Planned Parenthood Tape 6 – A Gynecologist’s View

Planned-Parenthood-videoby Tia Will

For the following article, I will continue to use the format of my previous two articles. I have referenced the time of the statement on the tape, the speaker, when the tape is incomplete, inaudible, or a cut away inserted, and finally have separated my interpretation with an asterisk. I have included my conclusions regarding the credibility of the charges at the end of the article.

For anyone desiring to follow along, this tape is entitled :

“Human Capital – Episode 2 “

One further point before beginning the tape. Contrary to claims that the tapes are unedited, this tape has been highly edited. The tape does not start at the beginning of a conversation, but clearly joins an ongoing exchange. There are only the comments of Holly although there is clearly someone asking questions whose voice is not heard. There are also frequent voice overs in which you see scenes from the Fresno PP interspersed with the tape of Holly, and frequent breaks in her responses with cuts to responses to a different question. One poster suggested that this is reasonable since no one would want to take the time to view the entire tapes. My view is that arriving at the truth frequently requires an expenditure of time. Viewing the full footage is the way to arrive at an unbiased conclusion but that is not provided.

0.02

Joining an already existing conversation without reference to the question asked, Holly O’Donnell ( a former employee of StemExpress, not PP) states :

“ she told me, its not an option, it’s a demand. That’s what your job is.”

She is referencing the harvesting of donated fetal tissue for transportation to researchers.

*This is a true statement. That is the job description. And there is nothing illegal about this activity. There is no statement of who is being referenced by the word “she.           ”

0:16

Holly:

“and these mothers don’t know and there is no way they would know”

in reference to tissue donation.

  • This statement is refuted by PP. PP officials have addressed this issue directly, stating exactly when in the process the mothers are consented. This point was essentially conceded by the male interviewer in his conversation with Dr. Nucatola when he misstates her comment about the timing of the order of the consents and is corrected by her. So which is the claim? Is the claim that consents are being obtained prior to the procedural consent, or there are no consents being obtained? Without proof, this is a baseless allegation made by a tissue technician who would have no way of knowing what consent process was used and in most cases would not have even been in the facility at the time of the consents since they are often done the day before the procedure.

0:40

Holly is narrating what happens when the StemExpress technician goes to Planned Parenthood to obtain a specimen. Part of the audio is accompanied by a supposed PP employee walking down a hallway interspersed with a voice over of Holly speaking. She states that different technicians had different assigned PP affiliates so that a good working relationship could be established and maintained. Holly was assigned to Stockton and Fresno.

1:03

Holly describes the location of the Fresno affiliate as “on an alley.” From the pictures presented it would appear that the facility does abut an alley on one side.

*I would like to point out that many, many businesses of all types abut alleys on one side. This says nothing about the legality or merits of their activities although the clear intent here is to invoke “back alley” images.

1:06

Holly goes on to state “in areas like Fresno where it is dirt cheap and the area not good, there are so many, so many. I would work for eight hours and there would be 40 something patients, it really wore me down.”

  • This is doubtless a true statement. But Holly’s emotional suitability for the job is not the issue. What we are not being shown are the reactions of the men and women who have dedicated their professional lives to the provision of health care services for their patients. It is this other perspective that I am hoping to provide even though I have never been affiliated with Planned Parenthood.

1:23   Holly continues: “The environment is morbid….like you can feel it.”

* I do not doubt the truth of this feeling for Holly. I do however dispute its objectivity. I have met many patients who consider all clinics and hospitals as morbid situations to be avoided. I do not share their sentiment. This does not make either opinion right or wrong and certainly says nothing at all about the legality, morality, or desirability of the activities of the clinic.

1:33 “You can hear screaming, you can hear crying”

  • This also is doubtless true. And the same could be said of any ER, pediatric clinic, gynecologist’s office or Labor and Delivery unit. This certainly does not mean that we should shut down all of these health care venues.

1:58 Holly continues stating that when they go into a clinic they are given a list of the women who are coming in for US or for their procedures and then states “ if we have time, we consent them. We take them in the room or meet them in the chair. Some women come in, take a test, are pregnant and then you can consent them. So it is just taking advantage of the opportunity.

