Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Kansas abortionists’ Category

Kris Neuhaus

Kris Neuhaus

Ex-Kansas abortionist Kris Neuhaus wants your pity (she sees herself as a martyr) and your money.

In a radio interview Thursday, she elaborated that she has lost her research job “without explanation” and has initiated a second online “fund-me“ campaign to raise $100,000.

Fed by adulation in multiple pro-abortion outlets where she has been termed a “hero-provider,” Neuhaus now insists (as in a press conference in April) that she be referred to as Dr. Neuhaus and bills herself as,

the first woman physician in Kansas to publicly provide abortion care, performing or consulting on over 10,000 procedures.”

Pro-life readers know that she was a failed abortionist who rubberstamped mental health “approvals” for late-term abortions for George Tiller from 1999-2007.

Her medical license was revoked in July 2012, but on appeal, was remanded to the State Board of Healing Arts in March 2014. The Board revoked the license again this January on the narrower complaint of record-keeping failure.

She is now appealing that second revocation.

Neuhaus touts herself as a martyr who lost her medical license unjustly in the pro-life administration of Gov. Sam Brownback due to her “affiliation with Dr. Tiller.”

In actuality, Neuhaus was charged in 2009— during the administration of pro-abortion Gov. Kathleen Sebelius– with violating record-keeping regulations and violating the standard of care for 11 teens obtaining late-term abortions in 2003 at Tiller’s Wichita clinic.

The state Healing Arts Board of Kansas in the past has twice deemed her “a danger to the public” and views her as defiant, self-righteous and “unable to be rehabilitated.”

Neuhaus has promised in the past she will never again do abortions, and claims to have attained a Master’s degree in Public Health at the University of Kansas, so why is she not employable? No answer to that.

In yesterday’s radio interview she said she is seeking public funding to help her afford the filing fees required to apply for medical licenses in other states. (Watchout, America!)

Eighteen months ago, her online campaign raised $63,000 –ostensibly to be used to save her home and pay her legal fees to the Board, at that time billed as $93,000. She has paid nothing to the Board and is protesting the reassessed costs of $31,000 she now owes.

Her husband is running another donation site to repay attorneys for their pro bono work on her behalf.

Neuhaus believes she deserves public support “to enable me to continue to oppose the dire state of women’s health care in Kansas, and to help expose the right-wing’s attempt to export this insanity to other states.”

Defiant and self-righteous seems an understatement.

Read Full Post »

comp health PP (2)Planned Parenthood of Kansas & Mid-Missouri hates the new ban on dismemberment abortions passed in Kansas. But it is already eagerly using opposition to SB 95– “this atrocious law” in their words–to fundraise.

However, there are two things they have had to tiptoe around in bashing this example of so-called “extreme political measures.” First, is Senate Bill 95’s title in statute–“which shall be known and may be cited as the Kansas unborn child protection from dismemberment abortion act.”

The second is the descriptive definition of what is outlawed:

“’Dismemberment abortion’ means, with the purpose of causing the death of an unborn child, knowingly dismembering a living unborn child and extracting such unborn child one piece at a time from the uterus through the use of clamps, grasping forceps, tongs, scissors or similar instruments that, through the convergence of two rigid levers, slice, crush or grasp a portion of the unborn child’s body in order to cut or rip it off.”

An email solicitation sent to supporters yesterday, signed by PPKMM President/CEO Laura McQuade, read (with their emphasis in bold):

“If Senate Bill 95 goes into effect in Kansas on July 1, 2015, PPKM will need to drastically alter our surgical services. Using inflammatory and non-medical language, this bill bans one of the safest methods of second trimester abortion according to every major medical authority including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the World Health Organization.”

Before dissecting that information, insert the reminder that abortion is never safe for unborn babies.

SB 95 bans one method of abortion: the shredding of a still-living unborn child in which the abortionist reaches into the mother’s womb with an instrument similar to a pair of pliers and grabs onto a body part, ripping a tiny baby apart, piece by piece until she bleeds to death.

It should be noted that McQuade does not write “THE safest,” but ONE of the safest methods. She’s backing off what all abortion chatter, and testimony to committees, has been against this bill–that dismemberment was THE safest method.

(In its partial-birth ruling of 2007, the Supreme Court upheld a ban on that gruesome abortion method. At the time partial-birth abortion proponents said this was THE safest for women.)

PPKMM issued a public statement in opposition to SB 95 on April 7, the day the bill was signed into law by Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback. Again, their statement omitted the title of the law and gave not a hint about the abortion method banned.

