and sign up for a September 2 province-wide protests at MPPs offices here. So far, there are protests planned for 92 of Ontario’s 107 constituencies. The parents’ movement seeking removal of the curriculum is urging all concerned citizens to join this special effort to influence individual Ontario legislators.

See related reports:

Ontario’s dangerous sex-ed is indoctrination not science says U.S. psychiatrist to large audience

Videos: US psychiatrist tells parents “stand firm” against dangerous sex-ed

See the LifeSiteNews feature page on the Ontario sex-ed curriculum containing nearly 100 LifeSite articles related to the issue

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Giulio Napolitano / Shutterstock.com
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete

,

Did the pope just endorse a gay children’s book? Of course not, says Vatican

Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete
By Pete Baklinski

ROME, August 28, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) -- While mainstream media is gushing with news today that Pope Francis allegedly praised a children’s book that promotes gender theory, the Vatican is decrying what they called the "manipulation" of a cordial letter from an official in the Secretariat of State to suggest that the Vatican is promoting teachings contrary to the Gospel.

Italian children’s author Francesca Pardi was reported by The Guardian to have submitted a parcel of children’s books promoting the acceptance of homosexuality and gender theory to Pope Francis in June after Venice’s mayor Luigi Brugnaro publicly banned the author’s newest book, Piccolo Uovo (Little Egg), from children’s schools. The book was criticized by pro-family leaders for promoting non-natural family structures of two men and two women.

In a letter accompanying the books, Pardi wrote: “Many parishes across the country are in this period sullying our name and telling falsehoods about our work which deeply offends us. We have respect for Catholics. ... A lot of Catholics give back the same respect, why can’t we have the whole hierarchy of the church behind us?”

The Guardian is reporting that Pardi has now “found an unlikely supporter in Pope Francis,” who through his staff has responded to the author and is presented as “praising her work.” It quotes the following from a July 9 letter to Pardi from the Vatican.

“His holiness is grateful for the thoughtful gesture and for the feelings which it evoked, hoping for an always more fruitful activity in the service of young generations and the spread of genuine human and Christian values,” wrote Peter B. Wells, a senior official at the Vatican Secretariat of State, in a the letter The Guardian is reporting it has seen.  

While the letter gently calls the author to use her talents to spread “genuine human and Christian values,” The Guardian takes it as the pope’s endorsement of gender theory.

“Pope Francis sends letter praising gay children's book,” the paper’s headline states. “Italian book that explores different family types including same sex was banned by mayor of Venice, but pontiff becomes unlikely supporter,” reads the subtitle.

In a press release that Vatican spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi sent to LifeSiteNews on Friday, the vice speaker of the Vatican, Ciro Benedettini, made clear that the friendly reply letter to the author in no way approves of attitudes or positions that are contrary to Catholic teaching and the Gospels.

The Vatican's statement also says that in the original letter from the secretariat of state Wells merely "acknowledged receipt" of the materials sent by Pardi, and also made clear that the letter was private and not meant for publication. 

"In no way does a letter from the Secretary of State intend to endorse behaviors and teachings not in keeping with the Gospel," says the statement, decrying the "manipulation" of the letter.

Benedettini said the blessing of the pope at the end of the letter was meant to be for the author herself, and not to affirm positions concerning gender theory that are contrary to the Church's teaching. Using the letter to this end is erroneous, he said.

Pope Francis has strongly condemned the notion of “gender theory” on numerous occasions, saying that it is an “error of the human mind that leads to so much confusion.”

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock
Lisa Bourne

,

Poll suggests most US Catholics wrongly believe Pope Francis backs gay ‘marriage’

Lisa Bourne
By Lisa Bourne

August 28, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) -- A considerable majority of U.S. Catholics are in conflict with Church teaching on abortion and marriage, a new study says, and a startling number of those also believe Pope Francis backs homosexual “marriage.”

Despite Church teachings, Catholics in America also closely parallel the general populace in their support for abortion and homosexual “marriage,” falling short in the Biblical call to be “in the world but not of the world.”

The findings suggest what many Catholics have said is a climate of confusion in the midst of the Francis pontificate. Concerns over that confusion prompted a coalition of pro-family groups to respond with an international petition effort asking the pope to reaffirm Church teaching, drawing more than a half-million signatures.

The survey, conducted by Public Religions Research Institute, found that 60 percent of all U.S. Catholics favor legalized homosexual “marriage,” compared to 55 percent of all Americans. Likewise, 51 percent of Catholics think that abortion should be legal in all or most cases, with 53 percent of the general population holding this view.

The Catholic Church teaches that marriage is a sacramental union between one man and one woman, mirroring Christ and the Church respectively as bridegroom and bride.

The Church also teaches that life begins at conception, that each human life possesses dignity as a child of God and is to be afforded protection, making abortion an intrinsic evil.

Catholics, accounting for 22 percent of adults in the U.S. population, have a favorable view of Pope Francis, the study said, but they are very confused about his take on homosexual “marriage.”

Of the Catholics who back homosexual “marriage,” 49-percent also think the leader of the Catholic Church backs it along with them. Fifteen percent of those Catholics who oppose homosexual “marriage” also mistakenly believe Pope Francis supports it.

Pope Francis has made numerous statements in support of life, marriage and family, but the confusion remains.

Click "like" to support Catholics Restoring the Culture!

"After Ireland and the U.S. Supreme Court both approved same-sex 'marriage,' a strong reaffirmation of Church teaching could save the sacred institution of marriage, strengthen the family and dispel the lies of the homosexual revolution," TFP Student Action Director John Ritchie stated.  "Young Catholics -- even non-Catholics -- look to the Church as a beacon of morality and stability in our Godless culture, but some of our shepherds have issued confusing statements."

TFP Student Action is a part of the lay Catholic organization American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property, and is part of the alliance behind the Filial Appeal, the petition asking the Holy Father to reinforce Catholic teaching at the Vatican’s upcoming Synod on the Family in October.

Ritchie explained how the confusion was aiding the Church’s enemies, and warned of the potential consequences.

"This prayerful petition asks Pope Francis to clear up the moral confusion that's been spreading against Natural and Divine Law," he said. "If the enemies of the family continue to chip away at holy matrimony, the future of the family and civilization itself will be in even more serious peril."

At press time more than 500,000 signature had been gathered for the appeal, including five cardinals, 117 bishops and hundreds of well-known civic leaders.

Share this article

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook