Posted on 05/10/2007 4:29:14 PM PDT by wagglebee
Los Angeles, CA (LifeNews.com) -- More details are emerging in a case where a counselor at the UCLA student health center advised a pregnant student to have an abortion. The woman in the case, a pro-life student posing as a pregnant teenager, says Planned Parenthood attempted to advise her to disguise statutory rape. In an undercover investigative story for a student-run newspaper, UCLA student Lila Rose posed as a pregnant 15 year-old and entered a Santa Monica Planned Parenthood.
She told officials there that a 23 year old man had impregnated her and her article in The Advocate newspaper says PP staff assured Rose that if she said she was 16 or older, they wouldn't have to report the rape.
The abortion facility staff encouraged her to "figure out a birth-date that works," to obtain the abortion and avoid getting the man in trouble with the police.
"California's mandatory reporting laws for statutory rape are supposed to protect pregnant minors," Rose told LifeNews.com in a statement Thursday.
"Underage girls are being targeted by predators, and Planned Parenthood is busy covering up the evidence. How many other rapes has this one clinic covered up?" she asked.
The story appears in the second issue of the newspaper and the first one had details about the UCLA case.
In that situation, the counselor told Rose, who again claimed to be pregnant, that the college has no resources available for students keeping their babies. The counselor also encouraged the student to get the state health system to pay for the abortion.
The advice came from Ann Brooks, nurse practitioner and counselor at the UCLA Health Center.
Rose said the counseling was entirely aimed at encouraging an abortion -- thinking that was the only option to help her stay in school. The student said Brooks also advised her to use Medi-Cal to fund her abortion with taxpayer funds.
"I have a place I can send you where they will get you signed up for Medi-Cal coverage and they just don't ask," the counselor reportedly said.
Brooks allegedly said Rose should have an abortion because of a lack of support for pregnancies on campus and the discomforts of pregnancy.
"Most of the students I talk to terminate their pregnancies," Brooks said, describing the unborn child as "a collection of cells."
She added that Rose could expect "physical difficulties" during pregnancy and the "embarrassment of your classmates" as a pregnant student living in the school dorms.
Brooks said "UCLA doesn't support people who are pregnant and make things easier for them necessarily."
In comments to LifeNews.com on Thursday, Rose said UCLA has use articles in the Daily Bruin, the official campus newspaper, "as a front to defend its image as an unbiased, plentiful pregnancy care resource."
"When women are given politically charged opinions from their counselor, and told that abortion at UCLA is the most feasible option for them, there aren't many 'choices' open for women. The administration is choosing for women, putting them in a situation where their only choice is to abort," said Rose.
Rose hopes that the second issue of The Advocate will open eyes to the need for better pregnancy counseling and pregnancy resource awareness and put pressure on the school to correct these deficiencies.
"Welcome to the internet, where men are men, women are men, and children are FBI agents."
Couldn't help myself there.
No way. Do your worst.
Your post made me think of something I hadn’t considered before.
If it is statutory rape or sexual assault for someone to penetrate a 15-year-old girl, then why is it not so for medical personnel to enter the same private area of a girl without consent of her parents? It seems just as violating, MORESO, actually, for these doctors to penetrate her all the way into her UTERUS. It seems no less of a heinous crime to that young girl (as well as the innocent life she carries).
Actually, the sting showed the POLICY of PP and what they do to further their belief that women and girls should be available for sex 24/7 with no consequences ever and that taxpayers should pay to kill any unwanted “consequences.” It’s a policy of aiding and abetting criminals.
I think that from the point of view of traditional morality and natural law, it is a serious violation for medical personnel to provide an abortion or sexual advice to a minor girl. Certainly it violates traditional Jewish and Christian views concerning the rights of parents to protect and guide their children. And it goes against custom and law in America for a couple of hundred years.
Unfortunately, Roe v. Wade made any kind of abortion legal and trumped natural law, traditional religion, American custom, and the American constitution, which was originally partly based on natural law and traditional religious views.
But statutory rape remains a serious felony, at least until some new Supreme Court decision which finds that rapists have a constitutional right to rape minor children. Therefore, although aiding and abetting a rapist, evil as it is, is not as evil as killing a human being, it remains illegal under our current laws. Not too many voters are happy with the idea of allowing and enabling the rape of girls who are 11, 12, or even 15 years old, without penalty.
No doubt the culture of death will work to make statutory rape legal, as NAMBLA is already trying to do for homosexual rape of children. But in the meantime, Planned Parenthood is guilty of serious, deliberate, and repeated violations of the felony laws when they cover up and conspire with rapists to abort the children of their minor victims. They are vulnerable on this point, both legally and in popular opinion, so they are desperate to hide it.
See how easy this is when you understand logic?
Her point is a legal one. She claimed to be 15 because that is the cut off where her pregnancy (rape) must be reported. She caught PP upping her age so that it did not have to be reported — not to mention that apparently she lied about the pregnancy altogether. They must not have looked at this girl too carefully. She passed herself off as underage and passed herself off as pregnant, thus catching PP breaking the law.
See how easy this is when you understand logic?
OK, I'm lying. In fact, this post is also a lie. Hey, wait a minute: Does that prove that you're lying, too?
