Associated Press Friday, February 25, 2005; Page A22
TOPEKA, Kan., Feb. 24 -- The Kansas attorney general is demanding that abortion clinics turn over the complete medical records of nearly 90 women and girls, saying he needs the material for an investigation into underage sex and illegal late-term abortions.
Two clinics are fighting the request in Kansas Supreme Court, saying the state has no right to such personal information.
But Attorney General Phill Kline, an abortion opponent, insisted Thursday: "I have the duty to investigate and prosecute child rape and other crimes in order to protect Kansas children."
Kline is seeking the records of girls who had abortions and women who received late-term abortions. Sex involving someone younger than 16 is illegal in Kansas, as is an abortion after 22 weeks unless there is reason to believe it is needed to protect the mother's health.
Kline spoke to reporters after details of the secret investigation, which began in October, surfaced in a legal brief filed by attorneys for two medical clinics. The clinics argued that unless the high court intervenes, women who obtained abortions could find government agents knocking at their door.
The clinics said Kline demanded their complete, unedited medical records for women who sought abortions at least 22 weeks into their pregnancies in 2003, as well as those for girls 15 and younger who sought abortions.
The clinics, which said nearly 90 women and girls would be affected, are offering records with some key information edited out.
posted
Well, here's the thing. While medical privacy is something I hold dear, if the clinics are breaking the law by performing abortions over 22 weeks, there has to be some way to investigate that. I can understand the reluctance to accept "edited" records, because it would be pretty easy for the clinic to edit out the evidences of what they've done, especially if they know they could be prosecuted for it.
Perhaps names, social security numbers, and addresses could be obscured, but everything else left intact, and if the state finds evidence that the abortions were illegal, then they could obtain the rest of the information to investigate further. Then the only doors they would be knocking on would be the ones of people who had broken the law by having an illegal abortion.
I don't know how workable that would be in the situation, though.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
I've just deleted everything I was going to say, I can't respond to this yet. I'm sympathetic to Belle's words, although I wouldn't have said them myself, but the girls under 16 part... I really really hope to clinics win on this one.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree. I'm far more concerned about using the records to identify teen girls who have had sex underage. While some might argue that all such cases are rape (and they are such under the laws of most states, I think), there's got to be a mixed bag in there of victims of violent rape, statutory rape and incest, along with a fair number of 14 year olds messing around with other 14 year olds.
I'm not really sure what the state is going to do with those records, but the logical next step after talking to the clinic personnel is to contact and interrogate the girls, right? I'm not sure how I feel about that in terms of the girls' safety not to mention their privacy.
As for the illegal abortions past 22 weeks, the state is asking for full records, no names expunged, if I read the article correctly.
posted
Well, he's only asking for information on the 90 that he believes were illegal (I guess based on tips or whatever), not all abortion records for every abortion in the state.
And I really don't think Kline is doing this to prosecute the people who had illegal abortions (although that may happen) - he is doing it to crack down on the abortion doctors here who perform them illegally and we have no way of knowing. They basically get by with almost anything because any time they are investigated, it becomes a major political deal. (where people like Kwea accuse them of attacking rights, even thought they are legitimately investigating illegal activity -- just like any other illegal activity)
posted
I agree with most of you. If the state is truly looking for crimes, hire an independent counsel who works for both sides and will only edit out information that is not necessary for the investigation. Otherwise, stop attacking abortion under the guise of "the law".
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Looking on rape and pregnancy as something to be ashamed of is one of the great puzzles to me about the women's movement. However, I think the privacy of medical records is important as well, any medical records and not these moreso because of their connection to abortion. I absolutely disagree with the politicization of abortion. It's a medical procedure and should only be done for medical reasons. I do think it should be weighted as if it were an amputation of a part of the patient's body.
Posts: 2010 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, either way -- they have to have the concrete "evidence" (which is in the records) in order to prosecute the clinics for performing abortions not within the terms of the law.
You notice this is in my state, and BIG news in my state, yet I purposely didn't post it here (and was hoping no one would) because I knew exactly how this discussion would go. We pretty much already know everyone's feeling on abortion on this forum.