  • What Holly has omitted is what happens prior to or in between her receiving the list of patients that she is to consent. Dr. Nucatola made it clear that the tissue donation consent always follows the consent for procedure. I do not know whether this is a willful or inadvertent omission by Holly who would have no way of knowing what information had been obtained or consents completed prior to her patient interview unless of course she has maintained lists of patients who are willing to corroborate her story or better yet had obtained their permission to review their medical records. If she herself had reviewed their records without their written consent, this is a clear violation of HIPPA and would subject her to whatever penalty the breaking of HIPPA violations would pertain to her position.

Between 2:00 to 3:28

Holly provides what appears to be a factual presentation of the patient and tissue log for any given day, the manner of entry into the computer for identification of desired tissue, intended recipient, and the obtaining technician. All is very standard documentation for tissue transfer.

* I would like to make one clarification at this point. There is on one sheet of the documentation a list of the “prices for fetal tissue”. This is important because it is the sheet utilized by StemExpresses for their costs. This is not, repeat not a Planned Parenthood document. It is not a list of sales prices. This is not made clear by Holly or by the Daleiden group.

Around 4:00

Holly has been describing the consent form used by the patient which includes her acknowledgement that this is a donation, that she is aware that she will receive no compensation for the donation, that she understands that the purpose of the donation is for research …. And that she has already been consented for the abortion.

  • This would appear to be in direct contradiction to her statement that “these mothers don’t know, nor is there anyway that they would know….”

She then states “No, it doesn’t happen all the time. Some of these women don’t know that they are going to get an abortion”

  • If this is true, and a breach in protocol is detected, it is the responsibility of the person detecting the error to notify the appropriate personnel to take care of the problem immediately. In this case, the responsible individual would be Holly. This is not at all unusual and is the reason that we have instituted an elaborate and repetitive set of checks in our system.
  • I will give you an example from my clinic last week. A patient presents for an IUD placement after having been counseled by a nurse over the phone. Somehow, a vital piece of information (the assurance that there was no reasonable possibility of pregnancy) had been omitted.

       The clinic assistant working with me that day (a float) also missed this crucial bit of information. I caught it, but not before the patient was undressed in the room and anticipating her procedure. The patient wasclearly surprised but very understanding when I explained the situation to her, called off the procedure for that day and rescheduled her at a time when I could attest to the safety of the procedure. This happens on occasion by human error, but may not be clear to Holly.

4:18   Holly begins a description of Dr. Berman

“There were actually comments about him going “viciously fast””

“Like if we didn’t watch him, we would lose our specimens, he was that fast.”

“If there wasn’t a girl in the room, he would get mad. He would pace the hallways, if there wasn’t something to do.”

“Its almost like he wanted to do it.”

“What I imagined was him literally going into the room, lifting the covers, going in grabbing and walking out. Like that’s how fast it is. Its ridiculous.”

  • Hard to know where to start. All of this is either :
  1. second hand ( aka gossip),
  2. to be anticipated since ancillary staff are supposed to be aware of the progress of a procedure so as to perform their duty in a timely fashion.,
  1. an expectation by the doctor that ancillary staff will be performing their duties in a timely manner so that neither the doctor nor the patients have to experience delays.
  1. imposing her emotional bias onto the presumed thought process of the doctor ( when doctors go to work, most of us “want” to do our job).
  1. purely a figment of her imagination as she freely states when she describes what she “imagines” to happen when he walks in the procedure room.

While it is completely true that some providers are more personable and have a better bedside manner than others, there is nothing here to even suggest that Dr. Berman does anything medically inappropriate and some might say that he is a good patient advocate for attempting to prevent unnecessary delays in patient care.

5:28

Holly continues after obvious editing.

