Axe to Grind? Massachusetts Governor with Ties to Planned Parenthood Defiant of Supreme Court Free Speech Ruling

By Cheryl Sullenger

Boston, MA – Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick is urging the passage of a new state law that will restrict abortion protesters, calling the legislation “a pressing need” in the wake of the unanimous Supreme Court decision that struck down that state’s “buffer zone” law, which prevented pro-life speech within 35 feet of abortion facilities.

However, Patrick’s apparent panic over pro-lifers having their First Amendment rights restored likely stems from his radical pro-abortion agenda and his time as a Board Member of Planned Parenthood of Massachusetts.

“Lawmakers need to be aware that Patrick’s personal history with Planned Parenthood makes him prejudiced against pro-life speech. His twisted view of pro-life activists has tainted his perspective. He clearly has an axe to grind,” said Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue. “The Supreme Court spoke clearly on the unconstitutionality of infringing on the First Amendment right of protesters. Now Patrick is at it again, trying to further limit pro-life speech at abortion facilities where women often want and appreciate the help offered by pro-life supporters. The women who need and want help to avoid abortions are the ones Patrick is hurting the most.”

Operation Rescue obtained documents that show Patrick sat on the Planned Parenthood Board in the early 1990’s. His name is prominently featured in Planned Parenthood’s Board Meeting minutes and on Planned Parenthood of Massachusetts letterhead.

One letter featuring Patrick as a Board Member, dated May 4, 1993, concerns a woman whose daughter may have suffered injuries at Planned Parenthood and received a refund for services rendered. [View Documents, esp. p. 3.]

Patrick, an African-American, is apparently unbothered by the racist roots of Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger, who proposed abortion and birth control as a way to “exterminate the Negro population.” (Woman, Morality, and Birth Control. New York: New York Publishing Company, 1922. Page 12.)

“There can be no doubt that when women change their minds outside of abortion facilities and make decisions to continue their pregnancies, Planned Parenthood loses money. It seems that Patrick is more concerned about Planned Parenthood’s bottom line than he is about truly helping women, especially women of color who are disproportionally targeted for abortion,” said Newman. “Denying pro-life supporters their constitutionally protected rights to further his abortion agenda is stepping far over the line and is an abuse of his position as governor.”

The bill, which has been fast-tracked by Gov. Patrick and passed the State Senate last week at his personal urging, would allow police to disperse pro-life protesters if they receive complaints and ban them from within 25 feet of abortion facilities for eight hours.

“The proposed law is subjective and prone to abuse. Of course abortion clinic workers will complain all day long. At some point, abortion facilities and their acolytes, such as Gov. Patrick, need to understand that abortion facilities simply do not get to abuse the rights of others and are not above the law,” said Newman.

While pro-life protesters and sidewalk counselors are mischaracterized as “violent” or “aggressive,” Eleanor McCullen, the lead petitioner in the Supreme Court case told news reporters that kind of behavior is not beneficial.

“Our mission is there for the woman first. Then, of course, we’re the voice for the unborn child. And I’m not about to aggravate and say, let’s get a little closer to the door. That’s counterproductive,” she said.

“It is clear that Gov. Patrick is trying to do an end-around the Supreme Court decision and the Constitution by wrongly vilifying pro-life sidewalk counselors in order to protect the flow of money into the abortion cartel in his state,” said Newman. “In the interest of full disclosure, his ties to Planned Parenthood abortion businesses should be known before the State House of Representatives acts in response to Patrick’s personal – and blatantly unconstitutional — biases.”

SHOCKING ABUSE! Planned Parenthood Faces Lawsuit in Child Rape and Abortion Scandal

By Deborah Myers

PP-DenverDenver, Colorado — Planned Parenthood faces a legal challenge in Colorado after Cary Smith, of Federal Heights, discovered that clinic staff failed to inquire or report about suspected sexual abuse of her thirteen-year-old daughter after giving her an abortion.

It was any mother’s nightmare.

According to the lawsuit filed on June 20, 2014, Cary’s daughter, R.Z., was only about six when it all began. Her new step-father, Timothy David Smith, began to do things that no one had ever done before. At this age, she was too young to realize that her step-father’s inordinate attention was actually a crime—a felony: sexual abuse of a minor.

Little R.Z. turned seven, then eight. The years went by, and the abuse continued. But Cary Smith never knew.

During R.Z.’s growing up years, the abuse became both verbal and physical as well. Her step-father even threatened to take her life. Timothy’s verbal and physical abuse extended to Cary, even when R.Z. was present.

Then it happened.

R.Z. got pregnant. Timothy told her to take a test and the results were positive.

On May 3, 2012, Timothy transported his thirteen-year-old step-daughter to Planned Parenthood in Denver, Colorado, for an abortion appointment that Timothy had forced R.Z. to schedule.

Planned Parenthood staff met R.Z. and her step-father and gave them the necessary paperwork. R.Z. filled out her date of birth and signed a few forms, but Timothy completed all the rest. R.Z. never read these documents.

Throughout the visit, four staff members spoke with and observed R.Z. and her step-father. All of them had opportunity to see that R.Z.’s birth date indicated she was only thirteen—well below the age of consent. Yet, none of them asked R.Z. about their relationship. None of them asked why their last names were different. None of them asked about potential sex abuse. And none of them reported anything to the state.

After the abortion, R.Z. walked back out to the parking lot, got into her step-father’s car, and went back home. And the abuse continued.

