Justice For Kids

Vision for Bankrupting Abortion

                                                                             20 October 2015

Chapter 1: Vision: Make Abortions as Rare as Snow in

a Seattle Summer

 

Vision: Make abortion rare via:

   - Promote ACP (Abortion-Cerbral Palsy) law suits

     making it financial suicide to perform abortions

   - Help more states (& eventually Canadian provinces)

     pass WRTK (Women's Right To Know) law mandating

     that women going to abortion clinics get

     abortion-preemie warnings

   - Inform more doctors in general about the

     abortion-preemie risk

 

How long can the Abortion 'Safety' Hoax last?

 

     In 1912 the 'Piltdown Man', the 'missing link' between apes

and humans was 'discovered' in Britain. 'Piltdown Man' (P-M)

was enthusiastically embraced by anthropologists around the

world. After a decade or two doubts about the authenticity

of P-M surfaced. Finally in 1953 'Piltdown Man' was thoroughly

debunked & shown to be a HOAX; URL:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man . The Piltdown

Man hoax took 41 years to debunk.

 

     Ending abortion 'safety' HOAX & BANKRUPTING the industry

In conditioning U.S. public opinion to get induced abortion

(IA) declared legal by U.S. courts, many 'safety' claims were

made, including that IAs were safer for women than delivery of

babies. Another claim was that when IA was made legal, risk of

female suicide would decline. Both of these claims and many

other abortion 'safety' claims are 'smashed' by the very well

documented 2013 book COMPLICATIONS with lead author

Dr. Angela Lanfranchi (who is a breast cancer surgeon). The

bottom line is that abortion advocates attained their legalization

goal NOT by legislation, but by court decisions, including the

22 January 1973 'Roe v Wade' Supreme Court decision.

Once a U.S. abortion doctor loses a medical malpractice law

suite involving the brain injury Cerebral Palsy (CP) & that legal

judgment is sustained at higher court levels, 'the Writing is On

The Wall'. What sayeth that writing? Answer: Doctors

performing abortions are playing 'Russian Roulette' with

financial BNAKRUPTCY. U.S. doctors losing CP (Cerebral

Palsy) medical malpractice law suits where the victim is a

child, will often have to pay legal damage awards well above

$1 million. Also, such doctors will very often suffer damaged

reputations both among their medical colleagues and the

general public. Autism over the last ~10-15 years became

more common than CP, and premature birth (made more likely

by abortions) also raises a newborn baby's Autism risk.

According to Harvard University professor Michael Ganz

(PhD), the lifetime cost (medical + non-medical + lost income)

of a U.S. resident is $3.2 million, an estimate made in 2007.

 

Getting the ACP (Abortion-CP) risk to court

 

     The full exposure of why the evidence is very strong that

prior IAs boost CP risk is in Chapter 2; The following is just

a 'thumb nail' sketch of why the ACP risk is a very credible one.

In the medical community it has been SETTLED SCIENCE for

over 50 years that prematurely born babies have raised CP risk

& the more premature the birth, the higher the CP risk. In 2009

via two (2) SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS it became settled

science that prior IAs raise future risk of a preterm birth. There

are at least 2 other ways prior IAs raise CP risk in newborn

babies. Prior IAs for CHILDLESS women make it more likely

that such women will have a first delivery of a child over age

30. The 3rd CP risk of prior IAs is that maternal infection

elevates a newborn's risk of CP, whether that newborn baby

was born preterm, full-term, or post-term. It is absolutely

not debatable that induced abortions raise a woman's risk

of infection.

 

Two (2) ACP Legal Opportunities

 

  -1 ACP law suits where the victims were born VERY preterm

    (between 28.0 & 32.0 weeks' gestation) to moms with one

     or more prior IAs

  -2 CP law suits where the CP victims sue the WRONG doctors

     (eg. an innocent obstetrician), not an abortion doctor who

     caused damage to a woman's reproductive tract.

 

1 ACP law suit where the victims were born VERY

prematurely to moms with one or more prior IAs

 

Among the many legal claims in such a law suit here are two

key ones that the plaintiff should consider including:

 

   - “The doctor performing the abortion on my mother, Dr.

      Doe, failed to inform my mother that an IA would increase

      her future risk of having a VERY premature delivery of

      a baby with Cerebral Palsy.”

 

   - “Abortionist Dr. Doe failed to inform my mother that an IA

      would increase her risk of reproductive tract infection, a CP

      risk factor, whether a future delivery is preterm, full-term,

      or post term.”

