NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/talk/abortion/57307

Text File | 1993-01-22 | 3.8 KB | 79 lines

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Path: sparky!uunet!mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!nyx!mcochran
From: [e-mail] (Mark A. Cochran)
Subject: Re: Planned Non-Parenthood? (to Rescorla)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
    of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
    control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Sender: [e-mail] (netnews admin account)
Organization: None worth mentioning.
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 05:53:58 GMT
Lines: 64

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Eric Rescorla) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>>In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Eric Rescorla) writes:
>>
>>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John Emery) writes:
>>Trivia: I believe this is the first time I've followed up to a Rescorla
>>post.  Like Brian Kendig, he appears to be a victim of the "squeaky
>>wheel" syndrome ("The squeaky wheel gets the grease").  These two don't
>>seem to squeak as loudly as the regulars I listed in the "Susan Garvin
>>fan club".
>Come now, Mr. Nyikos. Are the personal attacks really necessary.
>
>>>>If the abortion industry weren't such a lucrative business and profits
>>>>were'nt involved, perhaps this would be a trustworthy option.  However,
>>>>when money is involved, even the best people can be tempted to overlook
>>>>the good of the patient.
>>Planned Parenthood did close to 200,000 abortions, and did less than 10,000
>>cases of prenatal care per annum in the last three years.  That seems
>>to suggest something.
>I don't know what you are implying, Mr. Nyikos.
>I can think of many reasons why this would be so that do not include
>improper practices or pressure on the part of PPFA.
>
The obviuous conclusion is that people are going to PP because they
have decided they want an abortion. Sadly, PHoney prefers conspiracy
theories to the obvious answer.

>>>Huh? Mr. Emery, PPFA, for instance, is a non-profit organization,
>>>therefore (by definition) profit is not involved.
>>When Faye Wattleton's salary was nearing the $200,000 mark, I decided
>>to consider most of that as profit.  The head of Salvation Army, to cite
>>another extreme, only got ~10% of that at the same time.
>And how much does say the head of the United Way earn?
>Heads of non-profit organizations routinely make extremely large
>sums. So?
>
>>BTW why restrict your attention to PP?
>Because it's routinely cited by Pro-lifers as the biggest abortion
>provider in the U.S. and I know it to be non-profit.
>
>>> As far as
>>>I know, abortions are not particularly lucrative. Ob/Gyn's get
>>>much more money for a birth than for an abortion.
>>Figures, please.
>I don't have them, though I've seen them posted on talk.abortion
>before, but can't substantiate the claim right now. Retracted.
>
A normal delivery runs $2000-3000. A planned cesarean runs about
$5000. An unplanned section is just about double that. Halting
premature labor runs form a few thousand on up, depending on the case.
Premature birth costs up to about $5000 a day for NICU care. Length of
stay, obviously, is widely variable, and never cheap.

>>And be careful not to count 9 months of prenatal care in the costs.
>Why not? Doctors get paid to do it.
>
PHoney is overlooking the simple fact that most OB's have a single
price which includes prenatal care and delivery.

--
                  Mark Cochran          [e-mail]
These are the views of my employer, your employer, your government, the
Church of your choice, and the Ghost of Elvis. So there.
Member, T.S.A.K.C.