A Virginia Abortion Clinic’s Misconduct Is Part of National Scandal

The Virginia State health commissioner received a letter recently decrying “a clear pattern of repeated and serious misconduct” at a Fairfax abortion clinic “that poses a significant threat to patient safety” that “cannot be allowed to go unchecked.” This latest affirmation of the growing national scandal of dangerous and medically substandard abortion clinics came from an unexpected source: the National Abortion Federation (NAF), an abortion trade and advocacy group.

In response to a 52-page deficiency report issued by state health inspectors against the American Women’s Services abortion clinic — a report that recommended suspending the facility’s license — NAF joined with pro-life advocates in calling for the closure of the Fairfax clinic and other clinics in the state with ties to notorious abortionist Steven Brigham.

While it might be tempting to applaud this surprising turn of events, we must strongly resist that urge. NAF and the exploitive industry it represents are not the guardians of maternal health that they so publicly hold themselves out to be. Instead, the abortion industry has a long and shameful history of stridently opposing state laws that require the regulation, licensure, and inspection of abortion clinics. It also speciously argues that substandard abortion providers are “aberrations” rather than the norm in an industry more interested in keeping profits high than in protecting women.

Ironically, the abortion industry recently sought the elimination of the very Virginia laws that exposed egregious health and safety violations at the Fairfax clinic. In one incident at the clinic, described in the inspectors’ report, a staff member assisted in an abortion after unclogging a toilet but before changing scrubs or properly cleaning her hands. In another, an abortionist saved a blood-smeared surgical gown for future use rather than putting it into the laundry.

On its website, NAF argues that state health and safety requirements, which often include mandates for regular clinic inspections, “single out abortion providers for medically unnecessary” regulation and oversight. Clearly, these regulations were not “unnecessary” at the Fairfax clinic, where inspectors also found expired medications and dirty equipment smeared with “foreign material” and dried yellow and brown “splatter.” They are also not “unnecessary” for the more than 175 abortion clinics and individual abortion providers that have been investigated, cited by state health officials, and even sued for violations of the state health and safety standards since 2009.

The abortion industry callously equates mere access to abortion with maternal health and safety. It has little concern for what actually happens to women behind the closed doors of these often inferior clinics where substandard care is routinely provided. For example, at the Fairfax clinic, a woman was rushed to an emergency room after prolonged bleeding; her condition was exacerbated by the clinic’s failure to stock sutures, which are needed to treat this common abortion complication.

It is important to remember that convicted Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell provided “mere access” to abortion in his clinic, where a woman died because a stretcher could not fit through the cluttered hallways. Staffers at the facility used unsterilized instruments, spreading infections; and nonmedical and unlicensed personnel performed physical examinations and administered medications.

When the Gosnell scandal first broke in early 2011, NAF was quick to note that Gosnell had applied for membership in the organization in 2009 but was denied. What it failed to acknowledge was that NAF was well aware of the dangerous conditions in Gosnell’s house-of-horror abortion clinic. The grand jury that indicted Gosnell specifically questioned “why an evaluator from NAF, whose stated mission is to ensure safe, legal, and acceptable abortion care, and to promote health and justice for women, did not report Gosnell to authorities.”

NAF routinely disparages state health and safety regulations as “politically motivated,” but it was NAF’s own failure to report Gosnell that was politically motivated. NAF and the abortion industry it promotes are desperate to conceal the fact that today’s abortion clinics are the true “back alleys” of abortion mythology. The Fairfax clinic and Gosnell are not “rogue” providers or “outliers.” They are commonplace in an abortion industry that is often dangerous and secretive.

This past January, NAF filed a legal brief in the U.S. Supreme Court arguing that Texas’s health and safety standards for abortion clinics, which are similar to Virginia’s regulations, should be invalidated. NAF once again advanced its longstanding and self-serving argument that mere access to facilities performing abortions trumps the proven benefits of high-quality, medically endorsed standards of care.

NAF has a long history of animus toward commonsense health and safety standards, including inspection requirements for abortion facilities. In light of this clear record, we should view NAF’s seemingly altruistic actions in Virginia this week with healthy skepticism.