Abortion workers reveal disturbing facts about abortion industry
By Sarah TerzoPro-choice author Carole Joffe interviewed abortion industry workers for her book The Regulation of Sexuality: Experiences of Family-Planning Workers. Although many of the clinic workers Joffe interviewed genuinely seemed to want to help the women, the book reveals many disturbing things about what went on in the abortion facility. According to the workers’ own words and the author’s observations, women were rushed through the facility to maximize profits – and abortionists often treated them badly.
Joffe observes that the abortion facility regularly overbooked patients to maximize revenue. A significant portion of women, she observed, didn’t show up for their appointments and overbooking guarded against lost business. Joffe says:
Like many other nonprofit
clinics, Urban [the name Joffe gave to the clinic] typically overbooked
clients, especially at peak hours, to guard against the loss of revenues
that would result from too many no shows. This meant, for counselors, a
never-ending stream of clients in the waiting room…The clinic had to
make the most efficient use of medical personnel, the highest-paid
workers in the clinic, for financial reasons and for courtesy. (83)
But the facility’s overbooking also had the result that workers were forced to rush women through the abortion process one after another to fit them all in. They did not have time to counsel women as thoroughly as they would’ve liked. As Joffe says:
… As the clinic director was fond
of pointing out, counseling did not generate revenue for the clinic;
being seen in the medical room did. Perhaps the greatest problem with
slowdowns [counseling sessions that took longer than average] was the
risk of annoying doctors.(89)
There was no doubt that the overbooking was done mainly to maximize profits:
Besides ongoing frustration over
salaries, the [abortion] counselors felt that there was no real
understanding of the pressures and demands of their work. They believed,
for example, that the agency director and board were always devising
ways to increase the patient load (and hence generate more revenues)
without considering that more patients applied a need for additional
staff. (57)
Obviously, counseling fell by the wayside. There was little care or
respect for each woman as an individual. Even though many of the workers
wanted to give more support, they were under intense pressure.The facility’s owners and management always wanted to increase revenues. This caused tension between workers who wanted to help a woman make the best choice for her and management which simply wanted more abortions done:
At Urban, as in other family
planning clinics that provide abortion services, these services are the
major source of revenue; hence, there are constant pressures from
management to increase the total number of abortions performed. During
the period of my observations, abortions were performed four days a
week, and there were ongoing discussions about whether they should be
increased to five. (112-113)
One abortion counselor talks about trying to console upset women despite the pressure to rush them out of her office quickly:
I’ve taken up to one hour and a
half if the patient needs it – the people at the front desk don’t love
it if I do that too often, but if I have to, I do. I just had a patient
today that took a really long time. It was a post abortion – she was
crying, feeling really guilty. The doctor really scared her; I had to
act as her advocate. (86)
This is not the only time a worker had to protect a patient from the words and actions of the facility’s abortionists.As Joffe says:
Another counselor grievance
concerned doctors’ interpersonal style with patients. Certain doctors
were accused of being too abrupt or “insensitive” with patients… Bernice
[a clinic worker] recalls that when “Dr. Stuart first came, he did a
very racist number on a couple of patients. I called him on it, and he
has changed.” Some specific accusations of insensitivity were related to
the rejection of obese women for clinic abortions.… [These patients
pose “special difficulties” in an emergency] Counselors felt that some
doctors handled this admittedly difficult situation in a particularly
mortifying way. (106)
Infrequently it happened that a
patient became so upset during the procedure that the counselor felt
that it should be stopped.… For the Urban physicians, on the other hand,
the ruling premise was that any procedure, once started, should
continue – as long as it was medically safe to do so… For some doctors
at Urban, “starting” meant any contact with the patient, including the
preabortion pelvic examination.… The doctors at Urban did not routinely
proceed with the abortion in the face of immense distress. As one put
it, “if she’s crying a little, you still go ahead… If she jumps a foot
off the table during a pelvic, that is a different story.” The point is
that the doctors have far more tolerance of emotional distress than the
counselors did. And the ultimate decision to continue or discontinue
past a certain point is with the doctors. (106)
Some doctors tended to initiate
small talk with the counselors and essentially ignore the patients: most
counselors felt that this was insensitive: “she’s lying on the table
having an abortion… She doesn’t want to hear what you did with your
boyfriend last weekend. (97)
And, of course, there was only so much the abortion workers could do
to protect women from shoddy medical care and poor surgical skills. One
worker says:
At Gino’s, quality of a hamburger
depends on who’s working the grill that day. It’s the same with
abortions. If Dr. Benjamin is on that day, I know there’ll be few
complaints. If it’s Dr. Thomas, I know there will be a lot of pain. (105)
Source: Carole Joffe The Regulation of Sexuality: Experiences of Family-Planning Workers (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1986)
Editor’s note. This appeared at liveactionnews.org and is reprinted with permission.
Source: Abortion Workers
No comments:
Post a Comment