(Des Moines, IA) An Amicus Curieae, or “Friend of the Court Brief” has been submitted to the Iowa Supreme Court on behalf of Planned Parenthood of the Heartland. But some of the studies cited in the brief include chilling quotes that aren’t too friendly to Planned Parenthood.
The case before the Iowa Supreme Court, Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, Inc. and Dr. Jill Meadows v. Iowa Board of Medicine is Planned Parenthood’s appeal of the Iowa Board of Medicine’s ban of the use of telemedicine for abortion.
The brief is from three groups:
- National Women’s Law Center (NWLC)
- Iowa Coalition Against Domestic Violence (ICADV)
- Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault (IowaCASA)
(More about them tomorrow.)
The Amicus brief, filed by Des Moines attorney Roxanne Conlin, a long-time abortion activist and Planned Parenthood ally, claims that the IBOM rule will make it “harder, or in some cases, impossible for vulnerable women to access abortion services.”
Those include, “sexual assault survivors, women in abusive relationships, rural women, low-income women and women with certain pre-existing medical conditions.”
The brief cites all kinds of studies—some from The Guttmacher Institute, which was once Planned Parenthood’s research arm. And some from Dr. Daniel Grossman of Ibis Reproductive Health, who we profiled in the IRTL News March 2013 issue. Dr. Grossman’s group partners with Planned Parenthood on abortion experiments on women in the third world.
“You could hear screaming in the other room…”
One of the cited studies in the Friend of the Court Brief, published by Guttmacher, aimed to show that, “Women choose medical over surgical abortion because it is more natural, more private and less painful.”
(Source: “Having an Abortion Using Mifepristone And Home Misoprostol: A Qualitative Analysis Of Women’s Experiences,” by Fielding, Edmunds, and Schaff)
A 29 year-old woman in the study had this to say about her surgical abortion experience:
“They kind of herded you in like cattle, and there were like five or six women sitting in the same room. And then one by one you got called in and you could hear the screaming in the other room. It was like the fear of the unknown; it was just horrible…”
Think about that…the study is quoting a woman who thinks it is better to abort at home, so you won’t have to hear the other women screaming during their abortion.
Sometimes it’s not what is said in the study, but what is not said. “Nine women expressed relief,” in their follow-up visit 4-8 days after the medication abortion, according to the study. But there were 43 women in the study. What did the other 34 feel?
The Amicus brief and the studies it cites are worth reading. But be sure to read between the lines.
You can read below: