NRL News

How PPFA manipulates women into “donating” their babies’ organs

by | Jul 15, 2015

By Dave Andrusko

Dr-Nucalota-StillYesterday, and in a post written earlier today, we discussed at some length a shocking hidden-camera video in which two undercover investigators are shown discussing with a high ranking PPFA official how these supposed “procurers” of fetal tissue could work with Planned Parenthood affiliates to harvest intact baby body parts.

I would also like to talk about a key component we’ve only touched on: how/why women consent to “donating” their baby’s body parts.

In its story today, the Washington Post included the following statement from Planned Parenthood spokesman Eric Ferrero, which I assume PPFA distributed far and wide:

At several of our health centers, we help patients who want to donate tissue for scientific research, and we do this just like every other high-quality health-care provider does — with full, appropriate consent from patients and under the highest ethical and legal standards.

    “Full appropriate consent from patients.” Watching the video in which Deborah Nucatola, senior director for medical services for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, talked to two undercover investigators using a hidden camera, what do we learn about “consent”?

This issue is touched on in several places but elaborated at length in the following response from Dr. Nucatola. (“Novogenix” is evidently a small company that harvests the organs of aborted babies.)

But the interesting thing, I’ll tell you is some people consent, some people don’t. The funny thing is the second day, when that patient actually comes back for their procedure [her late abortion], when they’re waiting, what often happens is, Novogenix will talk to people who haven’t consented, and they usually do once someone has the time and energy to sit and have the conversation with them. So, she ends up picking up several more specimens, just from being there and speaking. …The seeds have been planted, they thought about it for twenty four hours, now there’s somebody else–they’re sitting there, waiting, they’ve got nothing else to do, it’s not like one on top of the next, on top of the next. So, I think it’s always beneficial, if you have somebody who that’s just what they do…

So is this “Full appropriate consent from patients”? You’ve asked her once and she said no. The laminaria is placed in her cervix to dilate it sufficiently to allow a late abortion, the delivery of a large, dead baby.

Now, a full day later, the woman’s anxiety at unimaginatively high levels, she is asked again. What Dr. Nucatola doesn’t say in this excerpt is something she talks about over and over and over again in their discussion at lunch [!]

And that is how to persuade the women, the larger public–and themselves?–that some “good” can come out of killing a helpless unborn child. Watch the blatant manipulation of emotions.

She tells the investigators that there are women who come in “asking about it [‘donation’] from the start.”

But the others, I mean, honestly, there’s not going to be one thing that works for every patient, Every patient experiences a whole wide range of emotions about the experience in general, and so you don’t know where they’re coming from there. But I think every one of them is happy to know that there’s a possibility for them to do “this extra bit of good,” in what they do. And I think patients respond most to knowing the types of outcomes that I might contribute to, so, for example, Alzheimer’s research, Parkinson’s research. …But, um, I actually think it’s an easier conversation to have, than just consenting them for the procedure [the abortion] in general.”

   Having been fed the line that if a woman donates organs from her baby it might contribute to a cure for Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s–“I think most of these patients have some experience with at least one of these conditions or another”–Dr. Nucatola says, “Most patients are very motivated.”

These people really are utterly shameless.

Categories: Uncategorized