I think I need to go, slay, and eat, that's what I think. I'll hafta get back to ya on the logic thing....
In Kansas, AG Phil Kline had documented dozens of cases of a clinic performing abortions for unreported statutory rape, and also performing abortions at extremely late dates (some as late as 32 weeks). All this was clearly against the law.
But after he lost his re-election bid, the new AG Paul Morrison quickly dumped the charges.
I will never understand how some people can turn such a blind eye to something so blatantly immoral and in some cases, illegal.
Don’t you guys know anything? They test them by filling them with water and throwing em at people!
So true funny but true.
Another Freeper (wish I could remember who so I could give credit, but the little grey cells sometimes fail me, mon ami) came up with this question: If Rudy was trying to promote adoption, why didn't he donate any money to the largest adoption agency in the country--Catholic Social Services? He's Catholic (nominally), and he was mayor of NYC, where he had to have rubbed shoulders with them as part of the whole government-social services dynamic...but instead he chose the world's largest abortion provider?
And...(apologies if I'm telling you something you already know) Rudy praised her in one of his speeches at a NARAL awards dinner. Gee...maybe he or his stff should have done a little research?
Actually, the student centers at some major universtities function as a sort of “free clinic.”
Here’s an op-ed I wrote on the clinic investigation, including what was found at the clinic that “serves” my area. Sorry, couldn’t find the original FR thread...this ran on 19 May, 2005.
**********
What does the recent flurry of legal activity surrounding one aspect of abortion mean, and does it have implications for Northwest Illinois?
In all 50 states, medical personnel are required to inform child welfare of evidence of child abuse, including statutory rape. Even in states like Illinois where there’s no parental notification required for an abortion, pregnancies resulting from abuse require a report. Though some underage pregnancies involve underage fathers, a pregnant 13 year old is certainly as much evidence of abuse as an unexplained bruise or fracture. That’s where the flurry comes in.
The Attorneys General of Kansas and Indiana are demanding a total of about 180 medical records from abortion clinics in their states, including every Planned Parenthood clinic in Indiana. They claim they have credible evidence that the clinics covered up the statutory rape of minor girls by adult males.
Planned Parenthood of Southwest Ohio is being sued over an abortion performed on a 14 year old. Though she gave her father’s name and address to the clinic, they did not notify her parents as required by law, or make a report to child welfare, even though she was brought to the clinic by her 21 year old boyfriend. After he claimed to be a “stepbrother,” he was put in the driver’s seat for her medical care; later he was put in jail for sexual battery.
An Alaskan lawsuit doesn’t involve statutory rape, but is a chilling case of an adult taking bizarre liberties with a child. Frantic parents reported their 15 year old daughter missing when she failed to come home after school. It turned out a social worker from an Anchorage hospital had taken her on an overnight trip to Washington State to obtain an abortion.
Isolated cases? A fishing expedition by “anti-choice” politicians and lawyers? Not according to a two year investigation by the pro-life group Life Dynamics. A member of the organization called over 800 clinics, claiming to be a 13 year old girl impregnated by a 22 year old man, and made the age difference very clear. In 91% of the phone calls (including 21 calls in Illinois) the clinic workers said they would not report the abuse to authorities. For example, clinic workers in Pekin and Chicago described the legal issues to her in detail, including the fact that the abuser could “got to jail.” A Peoria worker said she’d put a note in the girl’s appointment file so the clinic counselor would know not to ask her for details and they could avoid reporting the abuse.
At Rockford’s Northern Illinois Women’s Center, they were no less helpful. The clinic worker first offered to establish a line of communication that would hide the relationship from the girl’s parents. Then she and the girl decided that the best way to avoid reporting was to have the girl come alone, or omit information. The clinic worker finishes this part of the discussion by saying, “I mean, he has nothing to do with this…It has everything to do with you. We don’t require any information about him at all. I mean, we do ask who you came with, but all you have to say is ‘my boyfriend.’” See, this surgical procedure has everything to do with a girl who can’t consent to get her own ears pierced, and nothing to do with her abuser or her parents. Transcripts and MP3’s for this and other Illinois clinics can be found at http://www.illinoisleader.com/news/sectionview.asp?s=170.
How would you feel about a liquor store that helps teenagers organize keggers? A gun shop selling handguns to minors and telling them how to keep the gun hidden from Mom and Dad? A local physician willing to give steroid injections to student athletes? How about an orthopedic surgeon willing to repair abuse fractures without reporting the abuse? A surgeon doing any non-emergency procedure without parental permission? Are these “don’t ask, don’t tell” situations? Would anyone say it’s a matter of privacy, or keeping kids safe, or helping them? Would anyone even debate whether it was right or wrong?
Commenting on their efforts to stop the subpoena of medical records, Planned Parenthood of Indiana’s CEO told WTHR TV in Indianapolis, “It is very important that our patients know that when they come through our door for service that it is private, it is safe.” The question is who is made safe? Not the girl or her child, but only the abuser.
Is that a status quo we’re willing to accept?
What year?
See post 56 for full details of the clinic calls.
This was exactly the sort of “deceit” that is used by cops every day to catch child molesters. There is no moral conundrum here, and certainly no reason anyone should feel guilty about lying to some babykillers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.