“I was the clinic’s only ( inaudible credential initials) licensed phlebotomist. But the other individuals were drawing blood. “

  • Doubtless true. What she does not state is that many other job categories including medical assistants, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, certified nurse midwives, clinically trained medical students and physicians are fully trained and certified to draw blood. It is unclear from the tape whether Holly is not aware of this, or does not choose to acknowledge it, or whether it has been edited out of her comments.

5:34

Holly continues after obvious editing:

“The coworkers I had, they would not consent the donors. If there was a higher gestation, and the technicians needed it, there were times when they would just take what they wanted. And these mothers don’t know and there is no way they would know.”

* If this is true, and if Holly had knowledge of it, the time for her to report it would be immediately to a Planned Parenthood supervisor on site or to her immediate supervisor in StemExpress .

This is clearly illegal. The action that she is describing breaches the Patient Bill of Rights which applies in California. This is not a breach by Planned Parenthood if they are not informed. It would be a breach of policy by the individual technicians which is likely severe enough to cost the technicians their jobs. But if Holly knew of this and did not inform either her supervisor or the Planned Parenthood official on site of her concern, then she is clearly complicit.

7:17

Holly continues after obvious editing to provide a specific example in which a technician named “Jessica,” a StemExpress employee, not a PP employee obtained tissue without consent.

  • With the withholding of this information until revealed on the Daleiden tapes, Holly has clearly implicated herself in a known illegal activity, or at least been responsible for the failure to report it to the appropriate supervisorial staff as soon as she became aware.

7:57

After obvious edit, Holly continues (paraphrased):

There were times when a girl would approach me and ask me “should I be doing this?”

I am very pro-life and I would tell them like “run,” “go”… “like they will figure something out.”

  • In medicine, there is a well defined protocol for what to do if a patient expresses ambivalence or concern to a member of the staff who is not a licensed provider for the advice being sought. This is not it. The protocol is to inform a licensed clinical provider so that they can come and appropriately evaluate the patient. I have had this happen many times under many different circumstances. Patients have ambivalent feelings about all kinds of procedures. I have had patients taken off the operating room table when they have expressed ambivalence at the last moment prior to an elective procedure. Just this week, I had a patient decline a recommended biopsy only to return later the same day having decided she wanted it done after all.

       In my view, what Holly has just done is admitted to practicing medicine without a license.

8:36

Holly continues:

“I am not going to tell a girl to kill her baby just so I can get money. And that is what this company does.”

  • The first part of Holly’s statement is completely appropriate. It is not within her scope of practice to “tell a girl to kill her baby”. It is equally not within her scope of practice to tell a girl to leave the clinic. She has no responsibility and no authority to give any medical advice whatsoever. Her responsibility is to convey the patient’s comments to a provider whose scope of practice does include giving such advice.
  • The second part of her statement is unsupported. Dr. Nucatola clearly stated that the consent to procedure precedes the consent for tissue donation. If this order is adhered to per Planned Parenthood protocols, then this would not be a true statement. If Holly had evidence to the contrary, she had the obligation to present that information to a Planned Parenthood supervisor at the time she became aware of it.

10:07

Holly continues ( paraphrased) :

In describing her end of day duties she states, I would put the specimen in a FedEX box. I would have to drive it to FedEx. And the sad thing is, if someone asked what was in the box, I wouldn’t know what to say. “There are dead baby parts in there.”

The tape then ends and the following written copy appears :

Hold Planned Parenthood accountable for their illegal sale of baby parts.

My impressions of this tape are as follows:

  1. There is no evidence presented that any fetal tissue is made available for sale by Planned Parenthood.
  1. There is no evidence that any medical protocols have been breached by any employee of Planned Parenthood.
  1. There is no evidence that any Planned Parenthood provider is acting outside their scope of practice.
  1. There are unsubstantiated allegations that some technicians of StemExpress have acted outside the parameters of their scope of practice, but no evidence that Holly, when aware of these breaches, took any steps to report them to any individual with responsibility.
  1. There is evidence in her own words that Holly herself choose to practice outside her own scope of practice.

