Probably the best article that you're going to read about George Tiller and why he did what he did.
Hat Tip: Many thanks, Patty PV!
In this 1985 photo, Charlotte Taft , operator of a clinic in Dallas, Texas, hugs George Tiller during a press conference outside his office which was damage by a bomb in Wichita, Kan. Tiller, one of the nation's few providers of late-term abortions despite decades of protests and attacks, was shot and killed Sunday May 31, 2009 in a church where he was serving as an usher. (AP Photo/The Wichita Eagle, Gregory Drezdzon)


It is Tiller's commitment to his patients and their lives that dispel the slanders and attacks against him. The lies that were told that claimed he had performed tens of thousands of late-term abortions, that those abortions were all he did, that he was an evil man who was 'killing babies' simply because women were 'too lazy' to get an abortion sooner, or to use contraception were legion. I am glad that now people are telling his story.
And I hope the state of Kansas does not use the death penalty on Roeder and that he lives a very long time rotting in a cell. I think an apt sentence is life without parole with no access to television, solitary confinement, restricted access to visits and phone calls, and no access to the media.
The true evil are the zealots and terrorists who use such tactics against a man and our society. We will never surrender to such worthless scum.
Posted by: Mikeybackwards | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 09:10 AM
Tiller's abortion business was very lucrative. And he defended his income every way he could.
He had the former Kansas governor in his pocket due to campaign contributions.
As a doctor, he had presumably taken the Hippocratic oath to 'first of all, do no harm', but then abandoned that principle when it became clear how much money was in the abortion business.
Causing a baby to be delivered (except the head) and then puncturing the back of the skull and sucking out the brains with a vacuum is evil.
I don't care how you try to spin it as 'noble'. It is evil.
Whether that was 10% of what he did or 90% of what he did makes no difference.
It is an evil act of butchering a child who could've lived.
All he had to do was allow the head to be delivered and voila! -- the baby is no longer a burden to the mother.
But no.
He had to kill it to get paid the big bucks.
Posted by: Joe White | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 09:27 AM
Joe -
You resistance to reality in stupendous.
Posted by: Mikeybackwards | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 09:41 AM
So he was actually NOT aborting healthy babies? Has that been a bunch of bs? Do we know for certain one way or another or is it just all speculation?
Of course you often have to abort deformed babies. A had a friend who became pregnant with a severely deformed baby. She didn't abort because she thought maybe they were wrong, or maybe if she prayed harder... When she was 22 weeks along, the head too big for her petite size to carry, her ObGyn performed a C-Section. The baby died within the hour.
I had another friend that broke her neck in an accident. While at the hospital, they discovered that she was 6 weeks pregnant. A few weeks later, the doctor told her that with the fresh neck break, carrying the baby to term could cause her permanent paralysis from the neck down. She terminated the pregnancy - but lost quite a few "friends" who didn't know the whole story behind her decision.
Are there really people who are opposed to a thing like that? Even if your choice might be different, I hope that everyone can at least understand. "Abortions" are not all equal.
Posted by: Jellybean | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 09:42 AM
Jellybean, not many people can see more than one side to this issue.
Posted by: Patty PV | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 10:04 AM
Mikey, I understand your anger, but solitary confinement is overused. Typically, the discipline problems are put into solitary, but these people usually have mental issues, which the confinement just exacerbates. There are some reports that this fellow has mental and emotional problems to start with.
Punishment may not be the answer here - he just needs to be kept away from society, so he can't harm anyone.
Posted by: quixotic | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 10:07 AM
Is there no middle ground to all of this? I don't condone abortion, but I don't want to see it outlawed, or watch as fanatics from either side tear each other apart over it. I'm not certain, but I would doubt that there are many late term abortions carried out without there being a good medical reason to perform them...at least that's what I'm hoping.
Posted by: mutt | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 10:14 AM
Didn't the Spartans take care of their deformed children to? I mean they left them on a cliff to die I guess a vacuum is more humane.
Mikey before you start I know they were children carried to full term and delivered. Same concept though, baby may have a problem or deformity so they end it.
