ARTICLES
November/December2006 ARTICLES
Contents © 2006
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.
How Insidious It Really Is
Court Documents Reveal Multiple Complaints Against Abortion Chain
BY ROBERT KENNEDY
One of the largest chains of abortion clinics in Los Angeles is Clinica Medica Para la Mujer De Hoy. The abortion chain has six locations: 14673 Parthenia, Panorama City; 6011 Pacific Boulevard, Huntington Park; 4215 Marine Avenue, Baldwin Park; 2140 West Olympic Boulevard, Los Angeles; 1550 Broadway, Chula Vista; and 120 West 5th Street, Santa Ana. The clinic has existed for over 14 years and is currently operated by non-physician Bertha Bugarin. In California it is unlawful for a non-physician like Bugarin to operate a medical office, so Bugarin gets doctors to front for her and hold a fictitious name permit with the state medical board.
A review of the docket at the Los Angeles County Superior Court shows that the clinic has incurred approximately 18 lawsuits throughout its history as an abortion provider. Nine of these cases pertain to allegations of medical malpractice, two pertain to allegations of personal injury, two involved commercial litigation issues, and five were cases brought in small claims court.
One of the earlier lawsuits brought against the clinic was filed on November 28, 1994 by E. T. (Editor's note: we withhold the names of the victims.) She sued the clinic and Nicholas Braemer, M.D. for personal injury and medical malpractice.
Braemer is a well known doctor in the abortion industry and himself originally owned the Clinica Medica chain of abortion clinics that stretched from San Diego County to North Hollywood. Braemer's troubles date back to the year 1987, when the Medical Board of California filed an accusation against him after he botched an abortion on a 27-year-old woman. In that instance, the state medical board's accusation against Braemer stated that he "was successful in removing only one arm of the fetus and the remainder was left behind." Without checking to see if the abortion was successful, Braemer sent the patient home. The following day, the woman gave birth to a stillborn fetus who was missing an arm. In 1993, Braemer was put on five years probation with the medical board. However, throughout the years following Braemer's probation with the medical board, he continued to ignore the conditions of his probation and the restrictions on his license.
One of the results of Braemer ignoring his probation can be seen in the case filed by E. T. The complaint states that on December 12, 1993, she underwent an abortion performed by Braemer. As a result of this abortion, she "sustained injuries, including a traumatic abortion with a perforated uterus and pelvic retroperitoneal hemotoma resulting in the need for a hysterectomy." Trujillo was hospitalized as a result of the results of this abortion and, according to the complaint, suffered "loss of earnings, earning capacity, costs of hospitalization, costs of extraordinary medical expenses, extreme mental anguish and depression, fatigue, loss of sleep, anxiety, nervousness, tension, psychological trauma, and other physical and psychological complaints." The court file for this action does not contain a response from the clinic or Braemer to the allegations or show how this action was resolved.
The clinic and Nicholas Braemer were defendants again in another lawsuit, this one commencing on May 12, 1999 in a case brought by E.V. According to the complaint, on February 9, 1998 E.V. came to the clinic for a pap smear, which was performed by Braemer. The results of the smear indicated that E.V. had a form of uterine cancer. Braemer informed E.V. of her condition on February 12, 1998. She was also told that she was approximately five weeks pregnant. Braemer told E.V. that she should undergo an abortion so that her malignant uterus could then be remedied. The complaint states that E.V. did not want to have an abortion but deliberated on her circumstances and then consented. Braemer performed the abortion procedure on E.V., February 14, 1998. Braemer noted on the operative record that all "fetal parts were removed and accounted for empty uterus."
Braemer then advised E.V. to go to County-USC Hospital for her cancer. It was discovered that she was still pregnant (at that time, approximately 15-16 weeks pregnant). The complaint states that, when informed of this, E.V. became "shocked, dismayed and became quite distraught." Then, on or about April 15, 1998, E.V. underwent a second abortion procedure, which was successfully completed. The complaint states that as a result of this dilemma, E.V. "continues to suffer severe mental anguish, emotional distress and nervous pain and suffering."
Another lawsuit brought against the clinic once again involved Braemer. This action was filed on March 8, 1996 by L.A.. The complaint filed in this action alleges that Braemer provided pre-natal care to L.A. at the clinic. After Braemer had provided care to L.A., she went into labor and gave birth at Torrance Memorial Hospital. L.A.'s baby was stillborn.
The answers filed by the clinic and Braemer do not provide any factual defense to the allegations of these complaints. They only state that if the plaintiffs did suffer damages, other persons or entities may have been responsible. In the year 2000, the Medical Board of California revoked Braemer's medical license for gross negligence and incompetence in performing abortions.
Another lawsuit filed against the clinic involves its medical director -- one of Southern California's most infamous abortionists, Lawrence Reich. This lawsuit was filed by D.H. on October 24, 2002. In her declaration filed in the case on July 18, 2003, D.H. states that in December 2002 she suspected she was pregnant and decided to obtain an abortion. She made an appointment to be seen in the clinic on January 12, 2003. The receptionist at the clinic gave D.H. several papers to sign, but, says D.H., she was not given copies of the documents nor was it explained to her what they said. She was then escorted to an examination room where she underwent an ultrasound and was examined by Reich. The abortion procedure was performed. But, says D.H.'s complaint, she was not informed by Reich or anyone at the clinic that she needed to return to the clinic in a few weeks for a follow-up appointment and was under the impression that the abortion had been successful.
In early March 2003, D.H. noticed that she appeared to be gaining weight and was having a problem with frequent urination. She then saw her gynecologist on March 25, 2002. He performed a urine test that showed that D.H. was still pregnant. D.H. was shocked to learn the results. She then called the clinic to inform them she was pregnant. On March 29, she received a letter from the clinic stating it was important for her to come to the clinic. The letter was dated January 20, 2002 but postmarked March 26. It was clear to D.H. that this letter was not sent until after D.H. had contacted the clinic. By that time, D.H. was six months pregnant. She called the clinic to learn what had happened, why the abortion had not been successful, and why she had not been informed by the clinic to return for a follow-up appointment.
D. H. did return to the clinic on April 2, 2002. The doctor at the clinic told her that it was not too late to have the abortion if she wanted. Since D. H. was six months pregnant, she felt that the risk of an abortion at that point was something she did not want to undergo. As D.H. stated, "the baby was growing in me, and I felt at this point my safety and health would be compromised if in fact I went forward with the abortion. Had I been contacted by the clinic in January, I would have consented to another therapeutic abortion. My baby was born on July 9, 2002."
Reich has been convicted of having sexually molested a number of his patients (see "Pro-Lifers Praise Pro-Abortion Senator," January 2006 Mission). This led pro-abortion California senator Barbara Boxer, in a strongly worded December 8, 2005 letter to the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, to request the removal of Reich's medical license. Boxer stated in her letter that "Reich had a long history of sexual misconduct against patients, which led to a license suspension in 1982 and a 10-year probationary period that ended in 1994. Further, he was arrested in 2002 on sexual battery charges and pleaded no contest to sexual exploitation by a physician." An administrative law judge set a hearing date in February 2006 to consider whether Reich's medical license should be removed. In order to avoid this hearing, Reich agreed on February 14 to surrender his license and stop performing abortions. Clinica Medica Para La Mujer De Hoy allowed Reich to continue as its medical director until April 14, 2006.
When asked who owns Clinica Medica Para La Mujer de Hoy, Candis Cohen of the California Medical Board replied, "we cannot at the present determine who owns the clinic. There is no physician behind the clinic, so we are going to take a closer look at the clinic. We are launching an investigation."