 

     The February 2009 Dr. Hanes Swingle SRMA (Systematic

Review with Meta-Analysis) found that prior IAs multiply very

preterm birth odds by 1.64 (ie. 64% higher risk). Very

premature newborn babies have 55 times the CP risk as do

full-term newborn babies, according to the 2008 Evelyn

Himpens et al. SRMA.

 

2 CP law suits by victims who sue the wrong doctors

 

     It is possible that the plaintiff with CP will falsely sue

his/her mother's obstetrician believing that his/her alleged

medical negligence was the main causal factor in the plaintiff

being born with CP. This was the case in an Australian law

suit with a decision rendered on 8 April 2004. Kristy Bruce,

born post-term (NOT preterm, NOT full-term) in 1989 with CP,

sued her mother's obstetrician, Dr. Alan Kaye, alleging that his

medical negligence caused her CP. On 8 April 2004 Australian

judge Michael Grove rendered his decision: Not guilty, backed

by his 100 point ruling in which Grove pointed an accusing

finger at a prior induced abortion performed on Bruce's mother

Sharon Shavelle that weakened her uterus. In Shevelle's

pregnancy with Kristy Bruce her womb ruptured, the likely

cause of Kristy Bruce's CP.

 

     A defense counsel in a CP law suit may want to question the

plaintiff's mother as to whether she had any induced abortions

before the pregnancy involving the plaintiff. If the answer

is 'YES', that may well 'open the door' to exploring whether

prior IAs may have played a part in causing the plaintiff's CP.

Certainly, such prior IAs must be very suspect, if the plaintiff

was born prematurely, even if the delivery of the plaintiff

was only born moderately prematurely (between 32.0 &

37.0 weeks' gestation). The more premature the birth, the

higher the newborn baby's CP risk. Those born under 28.0

weeks' gestation have 129 time the CP risk as do full-term

newborns. For the very premature the CP risk is 55 times that

of full-term babies; both figures come from the 2008 Evelyn

Himpens et al. 'study of studies' (ie. meta-analysis).


...______________________________________________________________..

 

[End of the Vision section; what follows is

legacy articles]
 
Chapter 1                          Justice For Kids Now       8 August 2013
 

Best Video Exposing the 'Abortion-Preemie' Risk:

http://www.aaplog.org/media/     

 

Best Article to Expose 'Abortion-Preemie' risk

(Dr. Martin McCaffrey (U. North Carolina):

http://www.ncfpc.org/FNC/1305-FNC-Spring13-Abortion%27sImpactOnPrematurity2.pdf

  

Your Child Suffers AUTISM, Cerebral Palsy, Epilepsy etc.

Due to Prior Abortions:      Should You Sue?


( Brent Rooney (MSc), fullterm40@gmail.com , http://www.justiceforkids.webs.com )


If before giving birth to your child 'Chris' you had one or more prior induced
abortions, you boosted the odds that 'Chris' would be born prematurely (under
37 weeks' gestation) and have a 'MACE' (Mental retardation, Autism, Cerebral
palsy, Epilepsy) disorder. This online 'book' ( Justice For Kids Now ) will show
that this 'MACE' risk is for real and if you decide to sue your abortion doctor(s)
for medical negligence for your 'MACE' damaged child, suggests evidence that
may well improve your odds of winning (before an HONEST and well informed
court) a medical negligence law suit.

In 'capsule form' here is what Justice For Kids Now (online book) is all about.
The evidence that surgical induced abortions (“suction”, D & C, D & E, D & X)
raise the risk of future premature deliveries is overwhelming. In 2006 and 2007
eminent scientist Greg Alexander (ScD), representing the Institute of Medicine
(IoM), identified: “Prior first trimester induced abortion” as an “Immutable
Medical Risk Factor Associated with Preterm Birth” in an IoM textbook; URL: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11622&page=625 .[Behrman, 3] In
February 2009 Dr. Hanes M. Swingle ( U. South Alabama ) and his colleagues
published the 1st ever 'study of studies' of induced abortion & preterm birth risk.
Dr. Swingle et al. combined data from previous studies and reported that women
with prior IAs (Induced Abortions) significantly increased their relative odds of
a delivery under 32 weeks' gestation by 64%. So, it is very clear to HONEST
people who look into it that prior surgical abortions raise a woman's risk of a
premature delivery. That's point 1 & Point 2 is: it is not debatable that preterm
infants (born under 37 weeks' gestation) have higher 'MACE' (Mental retardation,
Autism, Cerebral palsy, Epilepsy ) risk than full-term newborns. Point 3: it is a
VERY rare abortion consent form that warns women that surgical abortions will
increase their future risk of a premature and handicapped newborn.
 