Based on the above, I have another concern about the activities of the Daleiden group. Holly would appear to be an emotionally driven and naïve young woman. I have a great deal of empathy for her because I myself have been in morally ambivalent situations in which I have experienced great and long lasting emotional disturbance by the choices that I have made and helped patients to make under extreme duress. My concern is that she has been exploited by the Daleiden group and has been placed by them at significant legal risk through her own words describing her actions.

Based on my 30 + years in medicine, I would offer her this advice as I would to anyone who finds themselves being asked to step outside their scope of practice:

  1. Do not give in to the temptation to share your opinion on medical matters. This can be interpreted as practicing medicine without a license. It can cost you your job, as I have seen happen. It can lead to legal complications.
  2. If you observe a coworker engaging in activity that you believe is illegal or immoral, your obligation is to correct them directly if you believe that they are acting in good faith but in error, or to report them immediately to a supervisor if you believe that their actions are intentional or deliberate. I have seen people disciplined for failure to report coworkers for breaching protocol.
  3. Regardless of her personal convictions, the mandated approach to reporting of suspected medical malfeasance is escalation through appropriate channels within the involved companies. Some people do not do this because they fear work place retaliation or loss of job. I understand this fear, but guarantee that this is a less onerous course than risking retaliation, loss of job and legal prosecution should you yourself have broken any laws.

Author

  • Tia Will

    Tia is a graduate of UCDMC and long time resident of Davis who raised her two now adult children here. She is a local obstetrician gynecologist with special interests in preventive medicine and public health and safety. All articles and posts written by Tia are reflective only of her own opinions and are in no way a reflection of the opinions of her partners or her employer.

    View all posts

Categories:

Breaking News Health Issues State of California

Tags:

25 comments

  1. “on an alley”

    So Daleiden’s group attempts to smear legitimate abortion services located in a bldg with an alley, and replace them with real back alley abortions.

    The more I read, the more I believe he is out to overturn Roe vs. Wade. Good luck with that, Mr.Daleiden.

    1. sisterhood, I don’t think there has ever been any question that Mr. Daleiden’s goal is the overturning of Roe vs. Wade.

      In interviews and in his own CV materials he has said that he first became involved with the pro-life movement at age 15, founding a pro-life club at Davis High School, and participating in the “Genocide Awareness Project” to show abortion images to the public. The topic of his senior thesis at Claremont McKenna College was Personhood in American Abortion Law and Jurisprudence. For that thesis he has said in interviews that he analyzed all the cases that have gone before the Supreme Court pertaining to reproductive rights to draw a conclusive answer as to the question of when life begins.

  2. “…He would pace the hallways, if there wasn’t something to do.”
    “Its almost like he wanted to do it.”

    Oh please, give me a break. I used to be the Community Medical Liason for the Sacramento branch of SCIF. I had to visit doctors and attend meeting re: workers comp. One wonderful doctor at a Kaiser would constantly bring his charts, and even his unopened mail,  to our meetings and read right up to the second the mtg started. If he was bored, he’s start writing notes, and we knew he was doing his work, not taking notes on our mtg! He kept us all on our toes, and we laughed about what an incredible multi-tasker he was. So, perhaps, this particular doctor just didnt like to waste anyone’s time.

  3. Thanks once again Tia (and Hi) for the work you are doing on this topic….a very naive question: can you describe StemExpress’ role in the process, are they subcontracted by PP and are they the intermediary or ??  Are they nationwide?

    I do not remember their name coming up before this tape in the description of the process.

    Do you or anyone else know the scope of these tapes and where we are with them in the general national conversation? I know certain DC committees are holding hearings, certain states, etc. but have lost track of the overall impact while trying to delve into the weeds of it (thanks to Tia!)

  4. ” ” Holly continues:  “I am not going to tell a girl to kill her baby…” ”
    hhmmmm. Peraps “Holly” is a Daleiden plant? Wonder where she went to high school, and college, and what religious group association? Wonder if she ever met anyone from Daleiden’s group before the day of these spliced tapes?

