Former Abortionist Confirms: Abortion is Not Health Care, “Never Medically Necessary”

[peaceful-forest]

Former Abortionist Confirms: Abortion is Not Health Care, “Never Medically Necessary”​

Originally posted on Feb 21, 2023 on LifeNews.com's website


Dr. John Bruchalski, the founder of Tepeyac OB/GYN in Fairfax, Virginia, wrote to correct the prevalent lie that state abortion bans are somehow endangering women’s health. And as a former abortionist himself, Bruchalski said he believes money, not sincere care for women’s health, is behind it.

“There are no advantages for a mother to end her pregnancy by an elective abortion, even in the most life-threatening circumstances,” he explained. “Elective abortions become more dangerous the further along in pregnancy, and that’s when the majority of these health complications arise.”

The Article:
Former Abortionist Confirms: Abortion is Not Health Care, “Never Medically Necessary”

 

[Yttrium]

Um... elective abortions are ones that are NOT done for medical reasons. Nowhere does the doctor say that abortions for medical purposes are never medically necessary. He even points out in the article cases when abortions are medically necessary.

If your thread title was changed to "Elective Abortion" instead of just "Abortion", it would be correct.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Um... elective abortions are ones that are NOT done for medical reasons. Nowhere does the doctor say that abortions for medical purposes are never medically necessary. He even points out in the article cases when abortions are medically necessary.

If your thread title was changed to "Elective Abortion" instead of just "Abortion", it would be correct.

“As an obstetrician-gynecologist who used to provide abortions early in my training, I know that intentional feticide is never necessary even in the worst-case scenarios,” he said.

 

[Yttrium]

“As an obstetrician-gynecologist who used to provide abortions early in my training, I know that intentional feticide is never necessary even in the worst-case scenarios,” he said.

Did you not read the paragraph above that? By "intentional feticide" he's talking about elective abortions, which are not medically necessary. The paragraph right above what you quoted points out situations where abortion needs to happen to save the life of the mother.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Did you not read the paragraph above that? By "intentional feticide" he's talking about elective abortions, which are not medically necessary. The paragraph right above what you quoted points out situations where abortion needs to happen to save the life of the mother.

You misinterpret.

“As an obstetrician-gynecologist who used to provide abortions early in my training, I know that intentional feticide is never necessary even in the worst-case scenarios,” he said.

Perhaps you have never met the man to understand exactly what his take is. It is that intentional feticide is never necessary even in the worst-case scenarios.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Super glad he’s not my doctor and super, duper glad he signed his name so that anybody who searches his name for reviews will find this article. Either he’s using some crazy double speak to pull one over on people… He says “elective abortions are not medically necessary” and ~*technically*~ he’s right because a medically necessary abortion wouldn’t be considered elective, and an elective abortion wouldn’t be considered medically necessary… Or he he is using the terms interchangeably which means he should just maybe… Shush.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Super glad he’s not my doctor and super, duper glad he signed his name so that anybody who searches his name for reviews will find this article. Either he’s using some crazy double speak to pull one over on people… He says “elective abortions are not medically necessary” and ~*technically*~ he’s right because a medically necessary abortion wouldn’t be considered elective, and an elective abortion wouldn’t be considered medically necessary… Or he he is using the terms interchangeably which means he should just maybe… Shush.

He IS saying that no abortion is medically necessary. That there is no medically necessary abortion. The direct quote from the link is:

“As an obstetrician-gynecologist who used to provide abortions early in my training, I know that intentional feticide is never necessary even in the worst-case scenarios.”

You may not like what he says but that IS what he says. There is no excuse for abortion according to him based on medical necessity.

 

[comana]

You misinterpret.

“As an obstetrician-gynecologist who used to provide abortions early in my training, I know that intentional feticide is never necessary even in the worst-case scenarios,” he said.

Perhaps you have never met the man to understand exactly what his take is. It is that intentional feticide is never necessary even in the worst-case scenarios.

The doctor refers to medically necessary situations that require induced labor when the fetus is pre-viable. How is that not a medically necessary abortion?

 

[Yttrium]

You misinterpret.

“As an obstetrician-gynecologist who used to provide abortions early in my training, I know that intentional feticide is never necessary even in the worst-case scenarios,” he said.

Perhaps you have never met the man to understand exactly what his take is. It is that intentional feticide is never necessary even in the worst-case scenarios.

He's saying that if in saving the woman's life the fetus dies, it's not an intentional feticide. The fetus still dies. And he provided examples of that, including chemotherapy.