[To subscribe to the monthly Justice For Kids NOW Bulletin ezine, send an

email to <fullterm40@gmail.com> with “JFK-NOW” in the subject line.]

 A 'heads-up' for those with just a mild at best intention to sue. The following
concept, a principle of ethical medicine, is truly important to know & utilize in a
court of law:

PPG: PRINCIPLE of PRESUMED 'GUILT':

In the 'Court of Medicine' a 'defendant' new surgery (or drug) is presumed
'guilty' of serious adverse side-effects, until the 'defendant' is shown by very
strong evidence to be 'innocent' of adverse side-effects.”[PPG]

Yes, the plaintiff INITIALLY has the BURDEN of PROOF to show medical
negligence on the doctor's part in a Court of Law. Let's say that the abortion doctor
performed a surgical abortion (“suction”, D & E, D & C, or D &X). The court may
well presume that the particular procedure you had, say it was the very common
suction” (i.e. vacuum aspiration) abortion, has been safety validated via ANIMAL
testing & human studies. The grand total of published ANIMAL “suction” abortion
studies in peer-reviewed medical journals is, wait for it, ZERO as of 1 May 2010;
URL: http://www.jpands.org/vol13no4/rooney.pdf . For human “suction” abortion
studies & preterm birth risk, there are well over seventy (70) statistically significant
studies finding that women with prior “suction” abortions have higher risk of later
delivering a preterm newborns than women with zero prior induced abortions. The
2009 'study of studies' by Dr. Hanes Swingle et al. (Feb. 2009) & Dr. Prakesh Shah
(October 2009) made this settled science. Dr. Shah's study was published in the
very prestigious British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology.

.......................................................................................................................................

WARNING: Induced abortion is both a medical AND a LEGAL issue. Justice For
Kids Now thus must delve into some legal concepts. You should only use legal
concepts presented in JFK-Now that your competent and trusted lawyer accepts as
valid, since the author of JFK-Now, Brent Rooney (MSc), is NOT now nor has ever
been a lawyer! For example, in Chapter 3 Brent Rooney asserts that an elective procedure that a doctor knows or ought to know, is contraindicated and not in the
patient's best interest must be withheld from the patient. Did Rooney dream up this
legal concept while jogging one morning? That concept is found in the third edition
of Legal Liabilities of Doctors and Hospitals in Canada (judge Ellen I. Picard and
Gerald B. Robertson ). Since medical law varies by U.S. State, whether this prudent
principle applies to YOUR state (more precisely, the state in which the trial would be
held) would be a question for YOUR lawyer to ascertain; yes, there are some
medical law concepts that apply to all 50 U.S. states, such as “suction” abortion considered in general (not 100% of all cases) to be a legal medical procedure in most situations.

..........................................................................................................................................

Capsule view of the following JFK-NOW chapters:
 
Chapter  1:     The introduction chapter you are now reading
Bonus     1B  San Antonio, Texas Miracle Worker: Dr. Martha Garza

Chapter  2: Arguments against the APB (Abortion Preterm Birth) and how to
                   counter them
 
Chapter  3: Specific cases that should be more winnable law suits than normal.
 
Chapter  4: Brent Rooney (MSc) publishing credits in the preterm birth field
Bonus     4B A list of over 100 significant published studies validating APB risk
 
Chapter  5: “Miss F.B.'s” victory in 2005 ABC (Abortion-Breast-Cancer) law suit
                    and how this risk could improve your winning odds in an ABD
                    (Abortion-Brain-Damage) law suit
 
Chapter  6: Medical Progress Helped by Animal Studies
 
Chapter  7: 28 April 2009 Sworn Affidavit (affirming no published animal 
                    “suction” abortion studies)
 
Chapter  8: Electronic Copy of 30 October 2001 San Antonio, Texas Abortion    
                    Consent Form
 
Chapter  9: Prestigious LANCET concedes abortion-preemie risk in the 12
                    January 2008 issue
 
Chapter 10: $20,100 contest reward for FIRST person to identify a published
                      ANIMAL study of “suction” abortion
 
Chapter 11: Editor-in-Chief of BJOG (Dr. Philip Steer) admits abortion-preemie
                      risk evidence is OVERWHELMING
 
Chapter 12: Poland extremely premature birth rate plunges 21% due to abortion
                      rate plummet

Chapter 13: Rep. Waxman [Hon. Waxman asked for Systematic Review

                  showing no APB risk]

Chapter 14: Preemie Epidemic [13 million 'preemies' worldwide yearly]

Chapter 15: Hispanics Targeted [APB risk applies to Hispanic women too]

  
Is the abortion-preemie risk phony or is it 'for real'?

