NRL News

Michigan Abortion clinic owner ponders reopening after being closed for safety violations

by | Jan 2, 2013

By Dave Andrusko

Women's Medical Services

Women’s Medical Services

The owner of an Michigan abortion clinic closed last week by an order of the city of Muskegon’s Fire Prevention Bureau for nine potential violations is “seeking the community’s input on whether the clinic should be reopened,” according to Dr. Robert Alexander “said he wants to know the Muskegon community’s opinion. Should he reopen the clinic?” reports Eric Gaertne.

Information found on Alexander’s website describes Women’s Medical Services as an abortion clinic that provides abortion services, counseling and emergency contraception. Founded as the Seaway Medical Clinic in 1964, “The clinic claims to serve women from as far away as Battle Creek and Ludington, in addition to those in and around Muskegon County.”

According to stories that ran last week, in responding to an unrelated service call, Muskegon police officers noticed the alleged violations. They contacted the fire marshal after entering the building. The order revoking the abortion clinic’s operating license came after the fire marshal and building inspector later investigated and found potential fire-, health- and building-code violations, according to Jeffrey Lewis, Muskegon’s director of public safety.

Later stories explained that a breaking and entering incident brought police to Women’s Medical Services. Although he had no proof, that did not stop Alexander from “alleg[ing] that [a pro-life] group may have been involved in the break-in being investigated by police.”

But it was Alexander himself who brought about the whole sequence of events. Alexander phoned police about a possible break-in, according to a press release Muskegon police issued last Friday.

Reading the stories sequentially, Alexander went from all but vowing not to reopen, to being open to reopening, to being “curious about what the community wants him to do.”

Muskegon law enforcement told reporters that nobody can occupy the Women’s Medical Services and “no services can be rendered there until the alleged violations have been brought up to code or the owner replies with a ‘reasonable explanation.’”