Under the “You CAN’T make this stuff up” category, I’d like to talk about a post this week found on the webpage of “The Abortioneers.” It’s a gathering place for abortion practitioners to compare notes, in this case pondering the importance of “first impressions” and what happens if the word gets round that your clinic is subpar. That’s, of course, in code.
I’m not sure where the symbol/ad found at the top of the page is from but it talks about “Star Ratings Matter!” We learn from the script that on a 5-star rating, supposedly one half of all shoppers agree 3 stars is as low a star rating as they will accept. And that “83% of consumers base their decision to purchase an item on BOTH star ratings and written review comments.”
The opening paragraph reads, “Can someone please come up with a ‘Tripadvisor’ for abortion clinics? Who wouldn’t want to rate their clinic experience? It would be cool, in an ideal world, if women felt safe enough to ‘rate’ their experience.“
The Abortioneers have an initial seven-point check list—kind of reminds you of Jiffy Lube–which they then elaborate on. For example, it’s not cool “If your clinic is in a bad neighborhood, needs a paint job, and your staff aren’t warm and professional (maybe they answer their phone too quickly and sound apathetic)” because “it just adds to the nasty abortion stigma.”
But “On the other hand, if you have a modern, clean facility out-of-reach from hassling protesters, affordable prices, and kind staff, you’re rockin’ it. Right?”
And so forth and so on.
Bottom line: the writer concludes that if she uses an online referral to “help me determine whether I want to go to a certain restaurant or not,” surely it would “make a difference” if women would “share their abortion experiences” (which they currently don’t).”Do I want someone’s opinion on the abortion clinic they went to?” she asks. “Yes, please.“
Okay. How about asking for an evaluation from the family of Tonya Reaves who died after having a second-trimester abortion in a Chicago Planned Parenthood clinic? According to documents Ms. Reaves suffered from bleeding, an incomplete abortion, and perforation.
Surely in order to produce the best “Tripadvisor,” The Abortioneers would want a more detailed evaluation of what happened during and immediately after the July 20 abortion.
According to WBBM’s Newsradio’s Steve Miller, Reaves underwent a second-trimester dilation and evacuation (D&E) abortion at 11:00am.
After the abortion Reaves suffered bleeding. But a Fire Department ambulance did not take her to Northwestern Memorial Hospital until 4:30 p.m., according to Miller’s report.
An hour later, at 5:30, doctors “performed an ultrasound, and another dilation and evacuation procedure – basically, another abortion – this time at Northwestern,” according to Miller. This could only mean that Reaves had undergone an incomplete abortion.
Miller goes on:
“Then pain and more tests, and one of those tests revealed a perforation, documents say. Then surgery at 12 minutes past 10 pm. An uncontrollable bleed was found. Reaves did not regain consciousness and was pronounced dead at 11:20 in the operating room.”
No doubt The Abortioneers would give at least a couple of stars to the clinic. After all, Reaves’s death has been ruled an accident.
But they might want to hold off. The family of this 24-year-old mother of one has retained a lawyer, Corey Meyer, the family’s lawyer, told ABC News, “We’re just trying to get all the facts from the incident and determine what the best course of action is.”
CLICK LIKE IF YOU’RE PRO-LIFE!
Tip of the hat to Jill Stanek.
LifeNews.com Note: Dave Andrusko is the editor of National Right to Life News and an author and editor of several books on abortion topics. This post originally appeared in his National Right to Life News Today —- an online column on pro-life issues.