The answer to that question is well delved into in Chapter 2. Here is a hint to
what the answer is. Lancet is one of the four (4) most prestigious medical
journals (I am NOT claiming that prestige and true quality are one and the
same); the other three (3) being the British Medical Journal, Journal of the
American Medical Association (JAMA), and the New England Journal of
Medicine. In 2008 researchers led by Dr. Jay Iams had a series of  three
articles about preterm birth published in The Lancet. In the second of the 3
articles Dr. Iams et al. wrote the following[Iams, 4]:

For example, greater public and professional awareness of evidence that
repeated uterine instrumentation—eg, uterine curettage or endometrial biopsy—
is associated with increased risk of subsequent preterm birth might over time
influence decision-making about the procedure.[2,9-12]”[Iams, 4][quote taken
from page 165]

Since that above quote taken from the Iams et al. article does not include the
word abortion, how can one be confident that Iams et al. are implicating surgical
abortion as a preterm birth risk factor? After the sentence are citation numbers
(2 & 9 through 12). Two of those refer to very important abortion-preemie
studies, the 2005 'Moreau' study and the 2004 'Ancel-Papiernik' study; in this
chapter those two references are “1” and2” in the Reference section below.
Both 'Moreau' and 'Ancel-Papiernik' found that women with prior induced
abortions significantly raised their odds of a very preterm birth compared to
women with zero prior induced abortions. Not only was the 2008  Iams
published in Lancet, but three of the authors, namely Drs. Romero, Goldenberg,
&  Iams are 'heavyweights' in the 'preemie' field and none of them are known
to be associated with pro-life groups. Chapter 9 reveals more about this very
important admission.

[To subscribe to the monthly Justice For Kids NOW Bulletin ezine, send an
email to <fullterm40@gmail.com> with “JFK-NOW” in the subject line.]
 

Links to key websites exposing induced abortion health risks:

http://deveber.org/text/whaa-chapters.html

                                                 [ Women's Health after Abortion: online copy of the book]

http://www.bcpinstitute.org                     [Abortion-Breast-Cancer [ABC] info.]

http://www.conservapedia.com/Abortion [Major Abortion Risks]

http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com     [Karen Malec's ABC website]

http://www.abortionrisks.org                   [Key Abortion Risks]

 

 
Brent Rooney (MSc, Preterm Birth Researcher)
RPRC (Reduce Preterm Risk Coalition)
3456 Dunbar St. (Suite 146) Vancouver, Canada V6S 2C2
web: http://www.jpands.org/vol13no4/rooney.pdf
http://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/ronney.pdf
email: fullterm40@gmail.com stopcancer@yahoo.com whatsup@vcn.bc.ca

References

1 Ancel P-Y, Lelong N, Papiernik E, Saurel-Cubizoilles M-J, Kaminski M.
   History of induced abortion as a risk factor for preterm birth in European
   countries: results of the EUROPOP survey Human Reproduction
   2004;112:734-740
-

2 Moreau C, Kaminski M, Ancel PY et al. Previous I induced abortions and
   the risk of very preterm delivery; Results of the EPIPAGE study. British J
   Obstetrics Gynaecology 2005;112:430-437
-

          3 Behrman RE, Butler AS, Alexander GR. [Book] Preterm Birth:

             Causes, Consequences, and Prevention. National Academies Press 2007

             [ URL: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11622&page=625 ]

          -

4 Dr, Jay D. Iams, Dr. Robert Romero, Jennifer F. Culhane (PhD), Dr. Robert
   L.Goldenberg. Primary, secondary, and tertiary interventions to reduce the
   morbidity and mortality of preterm birth. Lancet 2008;371:164-165
   [ Abstract URL:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T1B-4RJS1PD-14&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=727caa3fee5e184f09b6fecb114b2e3d ]

______________________________________________________________________ 

 

Bonus 1-B  San Antonio Miracle Worker Dr. Martha Garza 


Reducing the number of serious childhood brain injuries is wonderful work; there is
something better and reproductive health specialist Dr. Garza ( San Antonio, Texas )
made it happen by PREVENTING 'MACE' ( Mental retardation, Autism, Cerebral
palsy, Epilepsy) injuries (all caused by brain damage) in newborn babies & that is even better than curing 'MACE' maladies years after birth. Dr. Martha Garza accomplished brain damage PREVENTION with a capital P.