But to me this isn't an abortion issue. It's a criminal issue. If they are performing ones over 22 weeks, or on underaged girls, they are breaking the law.
I guess that would be people who have actually worked with the people you are talking about, in a medical setting, and care about the patients right to privacy.
Those who know how much of a betrayal of trust this has the potential to become.
It is enough of an issue that there have been major laws about privacy issues passed by the federal government in recent years.
((Edited to clarify that I didn't work in an abortion clinic, but that I have worked with rape victims in college on a rape hotline. Also, I worked in the medical field for 3 years while in the Army, and have a better background with regards to medical records than most.))
posted
If the clinics are breaking the laws of the state, then they must be investigated. Unfortunately, the polarization over the issue of abortion clouds everyone's perceptions and judgement when it comes to handling the issue, and allows neither side the flexibility to cooperate.
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
Is it illegal for a minor to get an abortion *at all* in Kansas? Or just if they don't receive parental consent?
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: This is a poor attempt to disguise an attack on their rights to receive legal medical care.
Except abortions after 22 weeks aren't legal medical care in Kansas.
I don't necessarily agree with what's being done. Besides, I have a hard time believing the clinic ever put the actual time of pregnancy on the records. If they knew it was past 22 weeks and knew it was illegal, why would they put that information on the records?
Posts: 4625 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
FG -- The abortions after 22 weeks, yes, are illegal except for the "health of the mother" clause. But are the abortions on the under 16 year olds? Yes, I know that having sex with them is a crime, but is performing an abortion on them? Also, does Kansas have a parental consent law?
If so, and these girls and their parents decided that an abortion was the best decision, then I do not see what right he as to ask for their records.
If there isn't a parental consent law, I still don't think this is right... if performing an abortion on a 15 year old is not a crime and he wants the information to go trolling for people to accuse of a different crime... although I wish every woman who was sexually assulted reported it and filed charges, I know that's not the choice some women make, and I think we should respect that choice, even at a younger age. Plus I don't think he can force them to cooperate with the investigation anyway, so while if there is no a parental consent law there is a chance he will find a girl who was raped and didn't tell anyone but just went and had an abortion, for the most part I think he is going to be harrassing and embarassing young girls who have already been through way too much. And I don't really believe that once the records get in the government's hands they will manage to keep them private. How are those girls going to feel when all their classmates know they had an abortion?
So, okay, have a pro-life doctor review the records of the after 22 week abortions, give an opinion on the medical necessaty, and attempt to prosecute those where it was flimsy. But leave the kids alone.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's illegal for someone to have induced them to have sex because they can't legally consent, Kasie. The legality of the abortion is not the issue, it's evidence of probably statutory rape or child molestation.
Posts: 2010 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
What bothers me is that I severely doubt the prosecutor's office is not busy enough without undertaking this. Also, we have all had to sign to open our medical records to law enforcement pursuant to homeland security. I don't see how they can say this is homeland security. I long for the day when the unborn are seen as citizens, but the fact is right now they are not, and even if they were they are not receiving violence from foreigners or factions who want to overthrow our government.
Posts: 2010 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Cover the names and personal info of the patients but leave the ages. Evidence of wrong-doing can lead to a deeper investigation where complete records can be seized.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Sex involving someone younger than 16 is illegal in Kansas, as is an abortion after 22 weeks unless there is reason to believe it is needed to protect the mother's health.
If that is the case, then more likely than not the crime would be committed by the abortion clinic and not the individual. It is ultimately the abortion clinic which has to decide whether there is a sufficient medical justification for an late term abortion. If that is the case, why would it be necessary to get the women's personal information? Isn't their anonymous medical records enough?
[ack, Eljay beat me to it. ]
quote:The clinics, which said nearly 90 women and girls would be affected, are offering records with some key information edited out.
I wonder what key information they offered to edit out.
[ February 25, 2005, 09:27 AM: Message edited by: Beren One Hand ]
Posts: 4116 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can see why this would be tempting, but I feel that the further harm done to these kids is going to be almost as bad as the decision to have an abortion was in the first place.
There should be another way to handle this, but the AG isn't willing to compromise for the sake of the victims...or at least he doesn't appear to be willing to compromise from the limited articles I have seen so far.
