Dammit Janet

Subscribe to Dammit Janet feed
Updated: 53 min 9 sec ago

On "Conscientious Objection," But Mostly on Pseudonymity

Fri, 09/23/2016 - 08:35
I was going to blog about a new commentary about "conscientious objection" in medicine. (Link to the full, very readable paper.)
Authorities should bar doctors from refusing to provide such services as abortion and assisted death on moral grounds, and screen out potential medical students who might impose their values on patients, leading Canadian and British bioethicists argue in a provocative new commentary.I remembered that lawsuit launched back in 2015 by the whackadoodle group calling themselves the Christian Medical and Dental Society against the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario over a new requirement that doctors refer patients for services their precious consciences and medieval paternalism wouldn't let them even contemplate.

I remembered that Joyce Arthur of Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada had neatly and completely eviscerated their whiney self-justifications in a piece titled "Christian doctors angry they can no longer abandon their patients."

Then I remembered that I had said everything I have to say about the issue here.
I think any doctor refusing to participate in modern, non-judgemental medicine should have his or her license yanked or else shunted into a specialty or practice where they have nothing to do with lady parts.

Dermatology or podiatry would be good.In that post, I reported on my attempt on Twitter to get the Christian doctors and dentists (WTF are dentists doing in there? "Sorry, madam, but my conscience demands that you must continue to carry that rotten molar until its natural demise"?) to make public a list of their members so that sane people could stay the hell away from them.

Well. As I reported the next day, a shitstorm ensued.

I was accused of trying to "out" the good doctors (and dentists, don't forget the dentists). Um, yeah, I was, in the interests of informing potential patients.

And I was accused of hypocrisy (spelled correctly for a change) in asking for their names from behind a PSEUDONYM!

The gang over at ProWoman/ProForcedPregnancy got particularly pissy about it, two commenters going so far as to imply that my intent was to "target" the doctors (and dentists, don't forget the dentists) for some kind of hostile action.

That second blogpost I wrote is called "FFS: Near Defamation (Is That a Thing?)." (I concluded that it probably wasn't.)

A condescending commenter at PWPFP said:
Hello Fern Hill,
I’m a lawyer, and I agree with you, this does not appear to be a case of defamation.
However, if you chose to pursue any type of litigation, you would of course have to do it in your personal capacity, using your legal name. Your association with your pseudonym “Fern Hill” and your association with your blog DammitJanet, would become permanent public record.
Kind regards,
Faye Sonier
(Please note, of course, that the comments above are not provided as legal advice.)Ooooh. Who's threatening whom there? My legal name and my blog would become associated in the "permanent public record"!!!!

This wasn't and still isn't new. The fetus freaks are obsessed with my practice of pseudonymity. I've been chided in comments here at DJ! I've been repeatedly called "anonymous" by various anti-choicers, including those at LieShite and WeNeedALawLikeAHoleInTheHead. Over at the Amateur Statistician's I am "Fake Person" with my own label. SUZY ALLCAPSLOCK, whose hilarious blog is now sadly private (come back, SUZY, we miss you!), also had a kick at the pseudonymous fern hill can. Mrozek at PWPFP has invited me TWICE to meet for coffee. (I declined politely, of course.)

They are really really peeved that they don't know my real name.

I can't help but wonder: Why? What would they do with that information? Inform my employer? (Ha. As a member of the precariat, I have clients, not an employer. Would they try to track them all down?) Inform the world of my address and phone number, you know, in case someone wanted to send me a personal message or gift?

Or maybe they have in mind merely a friendly, in-person and upfront "discussion."


Their obsession used to bother me. A little. It doesn't anymore.

Waaaaah! Grifters Whine about "Prolife" Cheapskates

Mon, 09/19/2016 - 10:43
This is amusing. Fetus-freak grifters complain about anti-choice cheapskates. (Bold mine, italics in original.)

The number of Americans who self-identify as pro-life is very high, and most of them are philanthropic. In fact, about sixty million adults who give to some sort of cause also share a pro-life worldview. However, only about one in six of those generous adults engage financially in efforts to end abortion. And among those who do support the cause monetarily, the estimated contribution per adult is less than one hundred dollars per year.More whinging:
These ardent supporters of preborn children and their families are apparently not interested in financially supporting efforts to end abortion.They did a survey to find out why.

The most popular personal reason why a self-identifying abortion opponent does not donate to a pro-life organization is they are not entirely certain their pro-life worldview is correct.Hee. "Not entirely certain."

More reasons (bold mine, typo in original).

Organization-related reasons for not donating included the perception of pro-life organizations as too extreme, rabid, of [sic] fanatical. Others viewed pro-life organizations as too old-school or out-of-touch, and respondents also reported not finding an organization with which they fully identified, lacking confidence in organization leaders, and lacking passion for the organizations themselves.
But the best reason is actually rather comforting (italic in original).

Curiously, a strong majority of pro-life believers who eschew financial support of pro-life organizations consider children the most important cause to support financially.
Curiously? "Extreme, rabid, fanatical" grifters whose purpose is to shame women who have sex are surprised that saner "pro-life" people prefer to donate their dough to ACTUAL children in need.

"Out of touch"? You betcha.

Small Mercy: There Could Be More Fake Clinics in Canada

Wed, 09/14/2016 - 09:25
According to Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (ARCC), there are about 180 fake clinics, aka crisis pregnancy centres, in Canada.

