It’s a TRAP! Planned Parenthood opposes all safety laws for patients.

Planned Parenthood is more interested in protecting its market share in the abortion business than it is in protecting women’s health and safety. It has fought any legislation that regulates abortions in its free-standing clinics, labeling these legislative efforts TRAP laws, to stand for targeted restrictions on abortion providers, when it should stand for Tricky Rhetoric And Politics. My research, some of which I have presented in previous posts, shows that without these restrictions, Planned Parenthood clinics have become some of the most dangerous places for women to have procedures or seek health care. Abortion clinics are regulated less than tanning salons or pizza parlors in states such as New York. (http://nypost.com/2014/04/07/health-department-fails-to-regularly-inspect-abortion-clinics/.) Some states with Democratic leadership, such as California, continue to lower the bar on women’s health standards by allowing non-physicians to do abortions in clinics. Several states allow clinics to be located greater than half an hour from hospital backup, with no licensing, inspections, regulations, or reporting required. Anti-TRAP legislation allows “back alley” level abortion clinics to qualify as acceptable, such as the Philadelphia clinic of convicted murderer Kermit Gosnell, where unsafe, unsanitary abortions by unlicensed staff went undetected until a drug bust unveiled the horrors.

Attacks on “TRAP” laws usually begin with an attack on the legislators proposing them, who are almost always Republican and pro-life. The reason for this is unfortunate. Any Democrat who wants to get reelected cannot afford to oppose Planned Parenthood. Not only would that politician risk losing the considerable campaign funds that Planned Parenthood’s political arm provides, but a media attack by Planned Parenthood against a candidate has proven fatal to many campaigns. Planned Parenthood sends reminders to politicians that it is watching and will consider any support for any abortion restrictions as a black mark on its ‘score card’ for that politician. Note specifically, that PP sees any restriction on abortion as “not protecting women’s health”, but “simply limiting access to reproductive health care.” Honestly, it surprises me every time I read one of these cases, that Planned Parenthood is not arguing FOR these protections for women instead of against them. The only reason is to avoid the expense of quality health care. That’s it.

Failing to regulate abortion clinics hurts women. This should not be a political issue!

1) Building codes matter! PP poo poo’s requirements about the width of corridors and doorways, but there have been cases where abortion patients have died because ambulance personnel could not navigate hallways with a stretcher. One might argue this is a rare occurrence, but it is not rare enough that any woman should endanger her health by choosing an unregulated PP or other free-standing abortion clinic over the much safer choice of a hospital or outpatient surgical clinic. PP had a $127,000,000 surplus last year, so it should use some of that money to upgrade its building standards if it cares about women’s health.

It also owns a lot of property.

2) Inspections matter! Numerous violations of health codes found when states have inspected PP clinics include unsanitary operating rooms, unsterilized equipment, expired medications, personnel untrained in CPR, and incomplete medical records sent with patients to the hospital, all of which directly threaten the health of patients. (See my previous post “Back-Alley Abortions-Planned Parenthood Style”)

3) Failure to obtain admitting privileges at a nearby hospital, or a relationship with a physician who does, matters! As does location of clinics close to a hospital! Though it is rare for women to die as a result of abortion, one need only Google “Planned Parenthood” and “ambulance” to see that medical emergencies happen with some frequency. Therefore women should avoid clinics that are distant from a hospital. As far as credentialing is concerned, it is possible that a hospital might choose not to allow privileges to an abortion provider due to an “anti-choice” stance or competition for patients, though I highly doubt this. More likely is that the hospital is refusing privileges due to the malpractice history of the physician. PP wants this law changed to allow the least qualified abortion practitioners to do abortions including non-physicians.

TRAP laws have been successfully battled even to the Supreme Court where the typical “political” 5:4 split has defeated them. The reason is that abortion access trumps quality care in the minds of Planned Parenthood and with just a little help from rhetoric and a lot of politics,  America agrees. But as a patient, go someplace else for your procedure or your health care. Inconvenience, including travel or expense to go to a hospital clinic, is worth it for the sake of your safety or that of a friend or family member. Planned Parenthood could run safe clinics, but it chooses not to in order to maximize profit. It has not lowered its safety bar as low as it is willing yet either. It continues to push for federal approval of Telemed abortions where patients will never even be seen by a physician. That will be the topic of my next post.