The potential for misuse of that information is huge, and clashes completely with patients rights issues head on.
BTW, I would feel this way about any medical procedure where the potential for harm would outweigh the benefits. There is a long standing practice/realization in rape cases that you really can't force a victim to testify...it rarely works well, and usually doesn't work at all.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I may be just plain wrong, but it doesn't seem American to go sweeping for classes of crimes like this.
Posts: 2010 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, either way, excuse me if I just withdraw from this particular thread and discussion -- simply because Phill Kline is a personal friend of mine. I don't want to allow this discussion to upset me.
So I'm just going to let you all discuss it and I'm going to stay out and not read the thread -- go ahead and bash away.
posted
I'm as conservative as they come, and you can't fight fire with fire (that is, advance the conservative cause by employing such heavy handed big government tactics).
Posts: 2010 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Because they don't trust the people who might be implicated by the records to not edit out the evidence that would implicate them.
Ah, I didn't think of that. So the state would evaluate whether there was a medical necessity based on testimony of the women instead of their medical records? Since the women do not have medical training, I doubt their testimony on the subject would be helpful unless the women testified that they knew the clinic was giving them abortions they were not entitled to receive. And if that were the case, the women would also be culpable and probably would not honestly incriminate themselves.
[ February 25, 2005, 09:44 AM: Message edited by: Beren One Hand ]
Posts: 4116 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
I said that I had limited info, but I didn't like where it seemed to be going....and that even if he found evidence (about minors having sex or rape) that it would be next to impossible to procecute under current rules.
I also questioned his motives, since I assume he is good at his job; he would know how difficult they are to prosecute, so I wonder if he has alterior motives.
Since you know him, perhaps you know better....but considering the possible ramifications to this nationwide ( and I know he HAS to have been aware of those), I don't think I was out of line or just "bashing".
posted
Somehow I knew this thread would turn to be one of those which are written so fast you can't read them and there's no much agressivity in the air you have a headache just by breathing.
Posts: 3526 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Im read the official site, and one problem rose right away while reading it...it says that the children would be under no legal scrutiny.
What do you call a police officer knocing at your door 9 months later, asking who got you pregnant. If a woman chooses not to report a rape, I may not agree with her choice (I don't), but I would not force that type of "scrutiny" on her. Also, in order to comply wth this but not release any information, alll the clinics would ahve to do is stop keeping records. Is that something we want to encourage?
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like the idea of getting an independent counsel to redact the names and like from the records, prior to handing it over to the government. I think the "past 22 weeks" cases are fair game, but am worried about the repurcussions if any concrete info on the under-16 girls came out, even if they weren't raped violently.
quote:Ah, I didn't think of that. So the state would evaluate whether there was a medical necessity based on testimony of the women instead of their medical records?
I don't think so. I think that they just don't trust the people being investigated for crimes (the people running the abortion clinic) to properly edit the documents. The only way to be confident that they aren't hiding evidence is to not let them edit anything out.
Posts: 1002 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If a woman chooses not to report a rape, I may not agree with her choice
I know where you're coming from Kwea, but the other side of this argument is also compelling. These are girls under the age of 14. It is quite possible that these girls do not have the maturity to make that decision. Worse still, these girls could be victims of their immediate family members.
BTW, are Kansas abortion clinics required to provide any counseling to children who receive abortions?
MPH, thanks for clarifying that. My brain is just not working properly this morning. So I guess most of us here would agree on the independent counsel idea?
[ February 25, 2005, 10:02 AM: Message edited by: Beren One Hand ]
Posts: 4116 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: The only way to be confident that they aren't hiding evidence is to not let them edit anything out.
As I mentioned before, why do you think the incriminating evidence was ever recorded in the first place?
Posts: 4625 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is he also demanding hospital records for minors who carried pregnancies to term? Shouldn't they be investigated, too? Or are their records already public?
Posts: 1681 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Isn't a pregnancy at age 14 something that needs to be reported anyway? I thought doctors had to report signs of abuse?
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Apart from the potential of the minor's pregnancy being directly related to a rape or other sex crime, teen pregnancies are fraught with dangers for both the mother and the developing fetus.
