“In the three consultations, I said that I was two to three weeks late and that I had taken a home pregnancy test that came back positive. The truth was that I was not pregnant,” the reporter explained. At Fundación Naiset, they did an ultrasound, but did not do any blood work or give her a pregnancy test. Pro Médica Mujer also gave her an ultrasound, showed her a spot on the screen, and claimed it was her embryo.

“They had no way of printing out the ultrasound, so I asked if I could take a photo of the screen with my cell phone,” she recalled. “The reply was categorical: I could NOT take a photograph of my ultrasound.” Ginecafem did give her a printout of the ultrasound.

After being falsely told that she was pregnant at each facility, the staff then began trying to get her to have an abortion. “At all three clinics, I felt some pressure to have the procedure,” she said. “Both at Fundación Naiset and ProMédica Mujer, I was asked which method I preferred even before they asked me if I was sure or if I wanted to think about it before going through with it.”

Fundación Naiset also asked her to choose what kind of abortion procedure she wanted, before confirming she was pregnant. “Before I had even had the consultation, they talked to me about the different procedures at the front desk,” she wrote. “They mentioned nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea as side effects of the medication method for the first two days, and bleeding from three to 10 days, which could be extended up to 15 to 30 days. But they said the effectiveness is 80%.” They then offered an aspiration abortion as another option.

This kind of gross medical malpractice in the abortion industry is, sadly, not limited to Mexico. It’s just another example of how the abortion industry around the world values making a profit above all else, even at the expense of women.

Oklahoma City abortionist Naresh Patel, for example, pled guilty to fraud and lost his medical license after it was discovered that he also was committing “abortions” on women who were not pregnant, prescribing them RU-486. In the United Kingdom, Marie Stopes had to cease committing abortions after shocking undercover investigations showed that staffers were coercing women into having abortions. In the United States, Planned Parenthood staffers have testified about the organization having abortion goals, or quotas, while women were being treated like cattle, rushed through their procedures to get to the next patient — anything to make more money, no matter the circumstances.

The abortion industry also routinely lies to women — about the services they provide, the risks of abortion, and medical information about their pregnancies and their babies. Abortionists also all-too-frequently engage in criminal behavior.

Abortion advocates often claim that abortion needs to be legal to prevent women from being butchered in back-alley abortions. And while this claim is almost certainly false, what, if anything, is the difference between the behavior of the legal abortion industry, and that of these supposed back-alley butchers?

“They had no way of printing out the ultrasound, so I asked if I could take a photo of the screen with my cell phone,” she recalled. “The reply was categorical: I could NOT take a photograph of my ultrasound.” Ginecafem did give her a printout of the ultrasound.

After being falsely told that she was pregnant at each facility, the staff then began trying to get her to have an abortion. “At all three clinics, I felt some pressure to have the procedure,” she said. “Both at Fundación Naiset and ProMédica Mujer, I was asked which method I preferred even before they asked me if I was sure or if I wanted to think about it before going through with it.”

Fundación Naiset also asked her to choose what kind of abortion procedure she wanted, before confirming she was pregnant. “Before I had even had the consultation, they talked to me about the different procedures at the front desk,” she wrote. “They mentioned nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea as side effects of the medication method for the first two days, and bleeding from three to 10 days, which could be extended up to 15 to 30 days. But they said the effectiveness is 80%.” They then offered an aspiration abortion as another option.

This kind of gross medical malpractice in the abortion industry is, sadly, not limited to Mexico. It’s just another example of how the abortion industry around the world values making a profit above all else, even at the expense of women.

Oklahoma City abortionist Naresh Patel, for example, pled guilty to fraud and lost his medical license after it was discovered that he also was committing “abortions” on women who were not pregnant, prescribing them RU-486. In the United Kingdom, Marie Stopes had to cease committing abortions after shocking undercover investigations showed that staffers were coercing women into having abortions. In the United States, Planned Parenthood staffers have testified about the organization having abortion goals, or quotas, while women were being treated like cattle, rushed through their procedures to get to the next patient — anything to make more money, no matter the circumstances.

The abortion industry also routinely lies to women — about the services they provide, the risks of abortion, and medical information about their pregnancies and their babies. Abortionists also all-too-frequently engage in criminal behavior.

Abortion advocates often claim that abortion needs to be legal to prevent women from being butchered in back-alley abortions. And while this claim is almost certainly false, what, if anything, is the difference between the behavior of the legal abortion industry, and that of these supposed back-alley butchers?