Saturday, July 18, 2015

Planned Parenthood and Planned Organ Harvesting

Deborah Nucatola
Google Images

Sandhya Somashekhar and Danielle Paquette report that an "Undercover video shows Planned Parenthood official discussing fetal organs used for research" (Washington Post, July 14, 2015). The official, Deborah Nucatola, Senior Director of Medical Research for Planned Parenthood, was recorded on camera explaining Planned Parenthood's work in 'donating' fetal tissue to researchers, according to the Center for Medical Progress, which recorded the discussion and which claims Nucatola's words prove that Planned Parenthood is breaking the law by selling fetal organs. Here are some of Nucatola's words:
I'd say a lot of people want liver, . . . [a]nd for that reason, most providers will do this case under ultrasound guidance so they'll know where they're putting their forceps . . . . We've been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I'm not gonna crush that part, I'm gonna basically crush below, I'm gonna crush above, and I'm gonna see if I can get it all intact . . . . Every provider has patients who want to donate their tissue, and they want to accommodate them . . . . They just want to do it in a way that is not perceived as: This clinic is selling tissue. This clinic is making money off this. In the Planned Parenthood world, they're very, very sensitive to that. Some affiliates might do it for free. [But if they charge, t]hey want to come to a number that looks like a reasonable number for the effort . . . allotted on their part . . . . [I]t's probably anywhere from $30 to $100, depending on the facility and what's involved . . . . It just has to do with space issues, are you sending someone there that's going to be doing everything . . . is there shipping involved? Is someone going to be there to pick it up?
Nucatola seems to be very careful in avoiding language that suggests Planned Parenthood to be involved in selling fetal organs, but money is definitely described as changing hands, and that itself offers the temptation to charge more if more trouble is taken, especially if Planned Parenthood is taking orders for specific organs, a problematic issue in its own right:
Arthur Caplan, director of New York University's Division of Medical Ethics[, says,] "I think the only relevant goal of an abortion clinic is to provide a safe and least risky abortion to a woman . . . . If you're starting to play with how it's done, and when it's done, other things than women's health are coming into play. You're making a huge mountain of conflict of interest."
Even if an abortion clinic is not getting money, the harvesting of organs from fetuses is highly problematic, for the reason Caplan gives. And note that Nucatola's matter-of-fact wording presupposes fetal body parts as commodities, even in her remark - or perhaps especially in her remark - that "Some affiliates might do it for free." Because some, perhaps most, do not do it for free . . . but for a price.



At 1:08 PM, Blogger Carter Kaplan said...

This is even more Philip K. Dick than Philip K. Dick.

At 3:02 PM, Blogger Horace Jeffery Hodges said...

Maybe Horkheimer and Adorno were right after all on the dialectic of Enlightenment . . .

Jeffery Hodges

* * *

At 5:33 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


To get maybe a fuller appreciation of the horror contained in the lettuce-chomping Planned Parenthood's little happy lunch-talk you might take a look at the comment I left over on Malcolm's site on the timestamp July 15, 2015 at 11:59 am, post title "Remains of the Day."

One caution, the D&N linked piece I set there refers to a post David put up back in 2013 containing some photographs taken on the premises of a clinic operated by one Kermit Gosnell.


At 6:26 AM, Blogger Horace Jeffery Hodges said...

Thanks, JK.

Jeffery Hodges

* * *

At 7:59 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You click that D&N link Jeff I reckon you'll know in the future to leave off that "Thanks JK" and simply go with, "Acknowledged" ... which in my military frame of mind I'll understand immediately to whom any such reply was directed.


At 8:04 AM, Blogger Horace Jeffery Hodges said...

Oh. I had followed the link to the quote from the novel No Country for Old Men.

Could you put the correct link here?

Jeffery Hodges

* * *

At 9:36 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

My my my Professor Jeff, must I write a program and put it on the Garmin (makers of portable GPS devices) up/downlink? I thought your sidebar listed you having a PhD or something ...?

(Fortunately for me I have no high Academic recognitions for you to same same, funnybone me for not being particularly proficient getting links to stick where Google demands my "precise location & otherwise particulars .. browsing History, Cache, etc etc.")

I merely have to copy and paste you a "map" ... notice the timestamp/title of Malcolm's post above? (I'm supposing you didn't read my Entire Comment there? You did get to the link to No Country for Old Men though ... so you're as it might've been put, "In the Ballpark.")

On Malcolm's site .. at the timestamp comment mentioned above, in that comment body there's this (immediately above the D&N link) ... perhaps the timestamps are responsible .. I can see how it's possible .. Malcolm's site is EST but, David's site is GMT, the UK in other words.

Anyway. Just above the link to David's D&N (Malcolm's site) there's this sentence;

"My comment appears at this Wednesday, 15 July 2015 at 17:10 timestamp here:" then, immediately below the mentioned comment on Malcolm's is the link (at the 17:10 GMT comment) that got you in the D&N ballpark.

Must I send you an email?


At 10:09 AM, Blogger Horace Jeffery Hodges said...

I've since found what you were referring to, but for the convenience of readers, here's an easy, direct link - though don't click if you're squeamish.

Jeffery Hodges

* * *

At 11:24 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

That purely by happenstance No Country for Old Men "serendipitously, fortuitously aligned" though, I'm pretty sure None of the bloggers (even the incidental Bill V.) certainly Mr. Cormac McCarthy, would/will be expressing to ol' JK much Appreciations finding themselves - in whatever like - associated with my comments?

However. I make nor neither offer apologies. Sometimes it just happens there are "planetary" alignments.

At the risk of sounding like Forrest Gump - That's all I got to say about that.


At 11:40 AM, Blogger Horace Jeffery Hodges said...

One good thing for me in tracking down the link was in encountering that passage by Cormac McCarthy, which makes me want to read the entire novel.

Jeffery Hodges

* * *

At 12:54 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You'll enjoy it. Pretty much in the ways we've both been "so especially favored" in that the language compares rather like a certain Wiki entry ranging from a simple arrangement of a single thick to complex configurations featuring multiple corrugated and uncorrugated layers, which I simply say "Acknowledged" and wouldn't be disagreeable so particularly as what I said was like talking in a big empty place full of echoes.

Even though, there's this tale .. folklore, whatever .. certain aquatic flyers don't.

My Regards if that's possible. I don't keep up much anymore.

At 2:18 PM, Blogger Horace Jeffery Hodges said...

Old Cardboard McCarthy . . .

Jeffery Hodges

* * *

At 3:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Comparatively as "we understand" to another author you see what I mean Jeff .. a duck's "quack" doesn't echo

Forgive the lack of the ending punctuation as I've, at least learned, none of that matters

Kermit Gosnell particlarly illustrative

No relationships intended

At 6:22 PM, Blogger Horace Jeffery Hodges said...

Well, I'll be getting into McCarthy soon . . . with high expectations, but is it really true that a duck's quack doesn't echo?

Jeffery Hodges

* * *


Post a Comment

<< Home