Posted by: Chuck Rizzo | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 10:47 AM
Chuck -
I don't have a beef with you on this one. Abortion has been around nearly as long as civilization itself. A common medieval method was drinking a tea made of the herb, pennyroyal, which would cause a 'miscarriage' (one reason it was so common was many homes kept pennyroyal for use in bedding to drive away fleas, lice, bedbugs, and ticks). Also many 'civilizations' have had a history of abandoning the deformed, the sick, the old, and even in many cases twins or triplets to die of exposure, starvation, thirst, or predation.
Posted by: Mikeybackwards | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 11:33 AM
Jellybean, not many people can see more than one side to this issue.
Posted by: Patty PV | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 10:04 AM
Lots of people can see more than one side.. the problem is that they don't agree with the assertion that an abortion is a cut and dry, medical procedure..and that it is just no big deal.
Just because you don't agree with someone, doesn't mean you cant see where they are coming from.
Posted by: Searching | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 11:52 AM
I've never met anyone who thought an abortion was just no big deal.
I take that back. I did know one woman who behaved as if she thought so . . . but I also believe she was mentally unbalanced.
Posted by: Patty PV | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 12:54 PM
Mikey wrote:
"Abortion has been around nearly as long as civilization itself."
Ah, the 'everyone's doing it' defense.
(My kids tried that one for lots of stuff. I didn't buy it from them either.)
Rape has been around since civilization began.
Theft has been around since civilization began.
Assault has been around since civilization began.
How long do you want the list, Mikey?
Posted by: Joe White | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 01:06 PM
Well, how many women have you known that have had an abortion?
Posted by: Searching | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 01:09 PM
Searching, how many women have you known that were told that, under no uncertain terms, if they were to carry this pregnancy to term, the baby will have no chance of survival, and the mother will most likely, if not definitely, die as well?
How many women have you known that at their 18-20 week scan (the first and/or only scan most get due to insurance constraints) find that there is something terribly, horribly, no correction/surgery available, wrong?
How many women have you known that developed severe pre-eclampsia, for which the only cure is delivery, that has gotten out of control before the baby is viable?
My generation is one that is waiting longer and longer to have babies, and in turn, are suffering more and more from these kinds of complications, so I've known more than I care to think about. It's a horrible situation, a gut wrenching decision, but often the only decision they can make.
Dr. Tiller was one of a barely a handful of doctors that would save these womens' lives by performing a late-term abortion. He was one of few that would help these women through the most awful thing they've ever had to endure. And he did for years, under scrutiny, threats, slander, all because he felt strongly enough about those women and their health.
This great man wasn't afraid to stand in the face of adversity, make the hard decisions, and help women that no one else would. The world is a lesser place without him.
This is why I left CSKC and haven't been back. Because you absolutely are not allowed to have an opposing opinion on the "hot topics" without being berated, insulted, and abused.
Posted by: cooper1178 | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 01:24 PM
If the mother's life is truly endangered, abortion should be an option IMHO.
Part of that process should be the unbiased opinion of another physician who has no financial ties to the abortionist.
It was concerning this very issue that George Tiller was in danger of losing his medical license at the time he was killed. The Kansas Board of Healing Arts was investigating him for his illegal skirting of this requirement of Kansas law.
http://www.ksbha.org/Press_Releases/12-12-08_tillerpetition.pdf
Posted by: Joe White | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 01:35 PM
I just did the research cooper. and these circumstances you are talking about, make up 1% of total abortions.. so, what is your reasoning for the other 99%? Profit, is what is sounds like to me.
Posted by: Searching | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 01:54 PM
Unless you want to go with the reasoning of some extreme websites and go for the genocide of the black and hispanic races?
I personally, go along with the profit. If you are one of the few that do it.. you will rake in the bucks.
Posted by: Searching | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 01:55 PM
Well, how many women have you known that have had an abortion?
Posted by: Searching | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 01:09 PM
I worked for several years as a facilitator in a women's healthcare clinic, so the answer to that would be, between 300 and 500.
Posted by: Patty PV | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 01:58 PM
Joe -
In this case I wasn't defending the use of abortion. You should really try the decaf. I was merely noting that like abandoning unwanted children, there is a long history of the use of abortion.
