Gerri Santoro and the Future of Obama-Care

In June of 1964, Geraldine “Gerri” Santoro’s body was discovered in a motel room. She had died during a “back alley abortion”. In May of 1973, a crime scene photo of Gerri Santoro was published in MS Magazine. The photo was powerful, Gerri’s dead, bloody body, kneeling and collapsed on the floor, blood sodden towels beneath her, evidence that she had tried to staunch the bleeding as her very life flowed from her. With the then recent SCOTUS decision of Roe v. Wade being made in January of that year, Gerri’s re-discovered case and horrid photo became a powerful symbol of the newly legitimatized pro-choice movement.

Deaths from “unsafe abortions” are still touted by the pro-life crowd (unsafe abortions differ from illegal abortions, it seems that over 90% of illegal abortions performed in the United States are performed by doctors, thereby deemed “safe”) to advance portions of their agenda. In 1988, Becky Bell died of a back alley abortion she sought because her of home State of Indiana’s Parental Consent Laws. In 2005, in Michigan, a 16 year old boy beat his under age, pregnant girl friend with a baseball bat, at her behest, hoping to induce a miscarriage, once again due to her unwillingness to inform her parents, as required by law. Both these cases are still used today to support the overturn of Parental Consent Laws and most recently, to support tax-payer funded abortion, although, in the spirit of “Man-caused disasters” and “overseas contingency operations” abortion is now called “reproductive health services.

In 2008 the Guttmacher Institute in conjunction with the WHO released data stating that:

— Where abortion is legal and permitted on broad grounds, it is generally safe, and where it is illegal in many circumstances, it is often unsafe. For example, in South Africa, the incidence of infection resulting from abortion decreased by 52% after the abortion law was liberalized in 1996.

— The worldwide unsafe abortion rate was essentially unchanged between 1995 and 2003 (15 and 14 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44, respectively). Because the overall abortion rate declined during this period, the proportion of all abortions that are unsafe increased from 44% to 47%.

— Worldwide, an estimated five million women are hospitalized each year for treatment of abortion-related complications, such as hemorrhage and sepsis.

— Complications due to unsafe abortion procedures account for an estimated 13% of maternal deaths worldwide, or 67,000 per year.

— Almost all abortion-related deaths occur in developing countries. They are highest in Africa, where there were an estimated 650 deaths per 100,000 unsafe abortions in 2003, compared with 10 per 100,000 in developed regions.                                                                                               
— Approximately 220,000 children worldwide lose their mothers every year from abortion-related deaths.

— Additional consequences of unsafe abortion include loss of productivity, economic burden on public health systems, stigma and long-term health problems, such as infertility.

To summarize the pro-choice argument, where abortion is legal and permitted on broad grounds (broad grounds would include ignorance, irresponsibility and laziness as well as genuine threat to the mother’s life, rape etc.) it saves lives. At least the lives of those capable of making decisions to avoid the need for an abortion in the first place. Where abortion is illegal, or difficult to obtain, you have an increase in unsafe or back alley abortions and increased death, loss of productivity, economic burden on public health systems and long term health problems.

As America’s leftists push for Obama-Care, and the resulting rationing, increased waiting periods and scarcity of quality care, the BBC reports that the UK recently announced a ban on private organ transplants. It seems that…

“It emerged that more than 700 transplants, mostly liver transplants, had been carried out on non-UK patients over the past decade.  In total, 631 of those transplants used organs from dead donors and, of those, 314 recipients were from outside the EU.”

The existence of bribes or cash fees leading up to these questionable surgeries is, at this time unknown. The BBC went on to state that while 10,000 people in the UK are currently in need of a transplant, only 3500 transplants were performed last year and approximately 1000 of those in need of a transplant died while waiting.

It doesn’t require Donald Trump or T. Boone Pickett to see a demand for a service in those statistics. How long will it take before “back alley transplants” becomes a thriving underground business, complete with the gruesome bodies of those whose surgeries weren’t successful being discovered in hotel rooms? And what will have driven these future victims of Obama-Care to such desperation if not the unavailability of medical care? If you think I’m reaching for this conclusion, compare the two, if an unwanted pregnancy and the life altering effects of a baby will drive women to risk death in back alley abortions, what will the absolute requirement for a transplant, or cancer surgery, or chemo, or the absolute NEED for any other modern medical miracle drive those who have been refused care or those who linger, wasting away on a months long waiting list with only certain death or surgery in their future, not merely life altering circumstances, life ending circumstances do? What would you do? Why would your Nation put you in those circumstances?

h/t David Hinz Morning Coffee News Update

Originally published at The Minority Report