  5. SODA

    Hi !  As you might imagine there is a lot to cover here. I know little about StemExpress except what can be found on their web site which lists them as a multi million dollar corporation that transfers human blood and tissues from their site of acquisition to researchers. As best I can tell they formerly partnered with Planned Parenthood to transfer tissue specimens from Planned Parenthood facilities to researchers and are not payed by Planned Parenthood and thus ( in my limited understanding of business arrangements) could not be considered to be subcontractors of PP.

    I say formerly because they have ended their relationship with Planned Parenthood on the basis of the allegations, legal implications, possibly due to threats to their executives and legal defense costs, not because they wanted to dissociate. So from my point of view, what the Daleiden group has achieved to date is to end any constructive use of fetal tissues, which without a transferring agent are now “biomedical waste” to be disposed of, and to stop the productive use of blood samples taken prior to the procedure until another agency can be partnered with.  All of this waste is due to what appear to me so far to be completely unsubstantiated claims designed to destroy Planned Parenthood, and as sisterhood has pointed out, to gut, if not overturn Roe v. Wade.

    1. “… All of this waste is due to what appear to me so far to be completely unsubstantiated claims designed to destroy Planned Parenthood, and as sisterhood has pointed out, to gut, if not overturn Roe v. Wade….”

      Tia: Although you do not appear to be referring to medical “waste” in your sentence above, your choice of words does bring to mind that these articles are all about waste, be it fetal tissue or otherwise.  What a sad commentary for all involved here.

      1. DurantFan

        You make a very good point. It hadn’t really occurred to me, but the waste brought about by these reckless and  baseless ( to date) accusations is far greater than what I have stated. The “waste” does include the loss of the potential ability of researchers to proceed with life enhancing and potentially life saving treatments, the money that will have to go to lawyers to defend Planned Parenthood that will not be available for other medical services including breast and cervical cancer screening, STD screening and most ironically contraceptives for our most vulnerable populations.

        1. C’mon Tia… if placentas were readily available for researchers, I can’t see where a fetus is necessary for research, unless it is to help other fetuses.  I absolutely have no problem with all tissue from placentas or from natural, “spontaneous” abortions, being available for research, but I have serious issues with D&C, partial birth (basically “pithing”) procedures unless there is a serious physical health issue for the mother.  To me, using the tissues from ‘elective’ abortions doubles my issues.  Just me.

           

  6. Thx Tia, and agree….so far they have ‘won’ in terms of preventing the research use of fetal tissue obtained through the PP process. And most likely destroyed StemExpress. I would think PP would have vetted StemExpress as a credible and ethical intermediary even though technicially not a subcontractor. So would SExpress collect the monies and pay PP for the processing? It does not seem until this 6th video that SExpress was a factor.

    I know I am only expressing my views, but I would think (tho we never know until we are ‘there’) that I would consent to the use of fetal tissue if I were to have an abortion in the same way I have elected to donate other body parts should I die unexpectantly….tho those body parts are getting older all the time 🙂

  7. This is clearly illegal. The action that she is describing breaches the Patient Bill of Rights which applies in California. This is not a breach by Planned Parenthood if they are not informed. It would be a breach of policy by the individual technicians which is likely severe enough to cost the technicians their jobs. But if Holly knew of this and did not inform either her supervisor or the Planned Parenthood official on site of her concern, then she is clearly complicit.
    7:17
    Holly continues after obvious editing to provide a specific example in which a technician named “Jessica,” a StemExpress employee, not a PP employee obtained tissue without consent.

    With the withholding of this information until revealed on the Daleiden tapes, Holly has clearly implicated herself in a known illegal activity, or at least been responsible for the failure to report it to the appropriate supervisorial staff as soon as she became aware.

    Acorn was disbanded because of the work and advice of a few of their staff so it was Acorn who was ultimately deemed to be in the end held liable for its workers actions.  This article attempts to cast off the “clearly illegal” acts on Holly and other workers and not the institutions they work for.  I’m not sure everyone else sees it that way but it’s a good attempt in trying to deflect the controversy and responsibility.

