Anti-abortion activists ordered to take medical records off Internet

By The Associated Press,
freedomforum.org staff

08.24.01

Printer-friendly page

EDWARDSVILLE, Ill. — A judge has struck a blow against three anti-abortion activists who allegedly posted on the Internet a southern Illinois woman's medical records detailing complications from an abortion.

Madison County Circuit Judge George Moran issued a preliminary injunction Aug. 22 to Daniel and Angela Michael of Highland and Stephen Wetzel of Omaha, Neb., barring them from publishing the photograph, medical records or medical data about the unidentified woman.

The woman claims in a lawsuit the three violated her privacy after her medical records — on St. Elizabeth letterhead — and her photograph appeared on an anti-abortion Web site operated by Wetzel.

She says she suffered emotionally and was ridiculed as a result of the publication and is suing Wetzel, the Michaels and the hospital for more than $50,000 in damages.

While her photo and medical records appeared to have been removed from the Internet on Aug. 22, an article written by Angela Michael containing much of the same information remained posted on an anti-abortion Web site that evening.

Wetzel did not appear in court Aug. 22 and did not return repeated telephone calls by the Associated Press. The Michaels said they provided photographs and information to Wetzel, but never intended to embarrass the woman or violate her privacy.

The case could help establish the difference between free speech and privacy issues on the Internet, which has been used increasingly in recent months by some anti-abortion activists, said Lucinda Findlay, a board member of the National Abortion Federation.

At least one site has published photographs of people entering and leaving abortion clinics across the country — under the banner "Abortion Cam" — in an effort to discourage others from obtaining abortions.

The Georgia-based Christian Gallery News Service, which calls itself the "charter member of the abortion abolition press," has recently solicited Indiana residents to photograph people outside the clinics for its Web site and public access television.

The group considers the photographers "abortion war correspondents," but the group's tactics have outraged traditional journalists and those on both sides of the abortion debate.

"We are not supportive of threats or intimidation," Mike Fichter, executive director of Indiana Right to Life, told The Indianapolis Star. "We are supportive of reaching women through education."

Dinah Farrington, vice president of public policy for Planned Parenthood of Greater Indiana, had stronger words: "This isn't journalism. It borders on domestic terrorism."

Planned Parenthood operates three of the state's 10 clinics that provide abortion services.

Legally, anyone can stand on a public sidewalk and take a picture of something in plain view. However, problems arise if someone trespasses on private property to get photos, said Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press in Virginia.

"The public begins to muddle the meaning of journalist," said Charles Davis, executive director of the Freedom of Information Center at the University of Missouri in Columbia.

And this anti-abortion group covers only one side of the abortion issue, Davis said. "It's like going to cover a war and only covering the evil, godless enemy."

The Christian Gallery News Service also operates the anti-abortion Web site that contains the Nuremberg Files, which lists the names of abortion providers and crosses off those who have died.

The legality of the Nuremberg Files was tested in court, but a federal appeals court in March upheld the right to publish such a list.

Meanwhile, anti-abortion activists not involved in the Illinois case said using the Internet to advance their cause doesn't work, and downplayed the significance of the lawsuit.

"We don't see (using the Internet) as effective," said William Beckman, executive director of the Illinois Right to Life Committee.

It all started when the unidentified woman was taken to St. Elizabeth in Granite City after suffering complications from an abortion in June at the Hope Clinic for Women there.

The Michaels, who are regular protesters at the clinic, admitted they took pictures of the woman as she was taken to the hospital's emergency room in a wheel chair.

According to the woman's lawsuit, they also confronted her, tried to remove a sheet that was covering her and yelled, "Look! This is a botched abortion!"

Soon after, a copy of the woman's medical records, her photograph and an article written by Angela Michael on the incident appeared on a Web site operated by Wetzel.

The material has been removed and reposted on various anti-abortion Web sites several times since the incident, as the woman's attorney, Mark Levy, called operators and demanded its removal. Moran issued a temporary order banning the material earlier this month.

The records and photograph were not located during a Web search Aug. 22 by the Associated Press.

But Michael's article detailing the incident, including the woman's age, the location and population of her hometown, son's age and medical details, remained published on an anti-abortion Web site not apparently linked to Wetzel.

A trial date has not been set, Levy said.

Related

Federal appeals panel: Web site targeting abortion doctors is protected speech
Judges throw out $109 million jury verdict, saying activists who created 'wanted' posters could be held liable only if material authorized or directly threatened violence.  03.29.01

Cable company: TV show can't air footage of women entering clinics
Public-access station officials tell anti-abortion activist that he won't be allowed to broadcast tapes unless women's faces are covered.  08.23.02