 

[chevyontheriver]

The doctor refers to medically necessary situations that require induced labor when the fetus is pre-viable. How is that not a medically necessary abortion?

Abortion is an intentional feticide. A medically necessary early delivery is not an intentional feticide even if the baby might die anyway. I am amazed that you cannot follow the doctor's distinction.

 

[comana]

Abortion is an intentional feticide. A medically necessary early delivery is not an intentional feticide even if the baby might die anyway. I am amazed that you cannot follow the doctor's distinction.

I would argue that intentionally starting labor when the fetus is guaranteed to die is no different. It is a medically necessary abortion.

 

[chevyontheriver]

He's saying that if in saving the woman's life the fetus dies, it's not an intentional feticide.

Yes.

The fetus still dies.

Maybe, but that is never the intent.

And he provided examples of that, including chemotherapy.

Yes. And he also considers the option of waiting with careful medical monitoring, until the baby is viable. He is not a proponent of intentional feticide, which is a good definition of abortion.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I would argue that intentionally starting labor when the fetus is guaranteed to die is no different. It is a medically necessary abortion.

The doctor disagrees. Even Catholic medical practice would disagree, particularly on ectopic pregnancies

 

[comana]

The doctor disagrees. Even Catholic medical practice would disagree, particularly on ectopic pregnancies

The doctor and Catholic hospitals are afraid to use the term abortion when a medically necessary termination is required to save the mother’s life. Abortion by another name is still an abortion. If the semantics game eases their mind I’m fine with that. I would hate for a woman to die because she believed all abortions were a sin.

 

[Pommer]

You misinterpret.

“As an obstetrician-gynecologist who used to provide abortions early in my training, I know that intentional feticide is never necessary even in the worst-case scenarios,” he said.

Perhaps you have never met the man to understand exactly what his take is. It is that intentional feticide is never necessary even in the worst-case scenarios.

From the Federalist (link in OP to the op-ed):

Chemotherapy for a pregnant mother that tragically results in miscarriage is not an elective abortion. Treatment for an ectopic pregnancy is not an elective abortion. Preterm delivery for an infection is not an elective abortion. These women are and have been thoroughly cared for and treated for their pregnancy complications before, during, and after Roe v. Wade. But abortion advocates want you to think these cases are compromised in post-Roe America and bundled up in the wrongly dubbed “rights” they are fighting for, in order to keep the abortion-on-demand culture alive.

The good Doctor isn’t saying that all fetuses are viable and that there never has to be medical intervention that results in the loss of the pregnancy, as you seem to think they are saying.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

He IS saying that no abortion is medically necessary. That there is no medically necessary abortion. The direct quote from the link is:

“As an obstetrician-gynecologist who used to provide abortions early in my training, I know that intentional feticide is never necessary even in the worst-case scenarios.”

You may not like what he says but that IS what he says. There is no excuse for abortion according to him based on medical necessity.

Well, then I’m glad he wasn’t my doctor when I needed any of my D&Cs. Because each time, I had at least one doctor agreeing that it was an urgent medical need.

 

[chevyontheriver]

From the Federalist (link in OP to the op-ed):


The good Doctor isn’t saying that all fetuses are viable and that there never has to be medical intervention that results in the loss of the pregnancy, as you seem to think they are saying.

I don't know what you seem to think I'm thinking, but at least you referred to the Federalist article. That would be a good representation of his thinking when I heard him talk a month ago. I'll leave it at that.

 

[Pommer]

I don't know what you seem to think I'm thinking, but at least you referred to the Federalist article. That would be a good representation of his thinking when I heard him talk a month ago. I'll leave it at that.

You heard what you heard and that’s good enough for me, but in his op-ed he’s not saying it.

 

[chevyontheriver]

You heard what you heard and that’s good enough for me, but in his op-ed he’s not saying it.

Whatever.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Um... elective abortions are ones that are NOT done for medical reasons. Nowhere does the doctor say that abortions for medical purposes are never medically necessary. He even points out in the article cases when abortions are medically necessary.

If your thread title was changed to "Elective Abortion" instead of just "Abortion", it would be correct.

Agreed.

However, the doctor being referenced was making some clumsy statements where they seemed to be conflating the two themselves...
"“There are no advantages for a mother to end her pregnancy by an elective abortion, even in the most life-threatening circumstances,” he explained."

Saying "elective" in the first part, and "even in the most life-threatening circumstances" in the 2nd part is poor phrasing on their part. If the latter is true, then the former designation of "elective" would no longer be applicable.