Q: Why Is Gosnell in the News? A: Guilt

So many lies, where to begin?

We at DJ! predicted it the day after the story broke in January 2011. Kermit Gosnell would become the Fetus Fetishist Anti-Hero.

And the myth just keeps growing.

First, some facts. It is a gruesome story of greed, exploitation, desperation, poverty, drug abuse, gross regulatory incompetence, and not a little insanity.

You can read the grisly details at the Wiki link but here's the upshot.

In 2011, Gosnell, alongside various co-defendant employees, was charged with eight counts of murder resulting in part from gross medical malpractice in treatment of patients at his clinic, as well as 24 felony counts of illegal abortions beyond the 24 week limit, and charged with 227 misdemeanor counts of violating the 24-hour informed consent law. The murder charges related to a patient who died while under his care and seven newborns said to have been killed after being born alive during attempted abortions. In May 2013, he was convicted on three of the murder charges, 21 felony counts of illegal late-term abortion, and 211 counts of violating the 24-hour informed consent law. After his conviction, Gosnell waived his right of appeal in exchange for an agreement not to seek the death penalty. He was sentenced instead to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

That was last year and one would like to think that the state of Pennsylvania cleaned up its act so as to prevent any recurrence. Sadly but unsurprisingly no.

Will Pennsylvania learn anything from this experience? No, says Brenda Green. As I write, the state legislature has fast-tracked a bill that will ban any insurance plan that covers abortion from insurance exchanges set up under healthcare reform. That means more women forced to pay for abortion out of pocket—and more customers for unscrupulous providers. “That Gosnell was able to get away with his horrific practice does not prove new regulations are needed,” says Susan Schewel, executive director of the Women’s Medical Fund, which helps low-income women pay for their abortions. “It shows we need to enforce the laws we have.”

So why is the case in the news again?

Here's Ezra LeRant, claiming that Gosnell is the WORST EVER serial murderer (he's not and not by a very long chalk) that no one has ever heard of. And no one has heard of him because of media censorship! [Insert obligatory pearl-clutching Ezra-SHRIEK here.]

And here are two more Canadian bandwagon jumpers: ProWomanProLie and the frog on Brian Lilley's pad.

The occasion is that a couple of Irish "conservative" documentary-makers are trying to raise the dough for a made-for-TV movie about Gosnell. Note that these grifters' work includes attacking climate-change science and most recently the effects of fracking so an even-handed treatment of this subject seems unlikely.

After claiming censorship at KickStarter, they wound up at IndieGogo where they have raised $1.877 million with 8 days left on a $2.1 million goal.

And hey, now they have Sarah Palin on board too.

On Twitter there's a frantic effort among supporters to get to the goal before the deadline or all is lost. As far as I can tell, all these frantic supporters are fetus fetishists. (Check out #Gosnell and #GosnellMovie.)

I asked, because I'm truly curious, why do they think this movie needs to be made, what good would be served?

The answers aren't very clear. They continue to assert that there was a media black-out of the case. (This is a lie.) And that consequently "no one" knows about it.

At the Lilley link, there's a clip showing the filmmakers asking Any Old Assholes, or AOAs, (I have it on good authority that that is proper journalistic parlance) whether they can recognize a photo of Gosnell. Of course they can't, though one trooper ventures "Nelson Mandela?"

On Twitter one person said indignantly that a friend of his (?) had never heard of Gosnell until s/he told him/her. And now s/he is outraged. Why not send friend links to stories? I wondered. "Because print is dead," I was told. Um, OK.

They claim that there are hundreds, thousands, zillions of Gosnells out there and that pro-aborts are protecting them.

That would be another "no". Here is an account of responsible people, many of them abortion providers, trying to alert authorities to Gosnell's horror house. And here's an excerpt from a book detailing the National Association of Abortion Providers' dealings with Gosnell. (He wanted to join. They said: No Fucking Way.)

So what's the motivation here? Are they simply being revved by the likes of LifeShite and Big Nurse Stanek? Well, yes, of course.

Are these just RWNJ slacktivists thinking they're accomplishing something from their couches? No doubt.

But I think there's more to it. I think somewhere deep down there's a dim understanding that they themselves enabled Gosnell and by means of further idiotic regulations and laws, both onerous and picayune, are creating more of his kind.

They themselves are the authors of suffering, exploitation, and needless death.

It's simple guilt.

Anti-Choice: Voice in the Wilderness

Further to my most recent post, there are more indications that the fetus fetishists are increasingly nervous, especially over renewed resolve and activism in New Brunswick.