As of 1 January 2004 every woman going to a Texas abortion clinic is offered a WRTK (Women's Right To Know) booklet with one of the warnings being that abortions raise future risk of a premature & handicapped newborn baby.
Without Dr. Martha Garza no such abortion-preemie warning would be in the Texas WRTK booklet. Fall 2003 a special Texas medical panel was set up to specify
 which health warnings would appear in the WRTK booklet. At first the medical panel was not inclined to include any APB (Abortion-Preterm-Birth) warning. Garza studied key APB medical articles & reviews, including the 2003 Rooney/Calhoun review (URL: http://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/rooney.pdf )[1]. Dr. Martha Garza ( President, Hispanic Alliance for Life & Family;; http://www.hispanicallianceforlifeandfamily.org/about.html)
must have given a convincing presentation to the special Texas panel, since it reversed itself by including a strong abortion-preemie warning in the Texas WRTK booklet; URL: http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/wrtk/pdf/booklet.pdf 
[skip to page 17). Dr. Martha Garza, an Obstetrician and Gynecologist practicing in San Antonio, Texas,   is very consistent in her stand for life affirming medicine as evidenced by advising young women to use safe and effective NFP (Natural Family Planning).  The importance of young women avoiding 'The Pill' is explained in the Appendix below (after the Reference section).

Did Dr. Garza mislead the special Texas medical panel?

When Garza made her 2003 APB ( Abortion-Preterm-Birth) presentation to the special  Texas medical panel, Dr. Garza had very strong published evidence to support higher 'preemie' risk for women with prior induced abortions. But it was theoretically possible that evidence after 2003 would show no elevated 'preemie'
risk. The opposite resulted. In 2009 the first ever SYSTEMATIC reviews of the
APB risk were published.[2,3]   Both the February 2009 Dr. Hanes Swingle [2]
review and the October 2009 Dr. Prakesh Shah review (British Journal of
Obstetrics & Gynaecology) [3] confirmed that women with prior induced abortions elevate their odds of a future premature delivery. Both Dr. Swingle & Dr. Shah achieved 'statistical significance' (i.e. being at least 95% confident
of increased risk), the 'gold standard' in medical science studies.

Dr. Martha Garza, Miracle Worker in San Antonio, Texas.
 
..................................................................................................................................................
 

Brent Rooney (MSc)
Research Director, Reduce Preterm Risk Coalition
3456 Dunbar St. (Suite 146) Vancouver Canada V6S 2C2
Web: http://www.justiceforkids.webs.com Email: fullterm40@gmail.com

References

1 Rooney B, Calhoun BC. Induced abortion and risk of later premature births. J

   American Physicians Surgeons 2003;8(2):46-49 [ URL:

   http://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/rooney.pdf ]

 

2 Shah P. et al. Induced termination of pregnancy and low birthweight and preterm birth: a

   systematic review and meta-analysis BJOG 2009;116(11):1425-1442 URL:

   http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122591273/abstract

 

3 Swingle HM, Colaizy TT, Zimmerman MB, Moriss FH. Abortion and the

   Risk of Subsequent Preterm Birth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

   Journal of Reproductive Medicine 2009;54:95-108

 
4 [Book:] Return to the Joy of Health (Dr. Zoltan Rona, Jeanne Marie Martin,


   Alive Books, 1995)

 

Appendix: Health Disaster of 'The Pill'

 

Zoltan Rona is a Toronto M.D. who also has a Master of Science in biochemistry.

Dr. Zoltan Rona is a 'super-star' in the field of Classical Medicine (aka 'alternative

medicine'). The following is extracted commentary from Dr. Rona's best selling

book (Return to the Joy of Health) about birth control pill side-effects (pages 218-

219):

 

Over the past 15 years, I have often said that the single biggest cause of

generated business at the doctor's office is the birth control pill. High

dose, medium dose or low dose, the story is the same—lots of visits to

doctors' offices to be examined, get Pap tests, treat all the resulting side

effects and get prescription refills....Numerous studies have documented

the fact that the pill creates vitamin and mineral deficiencies (folic acid,

zinc, B6, other B vitamins) leading to depression, fatigue, abnormal food

cravings, anorexia, migraine headaches, anemia, vision changes, and

other side effects....taking the birth control pill causes an increase in the

population of Candida (yeast) in the bowel as well as the vagina. Over

the years I have helped hundreds of women eliminate and prevent yeast

vaginitis attacks by simply having them stop taking the pill.... It is well

known that many causes of breast cancer are estrogen sensitive, meaning

that they grow in response to estrogens like those in the birth control

pill. Cancer specialists, therefore, often take breast cancer patients off

estrogens entirely...”[4]