So, it would be very interesting to know if Kansas has safeguards in place for minors, in order to protect their health.
An impartial third-party to black out identifying information would be good - but let's face it - if they find that there were sex crimes involved, they WILL need to get all the pertinent information - I hope that in that case they target their court actions to the clinics involved.
I don't know about Kansas, but Washington has mandated reporting laws for providers of medical care.
*ponders and wanders off to get some coffee*
*pops back in to quickly say - I heard this on NPR first thing this a.m. and knew you all would have things to say!*
Posts: 5609 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I suspect there wasn't a comment on late term abortions because the legality is pretty clear.
As far as the under 14 age abortions, especially the 10, 11, and 12 year old ones, I can see why this might be necessary and why records with even personal information might be needed. I suspect doctors of girls who proceeded with the pregnancy or who got an abortion with a regular doctor and hospital probably already have that kind of information reported. As stated, it can be a sign of abuse and they are required to report all such signs. I suspect abortion clinics are also required to report signs of abuse as well, but are less likely to comply. It isn't difficult to come up with the scenario of incest or molestation being covered up by taking the child to an abortion clinic rather than the family doctor or OB.
They already have the statistics. They may even have names. They need to know the incidentals, not for persecution against abortion, but to find evidence against sexual predators.
posted
Interesting. The link Farmgirl provided (edit: before the last one )didn't say anything about the AG investigating abortions over 22 weeks. According to her link, it's all about the children.
*drums fingers on table*
The logic that the AG is using makes me really uncomfortable. Pregnancy is those under 16 indicates a crime has been committed. It is the responsibility of the state to prosecute crimes that it knows that it has been committed. In order for the state to do this, it must know who the crime has been committed against.
My question is, how far does this extend? For example, if someone comes into a hospital and gets treated for OD'ing on illegal drugs, can the state then force the hospital to either report that person or just periodically search the hospital records for those people who came into the hospital for treatment for that in order to prosecute?
What about stab wounds and gunshot wounds which are likely indicators of some kind of assault?
*drums fingers on table* This is actually a really convoluted situation. The first order of business for a hospital is to provide medical care to people. Anything that gets in the way of this is not something the hospital should embrace. Obviously, if the state is peering over the hospital's shoulder beyond a quality of care mode, this is going to scare people away from getting treatment, which is not good.
On the other hand, if a criminal is caught, this prevents them from doing further harm.
posted
There are a lot more abortions in the 10-14 crowd than the 78 records they have subpeonaed. Since they have it narrowed down so much, I really suspect they are targeting cases they already have suspicions about.
Posts: 3495 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
Does that chart line up with the rest of the country? With the *vast majority* of abortions being performed on girls 10-14 years of age?
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, I think it does. I understood that it had to do with anything illegal, not just homeland security, even though the new privacy act came about to support homeland security.
Posts: 3495 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fourteen year old girls are not made pregnant by fourteen year old boys.
Oh, I need to go and dig up some pages that will support this, but from my experience, stories, and classes, when young girls are having sex, they are having it with older men.
I don't know if that makes a difference in any of your opinions, but the eighth grade girls are most likely NOT sleeping with the eighth grader next door. They are sleeping with the high seniors, college sophomores, or the weird twenty somethings that graduated from high school but found adult women too intimidating.
[ February 25, 2005, 11:16 AM: Message edited by: Lady Jane ]
Posts: 1163 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: With the *vast majority* of abortions being performed on girls 10-14 years of age?
Whoa whoa whoa! That chart shows the ratio of abortions to live births. Read the fine print. For every 1000 live births, that's the number of abortions performed. That does NOT mean that there are more abortions performed on 10 - 14 year olds. It means that when a 10 - 14 year old gets pregnant, she is much more likely to have an abortion.
Added: It freaked me out and confused me when I first saw it, too. That's why I looked closer. But you cannot in fact tell how many abortions are performed on each age group from that particular chart.
posted
I hope that they will be investigating these children's families, though, not intimidating the girls inadvertently.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
ElJay: glad you pointed that out. That makes much more sense (especially since, as said before, it's often medically necessary when the mother is that age).
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
]![[Frown]](frown.gif)