We seemed to have some pretty civil discussion yesterday. However, it seems that since I refused to play your 'what-if' game that you are now upset. What's up.
Posted by: Mikeybackwards | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 02:15 PM
cooper,
I'm glad you decided to post. It's nice to hear a variety of opinions on topics. Don't be a stranger.
Posted by: Rhonda | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 02:31 PM
Cooper - it's not as bad as it once was. Sorry that you left; when insults get personal, I scoot off the blog, too.
Posted by: Patty PV | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 02:31 PM
Cooper: Actually, until the last day or so, things have been pretty quiet. Our chief troublemaker has been banned, and I'm trying to get everyone to behave today.
Posted by: James Hart | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 02:34 PM
I'd be interested in the research Searching, it's almost impossible to find unbiased, non-politically or non-religiously motivated "statistics." There are lies, there are damn lies, and there are stats.
And even if that were the case, just 1%, are you willing to tell that 1% that they're lives aren't worth saving because the other 99% aren't medically necessary? And given the increases in infertility treatments, multiples, and older women getting pregnant, that number is also going to go up.
Posted by: cooper1178 | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 02:38 PM
Good work, James.
The truth is that it is the most interesting subjects that sometimes bring out the worst in some commenters. It's the hard questions that make people crazy.
I appreciate this article and this discussion, as I don't know that much about it myself. I know many women who have had abortions, but I don't know anyone who had to have a last trimester one. I can't even imagine how hard that would be. It's amazing to think that a person going through that would also have to put up with so much abuse from people who won't respect the private choice that has been made.
Posted by: Rhonda | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 02:41 PM
Years ago I watched a documentary which profiled women seeking abortions in a Woman's Clinic. Most of those girls were gang-banger types who came off as pretty tough during the interviews.
But, during the procedure, every single one of those girls began to bawl. I don't think they took it very lightly anymore.
I saw my daughter's fetal heartbeat when she was 4wks - her entire body the size of a grain of rice. I like to lay my head on her chest now, and listen to that same heartbeat.
I think aborting a healthy fetus is morally wrong. But, until I'm ready to step in and parent that other woman's baby - my moral opinions of what she should do are of no value. When my children are a little older, I hope to get out more and help take care of more of the born.
Posted by: Jellybean | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 02:45 PM
I think this article is very good characterization of Dr. Tiller. Why did this have to come from the UK?
I also do not believe Dr. Tiller did this for the money. Any idea what armed security around the clock would cost? Good lord, people, he did this because he knew he was helping people who struggled with the most horrendous decisions ever to be made by them.
And, when you say 1% of the population suffers from these kind of pregnancies, then that would be 675,000 women at any time. US census figures say there is approvixately 67.5 million women bw 15-45 yrs of age (child bearing age) in the US in 2005.
And with only 3 doctors in the US that is a possibility of 225,000 terminations a year. Which would be physically impossible.
Posted by: Robobuzz | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 02:45 PM
I wonder who the chief troublemaker is.
Posted by: D-man | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 02:46 PM
I wonder who the chief troublemaker is.
Posted by: D-man | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 02:46 PM
WAS. And, I can't believe you would even have to ask. ; )
I sure have enjoyed reading this thread. Nice to see comments from all sides, without the name calling...
Posted by: Tam | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 02:53 PM
Rhonda, you just brought to light another misconception that I think makes people very up in arms about this subject. You mention "last trimester" abortions. But "late term" is anything after 20 weeks, or the half way point. Most don't get their first sonogram until 18-20 weeks, it's already to late to have an early (acceptable?) abortion at the point. Viability is impossible before 24 weeks and even after that point, horrible odds.
I think there are a lot of people out there that think all of these "late term" abortions are happening when the baby could actually survive. I'm not going to say that doesn't happen, sadly I'm sure that it does, but terminating a doomed pregnancy at 23 weeks is very different, but labeled the same way.
Posted by: cooper1178 | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 03:03 PM
Robobuzz, you may find this article interesting.
Posted by: aqua | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 03:12 PM
cooper, we may not agree on everything, but I do respect your opinions. It is very nice to see your comments.
