ATTORNEY GENERAL ASKED TO INVESTIGATE TWO ABORTION DOCTORS

In today's Guam Daily Post (with linked references):

In 2024, 36 women residing in Guam terminated their pregnancies through chemical abortions, according to the 2024 Abortion Report. A request asking the Office of the Attorney General to investigate and bring action against a couple of doctors alleges that reporting requirements were not met.

Abortions are not illegal in Guam. However, there are no doctors who perform abortions on the island. In fact, according to the 2024 Abortion Report compiled by the Department of Public Health and Social Services Bureau of Vital Statistics, the women were given prescriptions for abortion medications by Queen’s University Medical Group in Hawaii through telemedicine.

That is not where Guam resident Tim Rohr, who asked the AG to investigate, found fault.

The Women’s Reproductive Health Information Act of 2012 states that a physician or qualified person who is performing the abortion needs to provide the woman with printed materials related to the procedure at least 24 hours prior. The woman must then certify “in writing on a checklist certification” that the materials were provided.

Rohr sent a Sunshine Reform Act request for the “total number of checklist certifications by month for calendar year 2024" to the Guam Memorial Hospital Authority, which is responsible for keeping records. He found none.

“Pursuant to a letter received from Guam Memorial Hospital Administrator Lillian Perez-Posadas, MN, RN, on March 6, 2025, in response to a Freedom of Information Act request: 'GMHA is not in possession of any documents responsive to your request,'” Rohr said in his request to the AG.

According to the Bureau of Women’s Affairs, “currently, no physicians in Guam are publicly providing either medication abortion or surgical abortion. The option for medication abortion is available via telemedicine.”

According to Post files, when the 2024 Abortion Report came out, Pro-Life Committee Chair Sharon O’Mallan said that when a woman terminates a pregnancy, she must meet with a “person here who does the in-person counseling,” then the woman is referred to the Hawaii-based abortion doctors before the abortion prescription is mailed to the woman.

The 2024 Abortion Report identified the providers who performed the abortions as Queen's University Medical Group Drs. Bliss Kaneshiro and Shandhini Raidoo, who are listed as abortion providers at the Guam Bureau of Women’s Affairs and are licensed to practice on the island.

According to Rohr, off Guam or not, the law needs to be complied with, including “in-person informed-consent” certifications. He alleged the abortion doctors failed this requirement, despite the preliminary injunction which enjoined the enforcement of the informed-consent requirement being vacated.

“Drs. (Raidoo) and Kaneshiro are also the two doctors who initiated a lawsuit in the Guam District Court against the attorney general of Guam and other defendants in January 2021 in order to enjoin the in-person informed-consent requirement of 10 Guam Code Ann. § 3218.1. 6 While their suit initially succeeded with the Guam District Court, as already stated supra, that decision was vacated by the 9th Circuit and physicians providing abortion services in Guam, telemedicine or otherwise, are required by law to comply with all the requirements set forth in 10 Guam Code Ann. § 3218.1,” Rohr said in his request.

With no paper trail, Rohr levied the allegations and called on the AG to “bring action against the physicians who provided the abortions in calendar year 2024 for not complying” with the law.

“Given the foregoing, it appears that 36 abortions were provided in Guam in calendar year 2024 without informed consent, as required by 10 Guam Code Ann. § 3218.1. Wherefore, I request the Attorney General of Guam, whose job it is to enforce the laws of Guam, to investigate the facts as set forth herein, and if said facts are found to be true, to bring appropriate legal action against the abortion providers,” Rohr said in the request.

The request was stamped received by the attorney general’s office on March 7, but when The Guam Daily Post asked AG Douglas Moylan to confirm receipt and what if any action his office would take, he said it was the first time he'd seen Rohr's request.

“We will review and contact Mr. Rohr,” Moylan told the Post on Saturday.

 

NINTH CIRCUIT SAYS ABORTION IS NOT "HEALTHCARE"

If there is one thing that the 9th Circuit Opinion made clear in Raidoo v Moylan, it's that abortion is NOT "healthcare." And the second thing the Opinion makes clear is that there is no such thing as "my body my choice."

Quoting from the Opinion (emphases added):

Even assuming that doctors who perform abortions are otherwise similarly situated to doctors who perform other medical services, it was rational for the Guam legislature to treat them differently because abortion presents different considerations than other medical procedures. Unlike other medical procedures, abortion implicates fetal life in addition to the patient’s health. See Dobbs, 142 S. Ct. at 2277 (“‘[A]bortion is a unique act’ because it terminates ‘life or potential life.’”); Harris v. McRae, 448 U.S. 297, 325 (1980) (“Abortion is inherently different from other medical procedures, because no other procedure involves the purposeful termination of a potential life.”).  

Clearly the Court, specifically quoting Dobbs, recognizes that abortion is "different" and that it is different because there is another life involved.

So the next time the Governor or Jayne (or their ilk) uses such terms, we need to respond with "why are you misrepresenting (lying to us about) "the law of the land." 

For 50 years we have had the "law of the land" (Roe) stuffed down our throats and told to shut up and sit down. We now have the "law of the land" on our side. 

Memorize the above paragraph - the highlighted parts, and have them at the ready. The pro-aborts are so used to our being on defense. This Opinion gives us a clear opportunity to go on offense. And it's time.