From the recent NB Liberal policy meeting:

The most significant shift from the weekend came on abortion rights as two resolutions were overwhelmingly approved by grassroots members. The resolutions broke from the policy first established by former Liberal premier Frank McKenna.

The two policies refer to family planning services and reproductive health but the meaning was clear: with the pending closure of the Morgentaler clinic, Liberals now support greater access to abortion in hospitals.

Wendy Robbins, a Liberal member, helped draft the wording of the resolutions.

"This is a clear signal that the party's moving beyond the position it's held in the past,” she said.

Even more interesting -- and encouraging to us sane people -- is this from a Telegraph-Journal story (behind paywall).

Geneviève Gagné, president of the New Brunswick Young Liberal Association, called for “access to a full-range of publicly funded family planning information and services.”

“I think every woman should have access to abortions or any information she needs to provide adequate family planning information to her,” the 20-year old Gagné said.

Gagné’s amendment came right after another delegate could not find a second person to support an amendment she had proposed to restrict abortion to medically necessary cases and to promote a culture of life.

Fredericton delegate Nancy MacAfee said she was surprised no one else in the room was willing to support her motion for right to life.

“I was flabbergasted. I know the mentality of people has changed a lot. … I felt like a voice in the wilderness,” she said.

Voice in the wilderness. Ayup.

Incrementalism: Admission of Futility?

Some time ago, I discovered the Wingnut Wedgie that divides fetus fetishists into abolitionists and incrementalists.

It has never gone away as an issue among them, with some demanding nothing less than absolute forced pregnancy for all and others, perhaps recognizing the futility of their cause, willing to settle for any kind of law at all.

As a first step, note, to a complete ban.

Here we go again with our pal, astroturfer and dominionist Mike Schouten, raising the question and seeming to invite discussion.

Here's a stunning admission. He acknowledges that defunding abortion -- the only remotely possible abortion restriction in Canada -- would affect only poor women. Or, in their preferred parlance, poor baybees.

All pro-lifers support efforts to defund abortion. By doing so, they support a process that would protect some children, but not others. Under defunding, abortion remains legal as long as the mother or the father pays for the abortion. Someone could argue, "I won't support that defunding law because it only saves poor babies while all the babies of rich mothers who can afford the abortion will still be terminated." That may be so, but defunding abortion is a step in the right direction.

Discriminatory as this is -- not to mention a rank violation of human rights -- he's okey-dokey with fucking over poor women and families, as a "step in the right direction."

Incrementalists and abolitionists seem often to line up in the Protestant fundy gang and the Vatican Taliban gang respectively, but that's not quite true.

Over at ProWomanProLie, a few people are discussing Schouten's gambit.

I found a comment by Melissa fascinating (bold mine).

Thank you, thank you, thank you for talking about this issue!! I was starting to think that incrementalism was the elephant in the room that we just were never going to talk about.

I’m an incrementalist myself, (and Catholic too, as if that matters). Truth of the matter is, though, I would bow out of this fight if we got to a certain incremental point (right now, I think that would be if abortion were limited to the embryonic stage of pregnancy, or the 1st trimester at the latest, although I could quite conceivably become so tired of the fight that I would bow out if we were to achieve a considerably less significant victory). I sometimes wonder if that is why the people who are opposed to incrementalism are so adamant–they know that they will consistently lose support as smaller gains are made.

DING-DING-DING! Give that woman a cupie doll!

This is precisely what the totalitarians fear. That if the tiniest restriction is placed on abortion, many if not most of the less fanatic opponents will say "There. Mission accomplished."

Given that legitimate fear, Campaign Lie's intent to focus on RU-486, or medical abortion, for this year's bunfest is a bit perplexing.

Say, for argument's sake, RU-486 is banned in Canada. (Unaccountably, it has still not been approved by Health Canada and sources suggest that the issue won't be decided until 2015.)

Would many fetus fetishists then declare victory and take up sane people's pursuits?

Seems possible at least.

But then the anti-abortion industry would lose a ton of money and political influence (such as it is).

My take: Schouten's raising of incrementalism now and CampaignLie's focus on RU-486 demonstrate that they've (nearly) given up.

The times they are a' changing. (See next blog post.)

Of course, we'll keep an eye on them, but it may be that the end is nearer than we think.

Canada Health Act: Then and Now, Nfld and NB

I have a question.

