why Dr. Kermit Gosnell's trial should be a front page story

[Os Cangaceiros]

The grand jury report (http://www.phila.gov/districtattorney/pdfs/grandjurywomensmedical.pdf) in the case of Kermit Gosnell, 72, is among the most horrifying I've read. "This case is about a doctor who killed babies and endangered women. What we mean is that he regularly and illegally delivered live, viable babies in the third trimester of pregnancy - and then murdered these newborns by severing their spinal cords with scissors," it states. "The medical practice by which he carried out this business was a filthy fraud in which he overdosed his patients with dangerous drugs, spread venereal disease among them with infected instruments, perforated their wombs and bowels - and, on at least two occasions, caused their deaths."

Saw this posted elsewhere, thought people here might be interested:

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/04/why-dr-kermit-gosnells-trial-should-be-a-front-page-story/274944/

Some of the descriptions are kind of...graphic, so just letting people know...

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I am not sure; the horrifying racism and disregard for female patients should, of course, be condemned, but it seems to me that more hysteria about abortion is the last thing American women need.

Of course, the fact that these women had to resort to an illegal, highly dangerous clinic speaks volumes about the American misogynistic restrictions on abortion, but I highly doubt any of the American mass media would highlight this angle; the conservative ones oppose abortion and the liberal ones do not consistently support it.

That said, the manner in which Gosnell treated his patients is just vile, and should be unequivocally condemned.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Why should it be a front page story? So it can be used to assault reproductive rights? Because that's the only way it's going to be used.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Why should it be a front page story? So it can be used to assault reproductive rights? Because that's the only way it's going to be used.

I hardly think that's the only light this story can be viewed in.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I hardly think that's the only light this story can be viewed in.

Sadly, that's the only light mainstream society in America will view the story in - as is evident from the article you link to and the comments below.

[Vanilla]

I hardly think that's the only light this story can be viewed in.

I've already seen this story used by anti-choicers to condemn abortion. If this becomes a front page story, it will only highlight how he performed a bunch of late-term abortions and therefore abortion is bad. Forget the fact that the reason these women had to go to these extremes is because of the extremely tight restrictions on abortion- it won't be mentioned. And I don't think that the news outlets would even bother talking about the terrible conditions the women actually faced.

I think that Dr. Gosnell should face severe consequences for his actions, but trying to publicize this story even more would just harm the struggle for women's reproductive rights.

[#FF0000]

Uhhh I think it'd be a tremendous mistake to ignore this story because 1) people aren't stupid and 2) things like this are a direct result of regressive, anti-choice nonsense.

[Red Commissar]

There's a lot of ways this story can be seen. The obvious one is that of the "back alley" abortion doc that provides these proceedures in a very unsafe and potentially fatal way to the mother as the article points out very well.

There's also other factors in here too that can be worked in. Predatory doctors like this prick who take advantage of desperate people and harm them are a creation of the way our society handles abortion. If these women were given a way to secure abortions without harassment from society and a streamlined way to access it in our health system, people like Gosnell wouldn't even exist.

The big problem I see here though is that the article points out Gosnell applied for membership in the National Abortion Federation to legitimize his practice, and the inspector who came thoroughly rejected it and described it as the worst place she ever saw- but never reported the problem to anyone else outside the NAF.

Of course though, as the article says at the end via the USAToday op-ed there's the claims that the story is being ignored due to bias in the media to not cover stories damaging to the pro-choice movement. The op-ed he cites complains that the media covered Sandra Fluke during the birth control debate but not this because of it. A lot of "pro-life" propaganda owes itself to shocking people on how abortion is carried out and late-term abortions are just candy to them. Something like this can easily be taken that way, and I'm sure this particular story has already made the rounds among them.

I again see it more as a condemnation of abortion restrictions because it's pretty clear that even with all these restrictions and attempts to dissuade people from abortion, people are still seeking it and in some cases, forced into a situation of terminating a pregnancy when it gets to later phases because they couldn't' access it earlier.