by Jill Stanek
October 31, 2007
LifeNews.com Note: Jill Stanek fought to stop "live birth abortions" after witnessing one as an RN at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Illinois. Her speaking out led to the Born Alive Infants Protection Act legislation, signed by President Bush, that would ensure that proper medical care be given to unborn children who survive botched abortion attempts.
I recently got my hands on two lawsuits filed this year by former employees against Planned Parenthood Chicago Area and its CEO, Steve Trombley. (They are Pelta v. Planned Parenthood and Chesis v. Planned Parenthood.)
One of those employees, Dr. Murray Pelta, was an abortionist for PP/CA from 1992-2007, its medical director from 1997-2007. The stories he must have to tell, and he indeed tells a couple in his complaint.
I've tried to imagine what it's like to be on the inside of PP, particularly its upper echelon. But when a business' lifeblood is abortion, I'm sure we will not begin to fathom the depths of its depravity until someone finally writes that tell-all book. (Paging Dr. Pelta? It's certain to be a best-seller, sir. Consider it.)
So the only real glimpses we have until then are anecdotal stories and lawsuits, so back on point:
Trombley fired Pelta on Feb. 28, 2007, which triggered his complaint. He began by alleging a pharmaceutical quid pro quo: Dr. Pelta and Trombley maintained a positive personal relationship for several years after Trombley's appointment. Trombley even occasionally asked Dr. Pelta for favors, such as discreet medical prescriptions for Trombley's personal use. Dr. Pelta wrote these prescriptions for Trombley and, in accordance with Trombley's requests, did not record or report the issuance of the prescriptions.
Pelta's complaint did not list the prescriptions dispensed, but the term “personal use” certainly broadens the speculative range.
Pelta listed the following revelation as the reason for his termination, a fitting term: In January 2007, a pregnant former PP/CA board member and current PP/CA employee asked Dr. Pelta to perform a confidential abortion upon her. She stated that, for various reasons, she wanted to avoid disclosing her pregnancy to other PP/CA board members and employees.
Although Dr. Pelta initially advised her to go through proper channels, she persisted and, in large part because of her position as a former PP/CA board member and current PP/CA employee, Dr. Pelta finally relented.
The woman specifically requested that Dr. Pelta keep the procedure a secret and not make a PP/CA record of the abortion. Dr. Pelta had maintained such confidentiality for abortion services provided to other PP/CA board members that, at their request, he kept confidential and did not record.
In light of these factors, Dr. Pelta agreed to the woman's request. On or about Jan. 19, 2007, Dr. Pelta successfully performed the procedure without complications. He did not charge the woman, nor did he receive any benefit for performing the abortion.
The lawsuit alleges Trombley fired Pelta after finding out about the abortion a couple weeks later.
There are two points to glean from this disclosure.
The first is why would an abortion industry employee and assumed abortion proponent be ashamed of her own abortion?
Second, Pelta admitted he committed secret abortions under a certain circumstance, an unethical and risky action in an already unethical and risky industry. Were there other circumstances? Is it a stretch to consider other abortionists commit cover-up abortions?
The second lawsuit was brought by RN Nicole Chesis against PP/CA and its new medical director, abortionist Darryn Dunbar, who incidentally took Pelta's place.
Dunbar fired Chesis on April 10, 2007. Her lawsuit included accusations and counter accusations. Mind you, these were alleged by PP employees, not pro-lifers:
“… changing dates on ultrasounds so that patients would have to pay a higher price for abortion services. …”
“… failure to ensure the presence of an anesthesiologist, licensed physician or registered nurse in or around the recovery room when sedation patients are present. …”
“… unlicensed employees with no medical training were performing improper ultrasounds and were making ultrasound diagnoses. …”
“… prescrib[ing] Depo-Provera to a patient with a history of depression” with the counter claim that “prescribing of Depo-Provera to patients with depressive orders is not prohibited. …”
What should we take away from all this?
The abortion industry is a house of cards. There is plenty of evidence against it just waiting to be uncovered. When the stars finally align and honorable law enforcement officers and agencies, judges, and legislators converge, it will fall.