A patient at The Women’s Med Center had to be transported to the hospital after suffering a seizure moments after undergoing an abortion Thursday, 2/7/19. The Women’s Med Center is a late-term abortion facility owned by Martin Haskell— an abortionist who claims to have invented the partial birth abortion procedure— and they perform abortions throughout all nine months of pregnancy.
The 911 call was made by Catherine Romanos, the patient’s doctor, who requested the ambulance transport after her thirty-one-year-old patient began seizing uncontrollably for 10 minutes. According to the EMS report, the woman was unconscious, but Romanos still attempted to minimize the woman’s condition. Romanos indicated the abortion procedure her patient underwent was uncomplicated, and that the patient’s husband had informed her that his wife frequently suffered from 10 minute long seizures.
This means Romanos was fully aware of her patient’s medical condition, but performed the procedure on her anyway. As Troy Newman, the president of Operation Rescue stated, “Why did the Women’s Med Center conduct an abortion on a woman with a known seizure disorder when they were not equipped to treat her in the event of a seizure? It seems that this woman’s condition should have contraindicated abortion in an ill-equipped outpatient surgery facility.”
This is not the first time the clinic has been in trouble. Since 2015, The Ohio Department of Health was in a legal battle with the clinic. According to LifeNews.com, the legal battle concerns the clinic’s failure to comply with “ambulatory surgical facility licensing regulations that required abortionists to maintain hospital privileges or obtain a variance using an approved hospital transfer agreement.” Perhaps even more shocking is that the late-term abortion facility is being permitted to operate with a license that expired in 2012.
Haskell is also no stranger to his clinics being subject to arduous legal battles. Due to licensing violations, Haskell was ordered to close his Sharonville, Ohio abortion clinic in 2014. As Operation Rescue reported:
“Haskell operated for years under a variance issued by the ODH that allowed him to continue operating as long as he maintained an approved agreement with two physicians to supply hospital care for women injured during abortions done by Haskell in Sharonville. However, Haskell continually changed the agreement without notifying the ODH. The physicians he had agreements with were a troubled lot that cast doubt on whether they could supply adequate hospital care for patients.”
From various abortion facilities being shut down for health code violations, such as rusted and moldy equipment, to The Women’s Med Center being unable to meet safety requirements for licensing, the agenda becomes clear. Abortion clinics care more about turning this invasive procedure into a product they can sell while operating under the guise that they care for women.
But if that were the case, regulations requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges to hospitals less than 30 miles away wouldn’t have been discarded during the Whole Women’s Health vs. Hellerstedt case. This standard initially required abortion clinics to meet the minimum standard for health and safety that are required of ambulatory surgical centers. The court’s ruling in this case ended this safety regulation.
We have seen the health and safety requirements for abortion clinics weaken in recent years, and in the state of Alaska— where there is no limit on abortions— the state health department says it “does not have inspection reports for our facilities because we don’t consider them medical clinics.” The abortion industry has even fought informed consent laws which require abortion providers to notify women of certain facts before an abortion can be performed on them.
The majority of women seeking abortions do so because they feel they are unable to support a child at the time of their pregnancy. The abortion industry takes advantage of these women in their time of need and manipulates them into believing abortion is their only option. Women facing unplanned pregnancies are in need of support, and the abortion industry will not offer them the care they need, as proven by the industry’s many attempts to withdraw regulations meant to ensure the safety of the woman.
The views expressed in this article are the opinion of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Lone Conservative staff.