The statement pledged to protect women’s “decision-making ability” and “ensure that every individual has the knowledge, opportunity and freedom to make informed private decisions.”

In reality, PPKMM wants women to stay unenlightened about the Dismemberment abortion procedure which they describe innocuously on their website as “removal of the pregnancy with forceps.”

This complete lack of candor is in line with court testimony from other abortionists that they are comfortable withholding a straight explanation of dismemberment to pregnant women considering abortion.

Truly informed decisions are those made with all the facts.

I guess the hypocrisy escapes McQuade.

Read Full Post »

Kris Neuhaus

Kris Neuhaus

Remember the Kansas abortionist who over a period of seven years “rubber-stamped” post-viability abortions at the Wichita abortion clinic of the late George Tiller?

Ann Kristin (Kris) Neuhaus is her name and the Kansas Board of Healing Arts is having one heck of a time getting her state license permanently revoked.

This past January, the Board issued a second revocation against Neuhaus. Undaunted, Neuhaus returned to the court that overturned the first revocation. On March 3,

attorneys for Neuhaus petitioned Shawnee County Judge Franklin Theis to block the Board’s second (the new) revocation and dismiss the legal expenses that she had been assessed.

A little history: In April 2010, the Board initiated legal action to revoke the medical license of Neuhaus for failure to provide “standard of care” and professional record-keeping for 11 teens aged 10-18 who had obtained third-trimester abortions from Tiller in 2003.

The role Neuhaus was supposed to play under the law was that of an independent “check” on post-viability abortions by providing bona fide second opinions on maternal health.

At that time, Kansas banned all post-viability abortions except under rare occasions threatening maternal life or substantial and irreversible “harm.” But the legislative intent was blown sky high when a pro-abortion Kansas Attorney General ruled that the “harm” could be “mental.”

Tiller testified under oath about the details of his arrangement with Neuhaus. He said he had called over 100 Kansas physicians but none were willing to do such referrals for him.

Tiller said he was connected to a financially desperate Neuhaus who was willing to provide the legally required mental health referrals using an online “Psych-Lite” diagnostic tool. (Neuhaus was never trained as a psychiatric consultant.)

What actually transpired, however, was that the “independent” referral from Neuhaus came after she interviewed abortion-seekers (almost exclusively from out-of-state) inside Tiller’s clinic just minutes before the procedure was initiated! All this was verified in a Wichita trial record from May 2007.

The Board charged Neuhaus with improperly evaluating those vulnerable girls and breaking state regulations requiring a proper health record for each patient. After extensive hearings by Administrative Law Judge Edward Gashler, the final order of revocation against her license was issued in July 2012 for “professional incompetence” and “failing to meet minimum requirements for maintaining records.”

Neuhaus appealed the order to a pro-abortion district court—that of Judge Theis. In March 2014, Theis overturned the Board’s revocation, concluding it was too “harsh” a penalty for Neuhaus’ atrocious record-keeping. Theis also disagreed with the finding of incompetence and ordered another review by the Board.

This past January, the Board issued

 a second revocation against Neuhaus on the single issue of incomplete medical files for those 11 teens. This was her “third strike” said the Board;

she had been cited in past years for improper patient documentation and had violated her legal stipulation to amend her ways.The Board order characterized her as stubborn and “incapable of successful rehabilitation,” and assessed legal costs at just under $32,000.

But earlier this month Neuhaus petitioned Judge Theis to again block the Board’s revocation and dismiss the legal expenses.

The saga continues.

Read Full Post »

Kris Neuhaus

Neuhaus at Board

Late Friday, the Kansas Board of Healing Arts issued a final order of license revocation for abortionist Kris Neuhaus, calling her “incapable of successful rehabilitation.”  Kansans for Life applauds the resolve of the Board in protecting the public from her.

Neuhaus’ license had been revoked in 2012 for her failure to follow both standard of care and record-keeping protocols when providing the legally-required “second  independent medical opinion ” that enabled 11 teens in 2003 to obtain third-trimester abortions at the Wichita abortion clinic of George Tiller.

Neuhaus challenged that revocation in state district court. While upholding the Board’s findings that Neuhaus repeatedly failed to document patient histories properly, Judge Franklin Theis vacated the standard of care charge and sent the matter back to the Board for a “do-over.” on Dec. 11  (see here).

The Board upheld using the sanction of revocation for record-keeping misconduct, because this was Neuhaus’ “third strike ” in this arena.

