Fake Abortions?

[PoorKnight]

Hey all,

I recently received a question from a fellow Catholic asking if I had ever heard of abortion clinics performing ‘fake abortions’ where they tell the girl / woman that they are pregnant, when in fact they are not, then do a procedure and take their money.

Has anyone heard of this and if so is there documentation of it anywhere: a book or article that mentions this ect?

Thanks and God Bless,
Poor Knight for Christ and His Church

 

[mikekle]

Ive never heard of such a thing, but imo, its the same thing when a drug user goes to buy drugs and the dealer sells them fake stuff…same scenario, and they probably deserve such a thing in the first place. Maybe that should be a ‘sign’ to the woman that what she is doing is wrong, even if she doesnt want the baby, there are PLENTY of people that do.

 

[biggybig]

I have. I cannot remember the details, but I remember reading a news story about an abortion doctor, I believe, being prosecuted for doing that.

 

[Jeanne_S]

Hey all,

I recently received a question from a fellow Catholic asking if I had ever heard of abortion clinics performing ‘fake abortions’ where they tell the girl / woman that they are pregnant, when in fact they are not, then do a procedure and take their money.

Has anyone heard of this and if so is there documentation of it anywhere: a book or article that mentions this ect?

Thanks and God Bless,
Poor Knight for Christ and His Church

I volunteered at a crisis pregnancy center as a counselor.We provided pregnancy tests,then counseled women on the various options re care that was provided for their babies.Part of the training process involved watching a video of former Drs and nurses involved with PP abortion clinics.One nurse testified to the fact that PP was caught doing the very thing you mentioned.As a result,any woman wanting an abortion had to have a pregnancy test done somewhere other than PP. We were instructed that if any client seemed intent on abortion,to
not give her any written proof of pregnancy that she could then take to PP to obtain an abortion.

 

[Patti_M]

In a documentary called “Blood Money” a woman who ran an abortuary in Houston talked about performing an abortion on a girl/girls who wasn’t pregnant. Maybe google the title. It is a pretty long documentary.

 

[Beryllos]

I haven’t heard of that.

Are you sure you are not confusing this with “fake abortion clinics”? Google that and you will find that there are crisis pregnancy centers which are designed to bring in women who are seeking abortion services and try to talk them out of it. They are not really clinics, and they do not perform medical procedures. They are more like counseling centers. I am sure they mean well as far as protecting life and so on, but it is not right if they use deceptive advertising or if they are not truthful about their mission when women come to their office.

 

[Beryllos]

P.S. to the above post: Of course there is no problem with crisis pregnancy centers which are truthful.

 

[MaryT777]

I have. I cannot remember the details, but I remember reading a news story about an abortion doctor, I believe, being prosecuted for doing that.

Yes, I will try to find the link. A Doctor went to prison for doing as such.

Mary.

 

[Xeyed818]

Hey all,

I recently received a question from a fellow Catholic asking if I had ever heard of abortion clinics performing ‘fake abortions’ where they tell the girl / woman that they are pregnant, when in fact they are not, then do a procedure and take their money.

Has anyone heard of this and if so is there documentation of it anywhere: a book or article that mentions this ect?

Thanks and God Bless,
Poor Knight for Christ and His Church

Posted: Dec 09, 2014 12:54 PM EST

OKLAHOMA CITY - Attorney General Scott Pruitt has charged an Oklahoma abortion doctor with fraud for prescribing abortion-inducing drugs to patients who were not pregnant.

According to the AG’s office, Dr. Naresh G. Patel, operating the Outpatient Services for Women clinic in Warr Acres, was charged on Tuesday with three counts of obtaining money under a false pretense after** improperly prescribing abortion-inducing drugs to patients that he falsely identified as pregnant.**

Undercover agents from the Oklahoma Medical Licensure Board, the Oklahoma City Police Department and the Attorney General’s Office set up appointments with Patel where the doctor performed ultrasounds and pregnancy tests on the women where he is alleged to have fraudulently identified each undercover agent as pregnant. Afterward, he prescribed them an abortion-inducing drug, provided directions for administering it and charged the female agents for the unnecessary treatment, according to the AG’s office.

news9.com/story/27585545/oklahoma-abortion-doctor-charged-with-fraud

Seems like it would be easy to tell a woman she was pregnant and offer the abortion-inducing pill. If she wanted to ‘think it over’, that could be a potential undoing - unless required to take the pill in the office.

For a D&C type abortion, the woman most likely has symptoms (and taken a home pregnancy test) before seeking an abortion. Back in the late 70s, they had ‘morning-after D&Cs’, kinda like the RU-486 pill of today. They were done (legally) before pregnancy was confirmed. (Pregnancy confirmation, or not, was done with the tissue from the procedure.)

What would happen if the clinic told a woman she was pregnant but the woman went home, thought it over - and decided to have the baby. Except no baby grew. Of course, the clinic could then claim ‘spontaneous abortion’ occurred, but it would be risky business (I would think).

The usual underlying question I’ve seen in connection with this - is whether the woman is still ‘guilty’ of an abortion even if she wasn’t pregnant in the first place. Many say, “Yes” because the error lies in the intent.

While researching this, I found an interesting article on the timeline of pregnancy tests:

1350 BCE

One of the earliest written records of a urine-based pregnancy test can be found in an ancient Egyptian document. A papyrus described a test in which a woman who might be pregnant could urinate on wheat and barley seeds over the course of several days: “If the barley grows, it means a male child. If the wheat grows, it means a female child. If both do not grow, she will not bear at all.”

Testing of this theory in 1963 found that 70 percent of the time, the urine of pregnant women did promote growth, while the urine of non-pregnant women and men did not. Scholars have identified this as perhaps the first test to detect a unique substance in the urine of pregnant women, and have speculated that elevated levels of estrogens in pregnant women’s urine may have been the key to its success.

history.nih.gov/exhibits/thinblueline/timeline.html

PJ