In this piece about what soon may be the only abortion clinic east of Montreal, the Athena Health Centre in St John's, there's this bit of history (emphasis mine).

According to a 1998 article in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, from the time the St. John’s Morgentaler clinic opened until 1993 the out-of-pocket cost for a woman having an abortion ranged from $400-$750, despite the fact abortion was covered by the Canada Health Act as a medically necessary procedure. In ’93, however, the province began paying the salaries of physicians at the Morgentaler clinic, enabling the clinic to reduce its fees. Then, in 1995, the federal government began forcing the provinces to cover the full cost of abortions for those eligible for provincial health care, and by 1998 the Government of Newfoundland was fully funding the medical service. The cost to the province today is about $1,000 per procedure.

The federal government began forcing provinces to fund abortion in 1995, yet somehow the memo to New Brunswick got lost in a time warp?

Now, nearly 20 years later, New Brunswick STILL hasn't got the message?

Alternatively, why did the 1995 feds force Newfoundland but somehow overlook New Brunswick?

Students of inequality and misogyny in Canada would like to know.

Conditional Pro-Choice

I realize that not everyone lurks in the dark recesses of the toobz that I do, but it would be hard to miss the brouhaha going on in the UK over Josie Cunningham.

Ms Cunningham wears many hats, as do we all, but it is her ambition to be a celebrity that has knickers in knots.

The telly show Big Brother was interested in her as a contestant (right word?) until it was revealed that she's preggers. Interest cooled.

No problemo, she responded, I'll have an abortion. (And she said so publicly, of which more anon.)

SHRIEEEEK!

How dare the hussy put her career and ambition ahead of procreation??1??1! (She has two children already, BTW.)

And much more, a lot of it unpublishable in a family-friendly blog like this. ;-)

So. Okey-dokey. The usual BS from the pro-forced pregnancy gang, but what's particularly pukey-making are the comments from what Aurgasmic yesterday termed the "conditional prochoice" side.

So fucking sick of these conditional Prochoice assholes. Either you think pregnant people are people or you don't.

— Auragasmic (@Auragasmic) April 23, 2014

"I'm pro-choice but she left it too long."

"I'm pro-choice but she's making a spectacle of herself."

(A good rule of thumb: if you start a statement "I'm x, but", you're probably not really x.)

Ms Cunningham is just like all of us who declined pregnancy because of other pressing matters: a job, an education, a career, whatever.

Shorter: There are no good or bad reasons for abortion. All reasons are valid. And if you're pro-choice, you know that.

This is the exact opposite phenom of Conditional Pro-Life.

And equally despicable.

ADDED: Some interesting "yabbut she's treating it flippantly" comments from the normally sensible folks at PZ Myers's joint..

Leveraging Laureen

Last night when the story of Laureen Harper first, hosting/sponsoring a cat video fundraising thingy -- in kitty ears to boot -- then dismissing a question from a young woman on missing and murdered indigenous women at that event hit the news, I was enraged but couldn't put my finger on exactly why.

Watch.



Then I read this:

Somebody needs to tell Laureen Harper that missing and murdered indigenous women isn't a cause... It's a national shame. #mmiw #cdnpoli

— Allison Fenske (@AllisonFenske) April 18, 2014

Yes.

True, I don't like cats. The time, attention, and money spent on them -- and pets in general -- makes me want to hurl. Laureen Harper is repeatedly referred to as a "cat foster-mom" though it's not clear that she herself does.

So, there's that on one side. People who go gooey over animals and whistle past a homeless person with a cap out on the sidewalk.

And on the other, the immense, ongoing national shame of at least 824 murdered and missing indigenous women in Canada. This government not only repeatedly and routinely dismisses any calls for action or inquiry, its treatment of indigenous peoples -- here and everywhere it or its minions have interaction with them -- is simply disgusting.

Laureen's callousness is not surprising then, but breathtaking nonetheless.

“We’re raising money for animals tonight. If you’d like to donate to animals, we’d love to take your money,” she said to lots of clapping, before suggesting dealing with the issue a different night: “tonight we’re here for homeless cats.”

So, now we come to Laureen Harper. I frankly don't give a rat's ass if she's living with her husband or the hunkiest RCMP officer -- of any gender -- in the land. I don't give a flying fuck what she wears, what she eats, what she says.

Because in Canada, mercifully, she is a complete nonentity, no matter what some sycophants would like.

