News

CHICAGO, IL, August 31, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – An Illinois appeals court rejected on Friday an abortion remorse lawsuit, denying the woman’s argument that she is entitled to damages against the abortion clinic. The woman alleged that the clinic staff had a duty to tell her that she was terminating the life of a human being as a matter of biological fact.

“It’s sad that judges are willing to compromise a woman’s health,” Georgette Forney, the co-founder of the Silent No More Awareness Campaign, an organization of men and women who regret their abortions, told LifeSiteNews.com.

“If [the lawsuit] wasn’t related to abortion, but to a transgender person who had changed their mind, [the court] would have been more understanding … A woman’s pain isn’t being acknowledged in order to protect the right to abortion,” she said.

Image

The plaintiff, identified only as Mary Doe, had an abortion at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Chicago in 2004, before which she says she had specifically asked a clinic counselor if her unborn child was a human being. Two years later, she filed a malpractice action against the clinic based upon the fact that the counselor had erroneously told her no.

Science is agreed that human life begins at conception, at which point a unique, living human being with its own genetic structure comes into being. Some abortion proponents justify abortion, however, by saying that the unborn child is not yet a “person.”

Doe alleged wrongful death of her fetus, intentional infliction of emotional distress and a violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act.

She said that she would not have had the abortion if the clinic had told her that she was terminating the life of a human being.

“We echo the observation of the New Jersey Supreme Court (Acuna v. Turkish ruling),” said Justice Rodolfo Garcia in the 16-page opinion. “No court, regardless of where it sits, has found a common law duty requiring doctors to tell their pregnant patients that aborting an embryo, or fetus, is the killing of an existing human being.”

“The negative answer from the Planned Parenthood counselor to the plaintiff’s question of whether ‘there was already a human being in existence’ during the plaintiff’s intake evaluation simply reflects the opinion of Planned Parenthood on when life begins,” he said.

Doe’s attorney, New Jersey attorney Harold Cassidy, expressed his disappointment with the court’s decision, saying that he will ask the Illinois Supreme Court to hear the case.

“All we’re saying in this case is if a woman asks for that information, she is absolutely entitled to it,” he said. “What has happened here is Planned Parenthood replaced her judgment with theirs by denying her the scientific facts and giving her their philosophical viewpoints.”

0 Comments

    Loading...