She had been involved in two prior disciplinary actions from the Board between 1999-2001 and as part of retaining her medical license then, she had legally PROMISED to correct her admitted record-keeping failures in the future.

Creating and maintaining proper medical records is not a trivial matter. The Board asserted that the “the interest of the patient is paramount…Failure to properly document denies the patient of the opportunity to receive proper follow up care and treatment.”

The Board particularly cited the youth, inexperience and vulnerability of the 11 patients, “who may have had a unique need for follow up because [Neuhaus] testified that some exhibited suicidal ideation or other indicators of mental illness or psychiatric problems.”

The Board found that Neuhaus:

  • intentionally, willfully and knowingly committed multiple violations of the Kansas Healing Arts Act;
  • “has not learned from prior disciplinary actions [and] fails to express contrition or otherwise acknowledge the wrongful nature of her conduct”;
  • feels”justified in her actions and showed no signs of remorse”.

Neuhaus’ attorney, Bob Eye, had pressed that Neuhaus had already suffered a sufficient penalty of not having had her Kansas medical license for the past years during litigation. However, the Board disagreed, and cited continued revocation and court costs were warranted under their sanctioning guidelines.

In the earlier revocation, the state lost the $93,000.00 in court costs charged to Neuhaus which Judge Theis dismissed. Neuhaus has fifteen days to file a new appeal.

Read Full Post »

ksbha logoAfter presentations Thursday from attorneys on both sides, the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts deferred a ruling on the matter of abortionist Kris Neuhaus, whose license they had revoked in 2012. Neuhaus wants to regain her license and not pay the original $93,000 in assessed court costs.

From 1999-2006, Neuhaus provided the legally-required “second-physician approval” for post-viability abortions performed by the now-deceased Wichita abortionist, George Tiller.

At issue were 11 such abortions in 2003, performed on teens in the third trimester. The Board issued license revocation for her failure to follow the standard of care in those cases.

Neuhaus won a reprieve of that revocation from Shawnee District Court Judge Franklin Theis, who ruled that –although her record-keeping was deficient–the revocation was too severe a penalty and the Board must revisit the case.

The Board met Thursday and allowed the public to hear the presentations from Neuhaus’ attorney, Bob Eye, and their own counsel, Reese Hays, as well as questions from Board members. At a few points, Neuhaus called out from the audience that she wanted to address the Board, and they permitted her a few  statements– which were promptly struck from the record as improper and irrelevant.

The Board then recessed to conference in private and then announced their decision would not be issued today.

Hays’ recommendation to the Board is that

Neuhaus is defiant, and cannot be rehabilitated.

He reminded that the 2003 case is Neuhaus’ “third strike” as the Board had disciplined her in 1999 and 2001 for similar record-keeping failures.

By her own admission, Neuhaus’ omission of essential information and assessments in the teen abortion files was intentional. It was even more egregious because, due to earlier misconduct, she was bound by a legal agreement with the Board to faithfully execute state regulations for patient charting.

Hays urged the Board to follow their own disciplinary guidelines, and include the “aggravating” factors that justified license revocation. That included the vulnerability of inexperienced and immature teens diagnosed with mental health problems but left without accurate medical files necessary to obtain proper follow-up medical care.

Neuhaus’ attorney, Bob Eye, hammered on the idea that Neuhaus wants to continue in the medical field and that her actions in 2003 were described as not “nefarious” by Judge Theis.

Board member, Anne Hodgdon, objected, asserting that the matter at hand was Neuhaus’ willful disobedience of the law and the Board.

Read Full Post »

Kris Neuhaus

Kris Neuhaus (AP file photo)

Next Thursday, the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts will have a hearing on their 2012 license revocation of abortionist Ann Kristin (Kris) Neuhaus.

They were ordered to review this case (translation: undo the revocation and issue a slap-on-the-wrist penalty) by Shawnee District Court Judge Franklin Theis, ruling on the appeal filed by Neuhaus.

The Board was incensed at the refutation of their authority to revoke, and asked for the state appellate court to intervene, but that support was denied. Instead, they were forced to obey Theis and re-present the case to the Board. In their newest filing,

Board attorneys emphasize this is Neuhaus’ “3rd strike” and her “character is not one that can be rehabilitated.”

The legal issue is Neuhaus’ repeated violations of standard of care, i.e. the baseline professional requirements in assessing the patient, making a diagnosis and committing this data into a written medical file.