Posted by: aqua | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 03:16 PM
Your numbers are close Robo, but not quite.
It's not 1% of women have those kind of pregnancies, but 1% of pregnancies have those kind of complications. In 2004 there were 6.3 million pregnancies, so still, 63,900 women would've been faced with those issues, and that's a lot.
Posted by: cooper1178 | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 03:18 PM
Cooper, go to surgery .com they are pretty biased and hit their abortion section.
As to the sonogram at 18-20 They knew they were pregnant before that and the blood tests they give you prior to a sonogram, say a lot about what is going on. Any abnormalities would prompt an earlier sonogram.
Patty, I hardly think you can call treating a patient for one procedure as knowing them. Did you have coffee and talk on the phone all the time and really know how it was affecting them?
Posted by: Searching | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 03:23 PM
thanks aqua, it's hard to stay quiet about something I feel so strongly about.
I've been fortunate to a) when faced with an unplanned pregnancy, have the support system/education/salary to go ahead and have the most beautiful girl in the world and b) when I signed up the second time for this crazy parenting ride, I was able to get pregnant, stay that way to term, and deliver a wonderful butterball of a boy without complication.
But I'm 30, and if I want to try for #3 in a few years, I know what my odds are, and my friends are there and have been faced with horrible scenarios I can't even fathom. It breaks my heart that one of the few people that could actually assist them during the worst times of their life, and fought vehemently much of his life to do so, is gone.
Posted by: cooper1178 | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 03:24 PM
Even the PR arm of Planned Parenthood documents the overwhelming majority of abortions are done for convenience reasons.
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3711005.pdf
The 'womans health reasons' option is so wide that it could include just about anything from backache and excessive weight gain during pregnancy, to morning sickness or whatever; and still only 12% of women cited it as a contributing factor, not even necessarily the main reason.
Posted by: Joe White | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 03:36 PM
There is a statement in the article I posted above that we all can agree on.
We all want to reduce and/or eliminate abortions.
Posted by: aqua | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 03:51 PM
Searching, my trisomy test wasn't administered until week 18, and the results weren't given until well after 20 weeks, if there had been an issue I wouldn't have know until then. Standard timing for the trisomy is 16-18 weeks, and that's the one that tests for abnormalities. The only blood test before that is to measure hormones to be sure that the cells are doubling at the proper pace. It would be hard to tell before that "late term" mark for many of things that might prompt an otherwise hopeful and willing mother to terminate.
Posted by: cooper1178 | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 03:55 PM
Searching, I probably spent two to three hours with person. My job with their appointments involved describing the procedure and what to expect, to determine if the procedure really was their decision and not their parents/boyfriend forcing them into the decision (because in that case, we cancelled their appointment), to make sure they had examined all their options other than abortion, to make sure they could describe what kind of support system they had (people who did have coffee and talk to them on the phone all the time) and refer them to additional counseling if needed. Then, also, to make sure that they left the clinic prepared to use some form of birth control. To answer your question, no, we did not have coffee and talk on the phone all the time. However, in the course of the time I was with them, we talked about things that might not ever discuss with their husbands, girlfriends, or kids.
Posted by: Patty PV | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 04:19 PM
Having had one aunt that had her baby stuck in the birth canal and another that carried and gave birth a mole pregancy I am glad that the testing for health problems is better now. At that time,50's early 60's, if you were poor you were lucky to have much prenatal care. Many of the current tests were not available. Even with the tests not all conditions can be tested for. Not all of the conditions are immediately fatal but the baby will never be able to be off life support. Every woman and family should have the option to have an abortion if needed. And for many abused women in difficult situtations being forced to carry a child is a very cruel life sentence.
People keep yelling that there are families out there to adopt all of the babies that are aborted, including one with only the brain stem developed. Where are they when needed to pay for the medical and emotional care that watching your child that has a health condition die slowly day by day. Think of Tay Sauks. I probably spelled that wrong.
Posted by: AH | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 04:36 PM
1.1 million babies aborted every year.