DJ! is committed to exposing them as liars, manipulators, and cheats.

They exist solely to dissuade Canadians from excercising their constitutional right to bodily autonomy. They are discriminatory and seek to limit and stigmatize our legal right to abortion.

We will do everything we can to deny them public money and to force them to adhere to regulations on truth and confidentiality.

A sample of recent posts:

Yet again, we have proof that they lie about their services and about the risks of abortion.

We found evidence that they breach "client" confidentiality.

We've uncovered the fact that they apply for and receive public money from provincial gaming foundations in at least three provinces: Alberta, BC, and previously did in Ontario as well (snerk).

Most recently, we've been delving into government grants and found that several fake clinics get federal funding to train apprentice liars under the Canada Summer Jobs program.

Well, I suppose we should be grateful that we have only 180 of these outfits in Canada. There are more than 4,000 of them in the US. And yesterday, it was reported that in Texas a fake clinic will be getting state funds intended for women's health programs!!!!
The anti-abortion nonprofit set to receive a $1.6 million grant through the state’s new women’s health program plans to dole out funds to an anti-abortion pregnancy counseling center that currently offers no medical services.
As Canada is about one-tenth the size of the US, using the usual math, we should have one-tenth the number of fake clinics, or about 400 of them.

I was curious about the ratio of fake clinics to population and so had another look at ARCC's PDF of its recent study of their websites.

By province, here's where they are:
Alberta 20
British Columbia 27
Manitoba 6
New Brunswick 10
Newfoundland 1
Nova Scotia 4
Ontario 85
Quebec 17
Saskatchewan 6

What jumps out is that little New Brunswick, with a 2011 census population of just over 750,000 people, has TEN.

Guess what? If all of Canada had that ratio of lying liars to population, we'd have 446 fake clinics.

So, while there have been recent victories in New Brunswick, there's obviusly a lot more to do there.

And, as we work to make sure that Canada NEVER goes down the path of significant public funding for fake clinics, we can be quietly, Canadianly glad that we don't have nearly the number of nutters the US does.

Fetal Gore Impact Study FAIL

Mon, 09/12/2016 - 16:28
Back here I promised to have at the "study" commissioned by the Fetal Gore Gang that tries to deliver on its long-standing claims that shoving gory images in people's faces does anything but make them recoil and occasionally toss chocolate milk.


Here is the announcement of the study's birth.

The study titled A Statistical Analysis on the Effectiveness of Abortion Victim Photography in Pro-life Activism was commissioned by the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform (CCBR). The CCBR developed a survey — administered by the independent company Blue Direct — which targeted the population of geographic areas in which CCBR campaigns had been run using abortion victim photography. With a sample size of more than 1,700 respondents, the survey results are sufficient to gauge public opinion within a five-point margin, the study claims.
Link to PDF for them's as like to look for themselves.

The PhD in need of a few bucks author of the report is Jacqueline Harvey. Among her credentials: U.S. Policy Analyst for Euthanasia Prevention Coalition International, team member at Charlotte Lozier Institute (anti-choice wannabe answer to prestigious Guttmacher Institute), and featured for-hire false witness.

'Nuff said there.

The independent company mentioned in the LieShite quote is Blue Direct.

It's based in Alberta and it pitches itself thus:
As a results oriented company, we’ll work with you while continuously testing and tweaking what we’re doing to ensure you get the best results.I read the "study" (twenty minutes I'll never get back). My eyes were already crossed by the biased language and idiosyncratic categories when I got to page 20 and saw this table.



First, just try to make any sense of that. "Cultural impact" is a thing? Not in any sociology textbook I can find. Also "cultural impact" heading has some numbers, but the footer has some other numbers.

"Pro-life percentage points gained"? Is that like IQ points lost trying to make sense of this scientifically and statistically illiterate word salad?

And the "points gained" is 1.20% and the MOE of the study is acknowledged at 5%?

Moronic.

The take-away: This is why Real Science™ requires peer review.

The conclusion: Come back, Fetal Gore Gang, when you can get this kind of crap published in a real scientific journal.

Fake Clinics Use Federal Money to Fund Summer Jobs for Apprentice Liars

Mon, 09/12/2016 - 14:52
A few days ago, we reported on fake clinics, aka crisis pregnancy centres, getting government funding.

We wondered what programs these lying liars could possibly qualify for.

So we went looking.

It's tremendously tedious but it's possible.

One has to search by department or agency.

We went to Service Canada looking for organizations that have received funding and found this or the downloadable/searchable PDF.

Golly gee, in 2015 the Canada Summer Jobs program gave our money to four fake clinics in Alberta.

Calgary Pregnancy Care Centre: $12,782 (2 jobs)

• Lethbridge Pregnancy Care Centre: $5,817 (1 job)

• Central Alberta Pregnancy Care Centre Society: $6,038 (1 job)

• Cochrane Pregnancy Care Centre: $3,766 (1 job).

Congratulations, Canadian taxpayers. You/we funded five students just in Alberta just in one year to learn to lie to and manipulate pregnant people at religious fake clinics.

We looked further. The Calgary fake clinic has been receiving federal money to fund summer jobs every year since at least 2010, starting then at $11,000, going up to the present $12,782 (inflation?).

But we're just getting started.

We have identified 22 other fake clinics taking federal money to create summer jobs, some, like the Calgary gang, for several years.

We'll be delving into those in future posts, as time allows. (We do have to make a living. No taxpaying chumps are funding this research.)