The backdrop to the case was that Neuhaus, a failed “circuit-riding” abortionist, had become the integral “rubber stamp” for post-viability abortions performed by infamous (now deceased) Wichita abortionist, George Tiller. The state law at the time banned post-viability abortions without a second opinion from a Kansas- licensed physician verifying that the mother faced “substantial and irreversible” harm. The Board utilized case files obtained by (former) Attorney General Phill Kline of 11 teens who had obtained third trimester abortions in 2003 with Neuhaus’ approval of dire “mental health” conditions.

The Board’s arguments for revocation do not hinge on professional fraud, or the fact that Neuhaus utilized an online ‘psych-profiling’ system to claim grave mental health issues justified those 11 abortions. The Board simply asserts that Neuhaus continues to ignore the essential, legally required written elements for patient intake, evaluation and case history.

It’s a problem that the Board repeatedly disciplined Neuhaus for:

  • in 1999 it was multiple cases of her failure to record drug dispensation as required by the federal authorities (DEA);
  • in 2001, it included her inability to do proper patient intake, create a proper sedation record, or document the gestational age of the unborn child as required by the Kansas Woman’s Right to Know statutes.

Judge Theis himself acknowledged that Neuhaus’ record-keeping fell below standard of care, but it was his opinion that it didn’t merit revocation.

The Board’s newest filing emphasizes that her deficient medical files were particularly egregious at the time of those eleven abortions, because Neuhaus was still bound by her 2001 formal promise to the Board to “comply with all provisions…of medical record-keeping.

The Board’s attorneys profile the situation thusly:

“The Board has attempted to remediate and rehabilitate [Neuhaus] to no avail…by her behavior in the two previous actions [her] conduct shows that she believes her way is better than the Board’s…she was given, not one, but two second chances to fix her documentation issues…her character is not one that can be rehabilitated.”

The Board will be presented with this second airing of the case Thursday and then notify Judge Theis of their stand. It’s assumed that the Board will maintain their original revocation and their authority in this matter.

Read Full Post »

Kansans are facing a a pivotal choice for the U.S. Senate: incumbent pro-life GOP Senator Pat Roberts versus pro-abortion multimillionaire Greg Orman.

Orman was unknown to Kansans before he bought over a million dollars in TV ads this summer denigrating Washington’s “gridlock” politics, and offering to end it. Orman portrays himself as an “outsider”–an “Independent” candidate– even though more than 90% of his sizable past political donations have gone to Democrats.

Orman is quite the stealth candidate, except to the abortion industry. They know exactly who he is. Back to that in a moment.

Sen. Roberts released a great new radio ad yesterday, with a crystal clear message that cuts right to the heart of the differences between himself and Orman:

“The right to life is the most fundamental right we have.
From conception to natural death, the life of every Kansan, every American, every human should be honored and protected.
That’s why we need to keep Pat Roberts in the Senate.
Pat Roberts has a 100% pro-life voting record.
Endorsed by both National Right to Life and Kansans for Life, Pat has been a key supporter of every major pro-life initiative in Senate.
Pat opposes abortion on demand and federal funding of abortion.
If you care about life, Pat Roberts is the only choice.

Pat’s opponent, liberal Greg Orman, doesn’t share our values.
Greg Orman is pro-abortion.
Greg Orman would give President Obama another pro-abortion vote in the Senate.
We can’t let that happen.
Orman says we have to move past this issue.
Pat Roberts, on the other hand, will never stop fighting for life.
Protect life, Pat Roberts for Senate.”

Back to Greg Orman. He has never held public office, lacks any record of public service, and has generally avoided taking specific positions on the major issues.

But in a recent debate with Sen. Roberts, Orman described himself as “pro-choice.” He said he “trusts women” and the public should “get past” the abortion issue.

Surprise, surprise. All three Kansas abortion businesses are supporting him!

  • The Overland Park abortion clinic of Hodes & Nauser (father-daughter abortionists who have sued Kansas’ pro-life laws) have Orman signs in the windows.
  • Last Saturday Planned Parenthood of Kansas & Mid-Missouri held a joint rally in support of Orman and other Kansas pro-abortion Democrat women candidates (Orman’s wife was advertised as being there on his behalf).
  • A letter praising Orman’s candidacy was published in the Wichita Eagle, written by Julie Burkhart, who has opened an abortion business (manned by “circuit-rider” abortionists) at the location of the late George Tiller’s infamous abortion clinic.

The choice for Kansans is clear: Pat Roberts, who has pledged, “never to stop fighting for life.”

 

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 46 other followers