Open Letter To The Gazette Papers Regarding Carhart Abortuary

Last February Maryland's Office of Health Care Quality investigated sixteen abortion centers in Maryland.  Of these, twelve were found to be deficient in meeting Maryland regulations.  The Germantown Reproductive Health Services, staffed by Leroy Carhart, was one of the twelve failures.  However, in a very strange article in the May 24th issue of the Gazette newspapers, Dr. Joshua Sharfstein of that Maryland office told the Gazette staff writer that no deficiencies were found at the Carhart center.  Thursday evening I sent the following letter to the Gazette.  I make it public below.  Please note that the hyperlinks will take you to all pertinent background information, including the reports on the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene site.  Now the letter follows:

In the May 24^th issue of the Gazette appeared the following article, “State investigation clears Germantown abortion clinic”.  Regrettably the article is factually inaccurate.  Yes, the Office of Health Care Quality did investigate Germantown Reproductive Health Services in February 2013.  On March 26, 2013, that office issued to the abortion clinic a “Notice of Current Deficiencies”.  In its very first paragraph it stated quite plainly that the facility was NOT in compliance with the requirements of the Code of Maryland Regulations 10.12.01.  The report, in its entirety, can be found at the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene’s web site; it is in pdf format and can be downloaded.  I link to it now.

Among the cited deficiencies of Germantown Reproductive Health Services are the following items:

• Nurses caring for sedated patients unable to document that they received adequate training.
•  At least three individuals functioning as registered nurses did not possess valid Maryland licenses
• No policies were in place to ensure that staff were trained to transfer patients to hospitals in the event of emergencies.  
• Single-dose medication vials were not discarded in accordance with regulations.
• Unlabeled pre-drawn syringes were found.
• Instruments were not properly cleaned and sanitized after usage.

The foregoing list is not exhaustive; additional shortcomings are listed in the report.

The Germantown abortion clinic was not the only one investigated by the Office of Health Care Quality.   Sixteen of Maryland’s abortion clinics were examined during the February time frame.  Of those sixteen, twelve failed the inspections.  Again, the reports are found (in downloadable format) on the DHMH website.  In fact, as the article states, four of these centers did have their licenses suspended due to the nature of the shortcomings found in those centers; details can be found in their individual reports.

Dr. Joshua Sharfstein told Senator Midddleton, Representative Hammen and presumably the Gazette staffer Ryan Marshall that “no deficiencies were found” at the Germantown facility.  If he omitted mention of these very significant and relevant reports that are clearly on the DHMH’s site, Dr. Sharfstein was not being completely forthcoming with these individuals and, by extension, to the citizens of Maryland.

NARAL Editorial In The Gazette - A Call For Letters To The Editor

Several months ago the Gazette ceased home deliveries in my neighborhood, so this escaped my notice until today, when a friend advised me of its existence.  Here it is.  It seems that two NARAL officials are taking umbrage at the truth being told on the pages of the Gazette.  Between then and now, responding letters have been published that shed much-need light through the smoke and mirrors that the NARAL folks attempted to throw in our faces.

Since letters did appear in last week's edition of the Gazette (see here and here for example), I think it quite possible that the Gazette is still accepting them.  So please write to the Gazette!  Send emails to letters@gazette.net, and include your name, address and phone number(s).  Your letters can and will make a difference.

Gazette Publishes Pro-Life Letters Regarding Article About Front-Line Activism

Last week I speculated that the Gazette probably wouldn't publish pro-life letters that contradicted the obvious slant of their article and editorial regarding our presence in front of baby-killing centers.  I'm pleased to discover that I was incorrect about that.  In today's edition appears three letters that lend some balance to earlier-stated opinion.  I will link to them.

Here is the first letter.  Here is the second letter.  Finally, here is the third letter.  Enjoy!

The Gazette Probably Won't Publish These Letters!

One of the reasons this blog was started was to give an audible voice to those of traditional Christian beliefs and morals who would not otherwise have a forum - not in the liberal mainstream media nor in the Catholic Standard.  Accordingly, I'll now publish letters to the editor that were recently submitted to the Gazette on the occasion of their recent editorial and the article the week prior, both touching on the ongoing Christian witness at the Spring Street Planned Parenthood.  Not surprisingly, there was a discernable left-wing bias in the Post-owned Gazette.  The letters will appear after the jump break.

Montgomery County Gazette And Free Speech

About a month ago some reporters from the Gazette papers interviewed some of us who witness at the Spring Street Planned Parenthood in Silver Spring MD.  The article appeared in last week's edition.  Considering that the Gazette is owned by the Washington Post, a mainstream media outlet that makes no secret of its left-wing bias, the article was relatively decent although it was a tad distorted to the left.