Two months later, on July 18, 2012, Timothy was outside of the home, and Cary was left alone with her daughter. Young R.Z. took the opportunity to tell her mom the news—her own step-father was sexually abusing her, and had been doing so for years.

Cary spun into action. She took the thirteen-year-old to the hospital and immediately reported the abuse. She contacted Planned Parenthood for her daughter’s medical records, and discovered that her husband had arranged for a secret abortion for R.Z. earlier that year.

Timothy Smith was arrested and charged with multiple counts of felony sex abuse, and pled guilty to two counts in late 2012.

But Cary was not content. Although R.Z.’s abuser was now behind bars, the system hadn’t worked.

The first medical professionals who had seen R.Z.—the four Planned Parenthood staff members—must have known that her daughter was a potential victim of sexual abuse. These were professionals who had the information to do something. They had opportunity to ask R.Z. before her mother even knew.

And they had the responsibility to act—to report suspected child sex abuse—under Colorado law.

But these professionals did nothing. Worse, they performed a dangerous, legally-restricted procedure on a minor child, without informing her mother, and turned R.Z. back over to her rapist following the abortion.

The inaction of Planned Parenthood staff, as well as their direct violation of Colorado statutes, enabled a sexual predator to continue his felonious abuse of a child for months afterwards.

Cary maintains that defendants’ negligence “created an unreasonable risk of physical harm” to her daughter. Cary is now suing Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains for five claims for relief, including negligence, negligent affliction of emotional distress, and extreme and outrageous conduct.

“We applaud Cary Smith for her brave stand to hold Planned Parenthood accountable for their crime against her daughter,” said Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue. “This lawsuit is another indication that Planned Parenthood is dedicated to one thing—selling abortion; and they do not care how many young girls are raped or abused in the process.”

Read Smith v. Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood

Judge Considers Iowa Regulations Banning Webcam Abortion

Meanwhile, nine webcam facilities in Iowa have closed since 2012 while 17 states have banned the corners-cutting Internet abortion pill distribution scheme

By Cheryl Sullenger

Des Moines, IA – Polk County Judge Jeffery Farrell is currently considering a suit brought by Planned Parenthood of the Heartland against the Iowa Board of Medicine for new rules that ban the webcam abortion system of dispensing abortion pills that was developed in Iowa. A ruling is expected soon.

The two parties appeared in court earlier this week to debate whether the Iowa Board of Medicine acted properly in adopting the new regulations last August.

Planned Parenthood argued in court that the Board’s decision was “flawed” and “politically motivated.” It noted that 5,000 abortion have been done using the webcam system, but failed to mention that it does not track complications of women who must find their own way to emergency rooms when things go wrong.

Planned Parenthood also insisted that Board member Fr. Frank Bognanno, a Catholic priest who was appointed by pro-life Gov. Terry Branstad, should have recused himself from the vote. However, the Attorney General’s office, which defended the regulations, noted that procedures allow for a party to ask for recusals ahead of Board votes, which Planned Parenthood never did.

While Planned Parenthood argued that the regulations would create a hardship on “rural” women, forcing them to drive “hundreds of miles” to get abortions, the Attorney General’s office countered that Planned Parenthood never stated exactly how many miles women might have to actually drive.

All of Planned Parenthood webcam site have been located in or very near metropolitan areas with ample access to legitimate health care, making the “undue burden” argument spurious.

Planned Parenthood once operated their webcam abortion pill scheme at 15 locations throughout Iowa, but since 2012, they have halted abortions at nine of those locations, including Storm Lake, Knoxville, Newton, Ankeny, Spencer, Creston, Red Oak, West Health Center in Urbandale, and the Susan Knapp Health Center located near Drake University in Des Moines.

The Attorney General’s office also noted that currently 17 states ban webcam abortions and none of those state laws have been found unconstitutional.

Webcam, or telemed abortions involve the remote dispensing of abortion drugs to women at Planned Parenthood locations where the abortionist is not present. The abortionist briefly interviews the prospective abortion patient over a closed video conferencing system, then dispenses the pills at the patient’s location by clicking a button on a computer screen that releases a drawer containing the abortion drugs. Women never receive a physical examination by a licensed physician, who is also not available to the patient in the event of a complication.

“How can any of us possibly find that a medical abortion performed over the Internet is as safe as one provided by a physician in person?” asked Dr. Greg Hoversten, Chairman of the Iowa Board of Medicine at the time of the Board’s vote last August.

Operation Rescue brought the abortion pill distribution scheme to light after an undercover investigation in March, 2010, then exposed plans by Planned Parenthood Federation of America to expand the scheme into every one of their clinics nationwide. Operation Rescue worked with Iowa pro-life groups, including Iowa Right to Life, to end webcam abortions.

Since then, Planned Parenthood’s plans to conduct what would have been the largest expansion of abortion services since Roe v. Wade have failed after bans on webcam abortions were enacted in 17 states. Federal legislation was also introduced. This made Planned Parenthood affiliates in other states reluctant to invest in the required hardware for a process that could soon be outlawed in their states.

“If Judge Farrell rules that the regulations will stand, it will be the end of Planned Parenthood’s scheme to cut corners on women’s health and safety for the sake of greater profits,” said Newman. “Their plan to expand webcam abortions into all 50 states has already failed because of the diligence of pro-life groups to raise the alarm on Planned Parenthood’s exploitive practices. Abortion numbers are falling in Iowa, despite Planned Parenthood’s efforts to increase them. A favorable ruling in this case would be the cherry on top of a string of pro-life victories that are saving lives today.”