David Grimes recently retired from the abortion business after 42 years, but he still actively promotes the life-destroying procedure.
The women’s magazine Cosmopolitan profiled him in a new piece that highlights abortionists who began their work before Roe v. Wade.
Grimes started aborting unborn babies while he was in medical school in the early 1970s, according to the article. He said he was studying medicine at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill when the state legalized abortion – three years before Roe v. Wade.
But there were restrictions in the state law — you had to have two physicians who sign off their approval for the procedure. It was degrading for a woman to have to go before a panel of physicians to justify what she wants to do. When Roe v. Wade was decided, all the restrictive state laws like North Carolina’s were struck down as unconstitutional. What Roe v. Wade said, essentially, is in the first trimester, you can’t intervene between the doctor and patient.
But Grimes only told the half-truth. In Roe v. Wade, coupled with its companion case Doe v. Bolton, the U.S. Supreme Court justices allowed for abortions on demand for any reason through all nine months of pregnancy – not just the first trimester, as he claimed. Interestingly, the same Cosmo piece that profiled Grimes also highlighted the work of late-term abortionist Curtis Boyd.
Grimes went on to talk about the unsafe, illegal abortions that he witnessed prior to and immediately after the Roe decision. During that time period, Grimes said he treated a number of women who were suffering complications from illegal abortions.
Back in the ’50s and ’60s, every major metropolitan hospital in the U.S. had a septic abortion ward. The most common reason for admission to gynecological services in America was complication of abortion. When I was a doctor at L.A. County hospital in 1986, my predecessors who’d trained there told me the septic abortion ward at that hospital was a 20-bed, U-shaped ward, and they had two private rooms. These private rooms were there so women could be alone with their families as they died from complications of illegal abortions, and those rooms were always full. When the California laws changed in 1967 and abortion became legal in the state, those wards emptied, closed, and were converted to other uses.
“It was horrible carnage — and every one of those deaths was preventable,” he added. “These women weren’t dying of exotic diseases. They were dying of simple things like hemorrhage and infection, and any third-year medical student with adequate equipment could’ve easily handled it.”
Of course, when Grimes said every death was preventable, he meant only women, not their unborn babies.
Keep up with the latest pro-life news and information on Twitter. Follow @LifeNewsHQ
“But the reason those women were dying is because the country had not yet made the decision that these women’s lives are worth saving. It’s just one of the ugly manifestations of misogyny, and it needs to be understood as such. It was a profound disdain of women and their autonomy,” he continued.
Grimes said he respects women to make their own decisions about abortion. He implied that he wants to save women’s lives by protecting them from dangerous, back alley abortions. But his actions show a very different picture.
Grimes is one of abortion activists’ go-to “experts” who denies basically any research that shows how abortions can increase risks to women’s health.
When Canadian filmmaker Punam Kumar Gill recently decided to investigated whether the link between abortion and breast cancer was real or just something made up by pro-lifers, her documentary crew interviewed Grimes.
“The jury is in,” Grimes said in Gill’s documentary “HUSH.” “What we now know is that there are no long-term consequences from abortion, and that includes psychological effects as well.”
But Gill, who, like Grimes, believes abortion should be legal, continued with her research and came to the conclusion that Grimes is wrong. She found a number of studies showing that abortions do put women at greater risk of breast cancer, future preterm birth, psychological problems and more. Gill’s film concluded that at the very least, there is not enough research to confirm what Grimes said, and there is research showing the opposite to be true. She argued that women should be fully informed about possible risks before having an abortion.
Grimes does not support measures that protect women either. He publicly opposed abortion facility regulations that were written specifically to protect women from modern-day, “back alley”-type abortionists like Kermit Gosnell and Steven Brigham. Rather than support these protective measures, Grimes described them as “sinister” in a 2014 interview with ThinkProgress.
Unlike Grimes, pro-lifers want to save both lives from abortion – unborn babies and women. We believe that women deserve to be fully informed about the possible risks of abortion and the life of their child in the womb. And we do not want either a woman or her unborn child to die a horrible, unnecessary death.