So many things are wrong here.

A woman in New Jersey goes to the doctor for abdominal cramping. An ultrasound shows that she is between five and seven weeks pregnant. The woman asks the doctor “…if the “baby was already there,” and [the doctor, Sheldon Turkish] responded, “don’t be stupid, it is nothing but blood.” She then signed a consent form and had an abortion.

After pursuing further information at her local library regarding human development, the woman, Rosa Acuna “…decided that her doctor had ended her relationship with a child she’d named Andres.” I would like to know what books she checked out at the library to come to this conclusion. The Quiverfull Guide to Gestation? (I made that up but I am sure that something like it exists). And let’s not even get into the fact that this woman named the “child” presumably after the abortion and possibly after she did her “research” and got a lawyer. If she named it before the abortion - and well, that is a whole different story - then it would stand to reason that she already knew she was pregnant prior to her visit to the doctor. Oh and by the way, Acuna already had two children at the time of this event. This would lead me to believe that she had some idea of what stage her embryo was currently in and knew how she felt about said embryo (you know whether she believed it was a cell or a full fledged person with voting rights and all, etc., etc.).

Oh, I could probably go on and on speculating as to whether or not she had a poor excuse for a doctor (maybe) and whether or not she felt pressured into having an abortion by the doctor (I don’t know, that isn’t her complaint) or that she did not understand how babies are made (um… she has two, someone should tell her). Maybe she had abortion remorse and wanted someone to blame for a choice that she wished she had made differently. I am not knocking being remorseful, or she is just pissed off that the doctor called her “stupid.” I am knocking her for blaming the doctor for NOT sufficiently guilting her into keeping her zygote by making her feel like a whore and a baby killer beforehand. Maybe, and I am feeling strong about this option, maybe the Right lawyer (Harold “South Dakota Hates Women” Cassidy) found Ms. Acuna and is now using her to push his own anti-choice agenda.*

She (Mr. Cassidy) is suing this doctor for malpractice. Because she did not understand that this embryo would eventually turn into a baby and/or is already a baby(?), and the doctor didn’t explain it well enough? Again, she already had two children, did he have too? That is all that I can come up with in order to better understand the suit that Acuna (Cassidy) filed against Turkish.

…arguing that abortion providers have a duty to tell their patients that the fetus or embryo they are carrying is “a complete, separate, unique and irreplaceable human being” and that the “abortion did not prevent a human being from coming into existence but actually killed an existing human being.” Acuna’s lawyer, Harold Cassidy, argues that they are simple statements of medical fact. (bold mine)

Medical Fact? Did I miss something? Was I drunk and passed out when scientists decided precisely when life begins? Yeah. I didn’t think so. What world, Mr. Cassidy, are you on where this is “medical fact?” Certainly not this world, where we have actual scientific research to support medical facts as opposed to … well, whatever the fuck it is this lawyer is talking about. Last I checked nobody really had an answer to the question of when a fetus becomes a person with rights and such, except for sure after they leave the womb. Isn’t that really the argument that prods the fight against choice? Isn’t that the argument that keeps abortion barely legal, and hanging on by a thin and tenuous thread? The simple argument that no one can prove or disprove when an embryo or fetus is a person with rights above the mother carrying it, is what sustains the fight.

Okay, let’s just agree wholeheartedly that Dr. Turkish’s bedside manner leaves everything to be desired and pretty much sucks rocks. His side contests that he did not in fact say the ‘blood’ thing**, but he isn’t arguing the “don’t be stupid” thing. Jackass. Ultimately, it is not the doctor’s responsibility to tell any woman what others believe about embryos.

The worst part is that Acuna (Cassidy) is actually suing to force abortion providers to tell their patients that ”an embryo or fetus is a separate and existing human being.” Again, not fact but a belief held by some. Not ALL. So by having an abortion any woman could be a conspirator in a murder? Then what? Then we can be arrested for murder? All of the doctors who provide abortions can be rounded up for past, present and future murders? This is ludicrous. I can’t even understand how this shit gets in front of judges.

Dr. Turkish’s lawyers and the American Civil Liberties Union argue that Cassidy’s formulation is an effort to force anti-abortion ideology into the mouths of abortion providers. Women won’t be left better informed about biology. They’ll be made to feel as if they’re killing a child.

Which is really the point, isn’t it? Don’t give women facts. Scare them and call them names. Murderer, baby killer and whore seem to be some favorites, but stupid is rising to the top of the list.
Originally, this case was dismissed but that decision was reversed on appeal,

…arguing that Acuna could go to a jury to argue over what medical information a doctor has to disclose when advising a patient about ending a pregnancy. If the appeals court ruling stands, Turkish’s lawyers argue, then New Jersey will have a whole new standard for informed consent, in which they must say what Cassidy wants them to say: that the fetus is an existing human, member of the species homo sapiens, etc.

I have no problem with abortion providers offering fact-based education regarding the embryo, fetus and the medical procedure. I DON’’T believe that it should be forced upon any woman. If I were to go to get an abortion tomorrow, I wouldn’t want to sit through some tired bit of literature about the age of my gooey cell and I certainly don’t want anyone telling me what I already know. However someone else may want and need that information and that should be their right. Ultimately, after forty weeks the result of any pregnancy is (pay attention Ms. Acuna) going to be the same thing every time. A child! Who’d a thunk it? But until then, it will be attached to a woman via her womb by an umbilical cord thus at her mercy for survival. And Mr. Cassidy, if we don’t want a baby, we don’t want a fucking baby!

Apparently, the justices also found it odd that Ms. Acuna didn’t understand that without an abortion she would eventually have a baby.

“Yes, she got that, Cassidy conceded. “But she did not know biology.” Which took the justices back to where they’d started. Is this case about medical facts, or something else entirely? It’s an abstract and frustratingly slippery question.

Yeah, I guess it is a slippery question…but the answer is not abstract and it is in fact slimy. This case is not about informing women of the facts of a medical procedure, but more about men taking away a woman’s ability to make medical decisions about her own body by distributing information which is incorrect (at best), ideological, bigoted and hypocritical.

I have an idea, maybe instead of spending all of this time and energy trying to force medical professionals to spout ideological bullshit and call it FACT, how about they force them to deliver some real information including but not limited to all available contraception and how to get it. Tell EVERY woman how not to get pregnant.

Via Slate

* Does this guy go from state to state looking for cases that he can manipulate to feed his scary make-the-women-suffer campaign?

** If in fact he said, “…it is nothing but blood,” then I question his medical training because isn’t it a fact that a five to seven week old embryo is a cell, at least? Is this just some different terminology used in medical circles? However, I am not a doctor nor do I play one on TV, so I could be wrong.