This week the editorial staff weighed in with their editorial.  Here is the link.  Notice the first sentence, where they outright accuse us of overstepping the First Amendment into "harassment".  The article also applies "hindrance" to our activiites, conceding to the perjorative terminology employed by the "Washington Clinic Defense Task Force".  That is factually incorrect.  In no way do we hinder or block those going into the building.  We offer them information that is relevant to their situations - or at least we attempt to do so, for it is we who are hindered by the "clinic volunteers".  Here is some prima facie evidence.  Click here if you can't see embedded video.



One sentence in this editorial is almost breathtaking in its inadvertent honesty.  I quote: "Women entering clinics may not be in the best frame of mind to talk with a stranger and think seriously about their decision."  That's right!  The Gazette is admitting that many of these women are NOT thinking seriously about their decisions.  We simply urge them to do so, as a decision to abort their babies will have devastating consequences on them - maybe not immediately but those consequences will make their presence felt.   Later on the Gazette states that the decsion to abort is "life-changing".  We agree!  Should they not be offered all available information?  As you saw in the video, who's doing the "hindering"?  More importantly, who is being harmed by the "hindrance"?  The women - and their unborn children!

Montgomery County Council Puts Lipstick on a Rattlesnake

In the January 27th issue of the Gazette (page B-1 of the Gaithersburg edition and linked here), we read that Leventhal et al "amended" their "gag the pro-life centers" bill.  But.. did they really??

The very first sentence of this article is most revelatory of the Council's dubious motives.  It reads and I quote, "Anti-abortion pregnancy centers no longer are singled out under a bill being considered by the Montgomery County Council that requires pregnancy centers to warn women if they are not being advised by medical professionals."  Note that it says that the pregnancy centers "no longer are singled out."   That adverbial phrase "no longer" makes quite plain that at one time, they most certainly were singled out, and intentionally so.  I believe they still are, knowing this cabal.  Also note the use of this word "warn".  When I think of that word, I think of danger.  There's no danger posed by the pro-life centers.  All women who've walkded into the pregnancy centers in this county have walked out by their own power.  The same cannot be said for this county's abortion centers.  I of course speak of the Potomac Family Planning Center where Jennifer Hallner died as a result of the lack of proper medical equipment to revive her.  Dr. Earl McLeod was disciplined.  I wonder if part of the discipline required that he post a sign warning women of his chequered track record.  I suspect not.

Now here's a curious paragraph.  "Montgomery County has four anti-abortion pregnancy centers that originally were targeted by the bill, including the Rockville Pregnancy Center, which is a licensed medical clinic. The Rockville center would be excluded from both versions of the bill."  Besides the clear admission that the pro-life centers were targeted, the two sentences contradict each other.  The first sentence says that Rockville Pregnancy Center was in the Council's cross-hairs.  The second says that it wasn't.  During the hearings, there was considerable squirming about that question, particularly on the part of Trachtenberg.  You can hear some of that on previous posting of this blog.

So why does the Council want to pass this bill at all?  Jackie Stippich, director of Shady Grove Pregnancy Center, correctly states that no complaint has ever been lodged by a client - a real client that is, and not just some NARAL volunteer who obviously has her own bias.  Speaking of bias, plenty of it has been demonstrated on this blog.  Leventhal's statement regarding objections to this bill is a dismissive and condescending "They resent it."  Well, let's take a look at Leventhal's behavior during the December 1st hearings.  Please go to http://restore-dc-catholicism.blogspot.com/2010/01/continuation-of-reports-on-montgomery.html and see how he blatantly attempts to twist the testimony of a pregnancy center volunteer.  Earlier in the evening he pooh-poohed the idea of touring a pro-life center, stating that he wouldn't be presented with a fair picture of how one operates.  In other words, he called these good people liars.  But perhaps it is he who is not being up front about his own arguable conflicts of interests.  Quite frankly, the Gazette article is curiously silent about that matter as well.  However, let me elaborate below.

The Maryland NARAL puts on a fundraising gala every October, usually in Rockville.  Their lists of sponsors is online here.  There are lots of familiar names, including those of George Leventhal and Duchy Tractenberg.  Moreover, Tractenberg, who originally introduced the bill, is a past president of Maryland NOW.  Ladies and gentlemen, can we say "conflict of interest big time"?  I daresay we can.

This so-called "amended" bill is scheduled for a vote.  Please continue to contact the council here and tell them "NO".