Archive for Monday, September 12, 2011

Doctor faces hearing over abortion referrals

September 12, 2011


A disciplinary hearing beginning today is expected to scrutinize how one physician arrived at second opinions allowing the late Dr. George Tiller’s clinic to go ahead with late-term abortions for young patients.

Dr. Ann Kristin Neuhaus faces allegations that she did inadequate mental health examinations before referring patients to Tiller’s clinic in Wichita. A complaint before the State Board of Healing Arts deals with her care for 11 patients, aged 10 to 18, all at least 25 weeks pregnant, who received abortions from July to November 2003.

Tiller was among a few U.S. physicians performing late-term procedures when a man professing strong anti-abortion views shot him to death in May 2009. Two months before, Tiller had been acquitted on misdemeanor criminal charges that, in relying on Neuhaus for referrals, he wasn’t truly getting the independent second medical opinion state law required for many abortions past the 22nd week of pregnancy.

Neuhaus, from the small town of Nortonville, about 30 miles north of Lawrence, is a former abortion provider herself who came under medical board scrutiny in the past.

She doesn’t have an active medical practice, but her Kansas license allows her to provide charity care, which she does.

Her attorney, Robert Eye, said he’ll present evidence during the hearing in Topeka showing that Neuhaus was more thorough than many physicians are in examining patients’ mental health issues. He said both sides expect to present testimony from witnesses they’ve designated as experts, examining her actions.

Neuhaus performed abortions in Wichita from 1994 to 2001 at Wichita clinic that competed with Tiller’s and operated her own abortion clinic in Lawrence from 1997 to 2002, citing financial problems as a reason for ending both practices.


kansanjayhawk 4 years, 2 months ago

This is example of why improved regulation is needed in this area.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 2 months ago

What you mean is that you oppose abortion, and since it's a constitutional right to have access to it, you want to see increased harassment of the medical professionals who provide the services.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 2 months ago

No that is not what I mean at all. The true zealots are those who impose abortion on our constitution it is not mentioned in that document once!

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 2 months ago

This is an example of a zealot who opposes the Constitution.

Crazy_Larry 4 years, 2 months ago

I corrected you once already....the hearing hasn't been completed yet and the doctor has been found guilty of no wrong doing...So, how can this be an example of anything? There's been no conclusive evidence found of any wrong doing. I think you'd be better off keeping quiet than repeatedly showing your ignorance. Wait until the hearing has been completed and the panel comes back with the results. What if they come back and find no wrong doing? Then you'll be eating your "this is proof" and "this is an example" words.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 2 months ago

The issue is whether this doctor violated the law and by doing so placed herself above the law! We all must work within the system to press our views on government we do not have the right to be a law unto ourselves! Supreme Court precedent allows reasonable restrictions to be placed on abortion and this and other laws is seeking to do just that.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.