So if they don't get aborted, what happens to those 1.1 million unwanted children? Do their parents change their minds and bring them up in a nice home? Is suspect not. More likely, they become dependent on government welfare systems.
If you believe abortion is wrong, don't have one.
Posted by: Gomez Adams | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 04:51 PM
Chief troublemaker banned? But Mikey's posted like 1000 times within the last couple days.
Posted by: Chuck Rizzo | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 09:14 PM
Mikey is fine. Verbose, and pedantic maybe . . . and as passionate about his beliefs as the people who disagree with him. But if the chief troublemaker had made half as much sense - without responding with personal attacks - there would have been no need for a ban.
Posted by: Patty PV | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 09:50 PM
Patty -
Thank you . . . I think. LOL.
Posted by: Mikeybackwards | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 11:16 PM
Patty you forgot long winded.
Posted by: Chuck Rizzo | Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 11:52 PM
One thing that pretty much everyone on both sides would agree on is that we'd like to see abortions minimized to a low number or eliminated completely. For the Pro-choice side, it would mean that people are only getting pregnant when they plan on it and there are few if any medical emergencies that would require terminating the pregnancies.
For the pro-life side, it would be obvious that fewer are aborting which would make them happy too.
But, I think it's important that the choice be out there for others. In my case, I wouldn't want to abort unless my lady was in a medical emergency, or there were serious issues with the fetus that would make life painful and difficult to live. Yes, I know that there are people who get abortions as a method to stop an unwanted pregnancy or are mad at a boyfriend or ex for leaving them when they got pregnant or a parent who would be ashamed and forced them into it. I'd rather in those cases that they'd just use adoption instead of aborting.
And that's the opinion of a pro choice man. I don't have the right to tell anyone else what to do with their body and it's their choice and burden to take.
Posted by: You're a Mean Drunk R2D2™ | Wednesday, June 03, 2009 at 12:08 AM
R2 wrote:
"....serious issues with the fetus that would make life painful and difficult to live...."
Why is killing the patient an answer to a serious health issue?
Isn't medicine all about finding a way to ease pain and reduce suffering?
What if we had taken that approach with every serious disease in the last few centuries, 'well, they're suffering, let's kill them' ?
Justifying the killing of a baby because it happens to have less than perfect health is simply disgusting.
Posted by: Joe White | Wednesday, June 03, 2009 at 08:42 AM
Chuck -
Dictionary.com
She didn't forget long-winded, she simply used a more concise - or less long-winded - term for it, specifically verbose.
My busting your chops about not knowing a pretty basic vocabulary word is now the pedantic part.
I highly recommend you sign up for dictionary.com's word of the day or at least read the Word Power feature in Reader's Digest.
Posted by: Mikeybackwards | Wednesday, June 03, 2009 at 09:27 AM
Mikey I'm sorry verbose isn't a word I use daily or know the definition for. I like using words everyone knows and understands. From now on just for you I'm going to chose random words out of dictionary.com to use even though I would never use them in my daily conversations with people.
Posted by: Chuck Rizzo | Wednesday, June 03, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Chuck, I love language, and have been told that I tick people off when I use words that they rarely use in daily conversations. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I grew up in a family where we used words in daily conversation like that all the time. And - I was the "dumb one" of the kids.
So my default mode is that everyone must know these words . . . sorry.
But, at least, I know when to use Ma'am and Sir! LOL
Posted by: Patty PV | Wednesday, June 03, 2009 at 01:36 PM
Oh I don't mind people who do it Patty, but mikey pointing out that I don't know what it means then saying I need to do word of the day to up my language skills irked me a little. I don't find people like that jerky. I just prefer the "simple" man approach. I have to in my job. I can't really expect Betty Sue in nowhere Arkansas to know what the word fiduciary means. I don't expect 16 year old Tommy to know what the term proximate cause means. I have to explain complex scenario's to simple people everyday so I just chose to talk that way. I know many grandiose words, but I chose not to use them.
Right now I'm only thinking of four letter words to yell at mikey, well when they run all together they aren't four letter anymore but you get the picture.
Posted by: Chuck Rizzo | Wednesday, June 03, 2009 at 06:08 PM