    1. BP

      There is no attempt at deflection here. None of the individuals that Holly has stated failed to obtain appropriate consent are PP employees. She stated explicitly that they were the employees of StemExpress. Again, unless she has a documented case of tissue obtained without a signed consent, she and the Daleiden group have nothing. No evidence of wrong doing by StemExpress and certainly no evidence of any wrong doing by PP. Hearsay and unsubstantiated claims are not evidence.

  8. “..it’s a good attempt in trying to deflect the controversy and responsibility.”

    Confusing comment coming from someone who regularly encourages people to take responsibility for their actions and not become “victims”.

    It’s difficult to believe “Holly” did not understand her job duties when hired. If those responsibilities were disdainful to her, she has the freedom to choose to quit her job.

    1. Sisterhood–agree, Holly sounds quite unprofessional and not aligned with her job. Her statements are on the level of malicious slanted gossip, not those of a professional health care provider.

      Its perfectly legitimate to be an anti-abortion advocate; if her feelings are that profound she can still maintain a professional attitude about her work, and act as an anti-abortion advocate after work without smearing her fellow employees with such slanted gossip and misinformation.

  9.  “run,” “go”… “like they will figure something out.”

    Wow, how compassionate and Christian of “Holly” to tell the young woman to go run.

    “Holly”  doesn’t state where the confused young woman is running to. Perhaps the pregnant young woman is running back to an abusive boyfriend? a homeless shelter? a home that does not want an unmarried pregnant young woman living there? an abusive father? or perhaps a loving husband or boyfriend or sister who will help her “figure something out”, like how she is going to afford to feed and shelter and love and nurture her newborn.

  10. hpierce

    if placentas were readily available for researchers, I can’t see where a fetus is necessary for research, unless it is to help other fetuses”

    Just because you and I “cannot see it” does not mean that it does not exist. I do not know how fetal tissues are valuable in ways that other tissues are not. My ignorance of the subject does not mean that researchers do not find unique ways to use this tissue in their research. Maybe a good article for someone knowledgeable in this area, or for me if and when I ever get the time to research the issue. What I can address is the issue of spontaneously aborted tissue. We almost never get access to it in a timely manner for transport to researchers in a state in which it is useful to them. Since most of these spontaneous abortions happen at the woman’s home, there is no way to address this time factor.

    With regard to the procedures that either you or I find ethically acceptable, I will repeat that our specific religious or moral objections are not the point here. The accusation has been of illegal activity. That specific charge is what has caused the current firestorm of public commentary and political grandstanding against Planned Parenthood. It is the illegality of any action on the part of Planned Parenthood that is the pretext for the hampering of all of their activities, and it is illegality for which not a single shred of credible evidence has yet been provided.

    1. “No evidence” = not that we have seen. States have launched their own investigations.

      StemExpress has ceased it’s relationship with PP, which is curious. It maybe game playing for now.

      Update to the ongoing story – see below.

  11. Human Capital – Custom Abortions – Episode 3 (tape 7?)

    Witness and former technician Holly says that she was instructed to cut open the skull of a “fully intact” fetus. I don’t recall her saying her estimate of the age of the fetus. How doctors can have custom abortions with the head coming out last so that they increase the odds of getting a full brain specimen. (There would be more dilation here than if the fetus / baby was delivered head first.)

    Quotes from others about late term births? Unclear on what was communicated.

    Next episode: Planned Parenthood Criminal Enterprise

    Tape available on youtube and elsewhere.

      1. TBD and BP

        I have reviewed the tape and will be sending in my article.

        Once again, I do not find there to be any evidence of any illegal activities although there are certainly passionate descriptions of activities that some will find objectionable. I will be interested to hear what anyone believes is evidence of illegal activity.

  12. I’m to the point where I don’t even want to waste my time. I seriously doubt you viewed the tape with the same analytical approach Dr. Will has provided. Her review of the previous six tapes makes me realize nothing new will be discovered in the 7th.  Probably just more splicing from a bored, misguided youth, whom, at his young age, gender, and privilege,  has never walked in the shoes of a pregnant woman facing very difficult choices.

Leave a Comment