Why Did Gosnell Keep Severed Fetal Feet?

October 25, 2015 • Posted in Blog

D. Joy Riley, M.D., M.A.

Regrettably, in defending human dignity, we are often confronted with circumstances in which humanity is degraded. Warning: The following graphically details some of those circumstances brought to light.

The 2011 report of the Grand Jury investigating abortionist Kermit Gosnell included a number of strange details about his place of business, including, “The investigators found a row of jars containing just the severed feet of fetuses” (p. 21).

Jar of severed feet at Gosnell's abortion clinic

Image from LifeNews.com.

Why would anyone do this?

Fast forward to the summer of 2015 and the Center for Medical Progress, which released a series of undercover videos of Planned Parenthood personnel and others discussing the monetized transfer of fetal body parts. The ninth video in the series highlights the work of Advanced BioSciences Resources (ABR), a supplier of fetal parts to research concerns, including the NIH. Perrin Larton is the Procurement Manager for ABR. She explains in the video that, whereas there has been a lot of controversy about embryonic tissue, fetal tissue “kind of got lost in the mix,” so they (ABR) continued to send fetal tissue to the NIH. She expressed concern about the future of abortion:

Screenshot of Perrin Larton in a video from the Center for Medical Progress

Larton told the interviewer that soon her company would be “starting in New Jersey and Philadelphia — but not Dr. Gosnell’s clinic though.”

In the eighth video, StemExpress CEO Cate Dyer explains about the needs and desires of researchers:

Cate Dyer, CEO of StemExpress, in a video by the Center for Medical Progress

So researchers want fetal body parts, but not obviously identifiable body parts, according to CEO Dyer.

What happened to all the fetal parts procured in Kermit Gosnell’s “Women’s Medical Society”? Some parts were found in the trash and some in the freezer, and then there were the feet in the specimen cups. We may never know, but it is clear that other abortion-related businesses know that hands and feet are not in demand.

Other Voices

A number of people saw this e-newsletter in process. They each had comments, which are published below (with their permission):

Bill (age 60) said, “This is really scary but appropriate for the times we live in . . . it also raises questions that should be answered. We should hold people accountable for these atrocities and the way to that is to bring the truth to light.”

Mary (50s) found the topic “properly ghoulish,” saying, ” . . . about wanting the babies without hands and feet so we don’t know what it is. . . isn’t that what murderers do in an attempt to disguise who their victim is in ‘traditional killings’?”

Grant (age 23) had the most to say:

“We may never know why Gosnell kept feet. . . Let us not lose sight of the real question: why do fetal feet bother us? Fetal feet, unlike frozen embryos, are identifiably humanish. In order for the researchers to do their job they . . . didn’t want to think about hands, heads, or soles. For them not to lose focus on finding cures, they couldn’t be bothered by the grotesque. So if you want to create a society where science advances then you will always need a Gosnell. He is the public executioner of a society dead set on severing a conscience from science. Humanity is a reality, but advancement is a concept. The Gosnells are tasked with changing reality to mirror our concept. The question then is: Should we be cutting off our feet to spite our fate?

“The tragedy is not simply the dead children who have no use of feet. The tragedy is also the society that willfully cowers away from the evils that they unwittingly promote. Scientific advancement does not necessarily make societal advancement. Sometimes the first can undermine the second.”

Read here about the Human Capital Journalism Project.