Lawsuit exposes frequency and scope of abortion coercion
Several pro-life groups in Minnesota — which have filed a lawsuit against the state for its pro-abortion laws — held a press conference Friday to expose the predatory and coercive nature of the abortion industry.
Key Takeaways:
- Speaking in defense of their lawsuit, plaintiffs discussed how they were coerced into abortions they did not want.
- They also shared tactics the abortion industry uses to entice women to abort against their will.
- The plaintiffs argue that Minnesota’s pro-abortion laws allow these predatory tactics and violate the rights of mothers and their preborn children.
The Details:
Speaking at the press conference were a number of women who either have had abortions or work with those impacted by abortion. They shared powerful testimony and insight into the preponderance of coercive tactics that take place to ensure that women abort, even when they don’t want to.
“I had no one to tell I wanted to keep my child”
Tanya Humphreys, a post-abortive counselor at Dakota Hope Clinic, shared the story of her own abortion at age 21. She said her boyfriend phoned the facility and made the appointment for her:
The abortion clinic scheduled an abortion for me without ever speaking to me and/or knowing if I actually wanted one scheduled. I desperately needed just one person to help me.
My boyfriend forced me into his car and drove me to the abortion facility. He stood next to me when the front desk gave me the forms to fill out.
It was there at the front desk, where there was no one to discuss what was going to happen, that I was compelled to sign the consent form for the abortion that I did not want. There was no counseling. No one discussed anything with me, and I had no one to tell that I wanted to keep my child.
My boyfriend hovered over me the entire time.
“I didn’t want an abortion at all”
Clara Munger Boyer said she went to a Planned Parenthood and was pressured to undergo an abortion she didn’t want.
“There was no discussion about my rights or obligations as a mother. In fact, the entire process was dismissive of any notion that there was anything of significance taking place. In actuality, I did not want an abortion at all. I want children. My circumstances made me feel trapped in considering abortion.”
She continued: “Planned Parenthood never offered to help me and never even talked through it with me. I needed counseling and I needed to discuss some important facts, but both … were withheld from me.”
‘Planned Parenthood was forced to sell abortions’
Mayra Rodriguez, who worked for Planned Parenthood for 17 years, spoke about the organization’s coercive practices.
“The workers at Planned Parenthood were forced to push and sell abortions. If a pregnant mother was ambivalent, the clinic workers were trained to convince those mothers to have an abortion. No help was offered to pregnant mothers who want to keep their children,” she said, adding:
The doctors had no time to speak with the mothers and the doctors did not know what women were ambivalent, which ones were being pressured and which ones were actually wanted an abortion …
On many occasions … the pregnant mother would ask the doctor to stop. But in each instance, the doctor lied and told her that it was too late. The doctor would complete the abortion.
Those doctors could have let those mothers have their babies, but they didn’t.
“The informed consent process is a joke”
Nicola Marsden is a client advocate from And Then There Were None, an organization that helps former abortion facility workers. She described some of the stories she has heard from from her clients.
“About 31% of our clients have witnessed the performance of a forced abortion where a pregnant mother has expressed that she does not want to proceed… but the abortion clinic staff make her follow through with the procedure anyway,” she explained.
She said, “Our clients frequently report that pregnant mothers will ask about the development of the child they are carrying only to be misled by being told that it is a mass of cells or just some tissue. One ATTWN client observed that if the pregnant mothers knew what was going to happen, they would never submit to the abortion,” she explained, calling the informed consent process a “joke.”
“Nearly half of our clients… advised that they were aware the abortion clinic had quotas for the number of abortions to be performed,” she added.
The Backstory:
Plaintiffs in the case include the Women’s Life Care Center; the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates; Dakota Hope Clinic; David Billings, MD; Dawn Schreifels, MD; and three mothers. Their suit argues Minnesota’s current abortion laws violate the 14th amendment’s due process clause.
They also say that the state’s law means that women do not receive informed consent before abortion, and that many abortions are “involuntary, resulting from coercion or pressure from others placed upon the pregnant mothers who want to keep their children,” and that “most waivers of the mother’s rights and consents to abortions are uninformed.”
The Bottom Line:
Harold Cassidy, attorney for the plaintiffs, argues that the stories of these women — and many others like them — are proof that the state’s laws illegally protect the predatory nature of the abortion industry.
“Although they’re obligated to provide protections of a mother’s rights, to ensure it’s voluntary, to ensure that it’s informed, they don’t … not only that but … they’re the private actors …,” he said. “Planned Parenthood as an example, they’re operating under the authority and power given to them specifically by the law, and they’re aided by state officials.”
[Editor’s note: This story originally was published by Live Action News.]