View Full Version : Botched abortion doctor sacked

Friday, August 15th, 2003, 05:38 PM
Last Updated: Friday, 15 August, 2003, 12:22 GMT 13:22 UK

E-mail this to a friend Printable version

Botched abortion doctor sacked

Dr Andrew Gbinigie was allowed to continue practising by the GMC
A doctor who was found guilty of serious professional misconduct after botching an abortion has been sacked from his latest job in Liverpool.
Andrew Gbinigie, 47, a consultant gynaecologist, pulled out a woman's ovary and part of her bowel during an operation in Birmingham in November 2000.

But he escaped being struck off by the General Medical Council (GMC) despite it hearing the operation had been beyond his technical expertise.

He was also found guilty of behaving improperly towards two female staff at the city's Calthorpe Clinic, but was allowed to continue practising as long as he stuck to certain conditions, including only working at hospitals with intensive care facilities.

A national newspaper revealed on Friday he had found a new job working as a locum consultant in the obstetrics department of Liverpool Women's Hospital.

'Contract terminated'

The hospital initially defended its decision to employ him, saying he had no involvement in abortions or other gynaecology work, but have now reversed their decision.

A spokesman said: "In the light of additional allegations against Dr Gbinigie which have only been brought to the trust's attention today, we will be terminating his contract with immediate effect."

Dr Gbinigie had also worked at the hospital between September 2002 and February 2003 and had been given a new four-month contract up until 30 September.

The hospital has set up a helpline for any patients who are concerned about their care on 0151 702 4300.

Friday, August 15th, 2003, 05:52 PM
I've had the mis-pleasure of being in contact with sevral "abortionists", that is people who actually carry out these "procedures".
And I must say I have been consitently dismayed by these people.
On the whole they have been extremely defensive, extremely immature, unable to reasonably refute claims against abortion, abusive and childish, seemingly indifferent to human life or human fellings or human morality, indifferent to the physical and emotional well-being of the women and families involved in the aftermath, extremely sexist (despite trying to appear as if they were concerned by the women's right to choice and on the whole were found by myself to be thoroughly vile and despicable individuals.

Of interest was the fact that while all of them said that "fetuses" were not human beings (although a DNA test would contradict that claim), they all admitted that there was no way they could tell when a "fetus" became a human child.

One of the worst thing I heard was that several of them were determined to follow the current trend of opening up abortion clinics on or next to University campuses around the USA.
Their reason?
"You always locate your business next to your primary customer base"

In other words, after a drunken and drug-filled night indulging in casual sex (with single or multiple partners) it was a quick trip down to get the unwanted child sucked out and then they could carry on again.

It worth noting that Abortion is a multi-billion dollar industry.
When I see these people, I don't see people interested in women's rights.
I see people interested in getting rich through murder.

At least assasin's admit what they do.

Friday, August 15th, 2003, 07:34 PM
Obviously this guy is a scumbag.
But in a larger sense -
Over 1/4 of natural pregnancies spontaneously abort naturally.
Does this make "God" a murderer?
Women are going to get abortions regardless of legality. At least when it's legal there are usually health standards and it can be regulated. Or would you rather we return to the coathanger method?
I understand your moral objections, I used to share those views, but is it your place to mandate ethics for everyone? What about cases where a child will be deformed and miserable if he were carried to term? It's really a grey area and not nearly so simple as you might think.

Friday, August 15th, 2003, 08:05 PM
Hmm...now we're descending to a risky topic as people's emotions start to get cranked up over this.

1/4 of natural pregnancies naturally abort?
This is a common "pro-abortion" question.
I'm not sure of the statistics but I will assume that is accurate.
The key word here is naturally . It happens in due course in nature. It is not a conscious decision to end a life.We all die at sometime, that is nature. The problem is when someone chooses to end our life for us, before it is time.

Is God a murderer?
Life is God's gift. It is his to give and take as he sees fit.
God is not a murderer as it is his right to bestow and revoke that temporary state as he wished.
Murder is wrong because it involves someone else "playing God".
That person is deciding to usurp the right of God.
That person is making the decision to take that which does not belong to them. It is theft of life.
God cannot steal that which already belongs to Him anyway.

As for women going to get abortions anyway, that is their decision.
It is a fact that far less women had abortions when it was illegal, the danger in illegal abortions an obvious deterrent.
Should we make it as safe as possible for women to have abortions?
I'm not sure we should.
That woman is someone who is setting out with the conscious decision to end a human life. Should we make it as easy, safe and confortable as possible for her?
To take an example.
If I set out just now with a gun, determined that I was going to take someone's life - would it be moral to provide body armour to make it as safe and easy for me as possible?
Should we make sure the killers safety is well provided for during the act of murder?
You might think me cold-hearted but I believe that if someone set's out to take a life, they bear full responsibility for any danger they may place themselves in and I would not for a second contemplate aiding them in anyway.

It is not my place to dictate ethics to people.
I would hope that people have enough ethics to know that such murder is not moral or acceptable.
As for misformed children and the disabled, there is often much talk of how it would be kinder to not let them live. That is dictating ethics in itself.
I don't think anyone has the right to take it upon themselves to decide who's life is too miserable to live? Who should live and who should die?
Where do we draw the line? At what point do you consider that someone's life is not worth living and more importantly - would they agree with you?
There are plenty of handicapped people who would be beweildered if not downright insulted if you suggested that it would have been better if they hadn't lived. You couldn't blame them for feeling insulted.
Some of these simple souls are among the most care-free and happiest and affectionate creatures on God's earth.
Many of them do simple menial jobs , but are productive members of society nonetheless.

It is a grey area and people who support abortion usually bring up many of these "grey areas", and sometimes they make valid points.
I have my views and others have theirs.
I cannot force them to stop murdering their children and and supporting others who do so, but at least I can live my own life according to my moral code and I suppose that will have to suffice.
At least my own children will have a full chance of life.