Posted on 06/29/2004 6:34:04 PM PDT by WildReeling
New York, NY (LifeNews.com) -- In a stunning admission last week, an attorney representing a national group of abortion businesses admitted that women don't need to know of the risk of premature delivery in a pregnancy following a partial-birth abortion.
The frank admission came during closing arguments of the New York trial of a lawsuit filed seeking to overturn the ban on partial-birth abortions, one of three such suits nationwide.
During his closing arguments on behalf of the National Abortion Federation, attorney Stephen Hut and Judge Richard Casey discussed a study conducted by Dr. Steven Chasen who practices maternal fetal medicine at New York City's Presbyterian Hospital and teaches at Weil-Cornell Medical College.
Chasen, NAF's expert witness in the trial, had conducted a study that showed an increase in the number of early term (premature) deliveries subsequent to a partial-birth abortion being performed.
Judge Casey brought up the study and asked Hut whether someone performing a partial-birth abortion has an obligation to tell women of the risk.
"There is certainly no obligation to report the results," to women considering abortion, Hut said.
"How can you give informed consent if you don't tell them," Judge Casey responded, "aren't we putting thousands of women and their babies at risk if we don't have an obligation to tell women who are considering abortion?"
"Absolutely not," Hut replied. He added that he thought the study was meaningless.
"And you don't think there is an obligation to tell women, when obtaining so-called informed consent," Judge Casey asked, baffled. "No," Hut replied.
Hut then said it would be wrong for someone performing an abortion to tell women of the study because the issue is too complex. Hut claimed the study was statistically insignificant.
"What in God's name, your Honor, is she supposed to do with that piece of information," Hut asked rhetorically.
"Have you explained it in terms that she can understand," Judge Casey inquired.
"No," Hut replied, again saying the study was meaningless.
Hut also admitted that, even if a study had been conducted that showed, with no doubt, that partial-birth abortions contained a substantial risk of premature delivery in subsequent pregnancies, the partial-birth abortion ban would still be unconstitutional in his mind.
(Excerpt) Read more at lifenews.com ...
You've gotta read this.
Attorney: Women Don't Need to Vote either...
BUMP
Still some hope here. Let's see what this Judge does. There is no jury involved, is that correct?
I think it was Jefferson who said, "I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just".
No need to tell the women, they're too stupid to understand it anyhow!
Just DAMN!
Judge Casey became indignant at this point and told Hut it sounded to him that it was "as if the doctors were informed and the women consented."
That about sums it up.
So there are laws mandating the proper labelling & warnings on everything from Alcoholic drinks to cigarettes, foodstuff to medications, etc - but because of politics the women who are seeking an abortion DONT NEED TO KNOW the risks???
and sleazy lawyers.
ping
ping
Like women are stupid or something.
This shows what the pro-abortionists really think of women.
Seems to me the logic here resembles the eeeevil big tobacco executives. I wonder if the abortion crowd will come under the same scrutiny. I think not.
fyi
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.