Some commentators have tried to style prime ministers' wives as "First Lady of Canada", similar to the style of First Lady used in republics, but this is not a recognized title. Use of the term is based on the pervasive influence of American media and not a defined public role or title for the prime minister's spouse. In any case, both the spouse of the Canadian monarch and that of the Governor General of Canada take precedence over a prime minister's spouse, rendering the notion untenable.

We just do not *do* First Ladies in Canada (check the wiki link for some interesting people who have wrestled with the role).

Plus, there's that oh-so-Canajan thing of leaving families of politicians alone. "They weren't elected," the manners police sniff. "It just isn't done to attack them."

Unless, of course, the family members chose to become part of the political pageant. Like this.

The federal Conservatives have plotted a road map to a 2015 election campaign that counts on a massive donor- and voter-targeting effort, a communications onslaught, and a bid to “leverage” the popularity of Laureen Harper, the prime minister’s wife, according to documents obtained by the Star.

The simple fact is that Stephen Harper is perceived to be at the very least, a cold, controlling micro-manager, and at worst -- by a scarily increasing number of Canadians -- an outright psychopath.

In short, he has a teensy problem with that whole "human" shtick.

Enter Laureen, who it is hoped/prayed can if not "humanize" him, at least "demonsterfy" him.

It's been tried repeatedly, to little success, whether in an awkward kiss or in sketchy panda embrace.

But hope springs eternal in the CON sausage factory. They're at it again -- now with homeless cats.

Pro tip: If you're going to try to "leverage" someone with as little natural charm as Laureen, get her some fucking media/public speaking training. Try to get her to understand in advance that all "good causes" are not equivalent, and in particular that 800+ missing and murdered women are not a "good cause" just like spaying stray cats.

(Hm. Maybe the issues are analogous in such twisted brains.)

To sum up: Laureen is NOT First Lady. She IS fair game. She DID put herself in a totally frivolous situation. She DID fuck up. In CAT ears. (Imagine the withering look an aide would get with: "Hey, Mrs. Obama, we want you to wear these really cute cat ears.")

But maybe the whole exercise was not for naught. On the YouTube page with the Shit Harper Did video, there was this comment from someone named Paul Gillett.

Before reading about this in the news today, I wasn't aware of the problem of murder in the Indigenous community. Though I don't fully agree with this activists' tactics, I have to say, good job. I also think it is troubling that the conservatives would use the Prime Minister's wife to manipulate Canadians.

I end with this tweet. This was tongue-in-cheek from a friend, but I got many other similar ones -- not so cheeky -- last night.

@fernhilldammit “Shut up about #MMIW, we’re talking about homeless cats” - Laureen Harper’s legacy @Collyw0bbles

— Johnny B (@MayorJeebus) April 18, 2014

ADDED: Share your pet pic. From here.

Abortion in Atlantic Canada: GAME ON!

When I was a youngster, the battle for abortion rights in Canada was on. Even as a poor student, I contributed regularly to Canadian Abortion Rights Action League and continued until we won. Natch, I turned my bod out when required too.

Now it's the current generation's turn.

This is winnable. And it will be fun for the young'uns. We haven't had a good feminist dust-up in Canada in ages.

It's got all the elements: a petition, rallies in Fredericton, PEI, Halifax and elsewhere across the country starting tomorrow, Thursday, April 17.

Politics enters in of course, especially in an election year, which seems to spook the fetus fetishists, who must realize the clock is ticking LOUDLY on their antediluvian attitudes.

Plus, of course, the legal battle, instigated by Dr Morgentaler, which has to date provided a handy out for the government.

Health Minister Ted Flemming has declined to comment, citing the lawsuit the late Henry Morgentaler launched against the provincial government in 2002, demanding the government pay for procedures at this clinic.

"That lawsuit is still before the courts, it's still an open file before the courts, so beyond that I'm not prepared to comment further," Flemming has said.

Oopsie. Lawsuit has been withdrawn.

Besides the cross-country support, this is a very real issue in PEI, where there are NO abortions performed. About 10% of the procedures at the NB clinic were done for Island women.

In light of that, I found this absolutely astonishing.

A search of Hansard, the official written record of debate in the P.E.I. legislature, shows the word abortion has only come up in debate three times since 1996.

THREE times in nearly 20 years??????

The silence is being shattered in Atlantic Canada.

And it's gonna be FUN!



Previous DJ! coverage of New Brunswick and PEI.


ADDED: LEAF weighs in.

UPDATE: Now, a way to donate to the cause.

PSA: Something You Can Do about Identity Theft

I was once the victim of identity theft. It was minor: somebody writing letters to the editor in my name (I was a small-fish local activist). I kicked up a shitstorm, got retractions. All good.

But the revelations about the theft of data from the Canada Revenue Agency are more worrying.

There is a very nasty scam that can be perpetrated completely without your knowledge until it jumps up to bite you on the ass. And it can take years to unscrew.

With some really basic info on you, bad guys can apply for and potentially get credit of various sorts in your name. If they're successful, they run up debt and ruin your credit rating in the process.

And you won't find out until you apply for a credit card or a mortgage or something and get refused.

Luckily, there something you can do and it's FREE.

There are two credit rating agencies that want to sell you all kinds of credit monitoring programs, but that will also (must have been arm-twisted by government) provide some info on your credit rating for FREE.

Their sites manage to hide the FREE service rather well, but I sussed them out this morning and here they are.

TransUnion and Equifax.

Smarty-pantses say you should check on this regularly. I last did it about 10 years ago when I heard of the scam, but I'm on it again now.

You're welcome.

Abortion in New Brunswick: It's Time

By now you've heard that the Morgentaler Clinic in Fredericton (one of only two abortion clinics east of Montreal!) is closing. CBC report and Al Jazeera report with photos and tweets.

What I hadn't realized is that New Brunswick is the original home of the TRAP law. TRAP (Targetted Regulation of Abortion Providers) laws are increasingly common in the abortion wars in the US.

But New Brunswick blazed a trail, legislating against ONE SPECIFIC CLINIC.

From the press release by the clinic:

From the moment Dr. Morgentaler announced his intention to open an abortion clinic in Fredericton, the provincial government planned to thwart his efforts.  The premier at the time, Frank McKenna, stated that: “if Mr. Morgentaler tries to open a clinic in the province of New Brunswick, he’s going to get the fight of his life.”

Subsequent New Brunswick governments have continued to block access to abortion services in New Brunswick.

Dr. Morgentaler was immune to their threats.  He had already survived jail, threats against his life and the bombing of his Toronto clinic.  The actions of the N.B. government only served to strengthen his resolve to ensure that New Brunswick women would have access to safe abortion care in his clinic and that no woman would be turned away regardless of her ability to pay.  The Morgentaler Clinic opened in June, 1994 and since then has provided abortion services to more than 10,000 women in a non-judgmental, evidence based, and professional environment.

The main obstacle the New Brunswick government created for New Brunswick women who needed to access abortions was, and still is, Regulation 84-20, Schedule 2(a.1). It states that an abortion will only be covered by Medicare if:
1. It is performed in a hospital by a specialist in the field of obstetrics or gynaecology and that
2. Two doctors have certified in writing that the procedure is ‘medically necessary’.

(Note that NB has never bothered to define "medically necessary." Read the whole press release for the history of their struggles and the heroic contributions of Dr Morgentaler. Also, DJ! has been covering the clinic's travails for years.)

So. Hats off to the innovative fetus fetishists of New Brunswick!

The deranged anti-choicers, rather than celebrating, are suspicious. They think the closure announcement is a stunt. Well, they don't want to dry up all those tasty donations, do they?

While it's idiotic to think of this desperate measure as a stunt, I think it will have serious unintended consequences that both the governments of NB and PEI (10% of abortions done at the Fredericton clinic are for women from PEI, where abortions are simply NOT DONE) will have to deal with.

The Morgentaler Clinic acted as a safety valve. For women who could afford it and arrange the travel, time off work, child care etc, the clinic provided an "out" for these two governments.

Fine, they could say, you want a "non-medical" abortion? Go to Morgentaler's and pay for it yourself.

Not anymore.

So what will the governments of NB and PEI say to women now?

Will this be the wake-up call for women and their allies previously shamed into silence? Will this be the rallying point for pro-choicers across the country to demand that ALL Canadian women get equal access to health care?

I hope so.

Now for the public service part of this blog post.

Here's a petition to sign. Now at over 6400 signatures, when I signed yesterday, it was just over 3000.

Next, here's a list of NB legislators with email addresses for letter writing.

And here's a blogpost by a former clinic worker, Pedgehog, with her own insights and suggestions.

It's time. Let's drag New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island into the 21st century.

UPDATE: There's an election in NB this year. Looks like Liberal Leader is "softening" support for government 2-doctor policy without actually coming out in support of repeal of the regulations.

UPPITY-DATER: There's a rally next Thursday, April 17. 2,000 already confirmed.

MORE: There's NBProchoice tumblr. Upload a picture.