General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhen the first Texan woman dies from an ectopic pregnancy after being denied an abortion, and
that will happen soon, I think her family should collect $10,000 from every registered Republican in the state.
Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)ever-so-magnanimously carved out in the legislation.
LakeArenal
(28,863 posts)hatrack
(59,596 posts)LakeArenal
(28,863 posts)StClone
(11,690 posts)I'd say these TX legislative boneheads might run into a strong case. When this law was first announced it was noted how crafty and sly it was. I saw it as clumsy and sloppy. We shall see.
Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)I'm hoping that, given this exception, medical providers will act in the best interest of a patient.
But if they don't ... it's THEM that will end up getting sued and having to pay for the mistake.
It's fun to talk about every Republican paying for it, but that'll never happen.
Celerity
(43,655 posts)LakeArenal
(28,863 posts)musette_sf
(10,206 posts)is that many physicians will opt to NOT intervene to save an innocent woman's life, because they fear litigation.
These "exceptions" are nothing but a death sentence for the innocent woman.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Savita_Halappanavar
Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)Does not outweigh the threat of being sued by the family of the dead person, for some indeterminate sum.
Assuming the provider is basing their decisions entirely upon $$$ concerns.
Hopefully nobody does that to begin with.
Note that the Ireland case at hand involved a criminal offence with maximum of Life imprisonment.
musette_sf
(10,206 posts)That's the whole point. There was an "exception" policy and they let that poor woman die. If any of these Texas Taliban bounty hunters gets paid off, what do you think is going to happen to the reported party? They are going to be prosecuted for murder, and knowing Texas, the penalty will be death.
Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)However, there are 'cutoffs', time-wise, in many states in the Union. 6 weeks is just the shortest one. And I'm not sure the 6-week limit carries criminal jeopardy with it, correct me if I'm wrong but that's my understanding.
I believe SCOTUS has previously decided the earliest that the LEGAL cutoff can be is 'viability', which I think is accepted as 4 months?
All the states that DO have these cutoffs have the same situation with dangerous pregnancies that develop after 4 months, but I don't recall hearing of these Ireland-like situations happening in them where doctors refuse to save the pregnant person's life out of fear of going to jail.
But regardless, I don't know that this new 6-week thing changes the overall complexion of that particular situation, not even in Texas.
Just trying to ease your mind a bit here ...
dansolo
(5,376 posts)I think viability is about 22 weeks, which would be 5 months.
NotANeocon
(423 posts)The bill legally refers to a pregnant WOMAN - a single organism/human-being.
The theft of language is one method the pricks used to advance their agenda.
ShazzieB
(16,590 posts)Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)From now on, I strike that from my vocab.
But ... if we're going to get nit-picky, one should actually say 'person'.
NotANeocon
(423 posts)Last edited Fri Sep 3, 2021, 03:56 PM - Edit history (1)
When was the last time you met a pregnant male human despite couples who claim "we are pregnant". If you are certain you are referring to a TG person your quibble has merit.
Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)salin
(48,955 posts)to reattach the egg and thus it isn't life threatening (but - yes it is life threatening) to the mother. No certainty that sane people would rule on whether or not an exception should be granted.
I believe that in 2019 there was a bill in a state (WV? ND?) that would criminalize a doctor for *not* conducting this imaginary procedure and force the woman to carry "to term" (tacit: or to death.) It didn't become law, but it is a real strand of alt-reality belief in the extremist prolife crowd.
wnylib
(21,719 posts)may be too intimidated to take the risk of operating on her. They might argue among themselves before acting, possibly delaying it for too long.
Or they might protect themselves by letting the embyo grow to the point of bursting through the tube and then attempt to treat her afterwards, increasing the chances that she will die.
Farmer-Rick
(10,222 posts)They decide the law now.
Mariana
(14,861 posts)It requires different treatment than a standard medical or surgical abortion.
Hekate
(90,939 posts)It is extremely enlightening to talk to someone who, when being informed of the sad event of emergency ectopic surgery to save a womans life, demands to know why the baby could not be saved. I was at university, talking to 2 other graduate students, one of whom had just had this event herself.
Its also extremely enlightening to share the story of a neighbor who was happily pregnant with her second child, only to be snapped out of her glow at the end of her 1st trimester by a nurse who said in horror: What is that on your cervix?! Well, that was a very fast-growing cancer, and it was enough of an emergency that she was immediately sent to another state for surgery by specialists.
I thought the woman I was sharing this story with had good sense and would understand my concern for my neighbor, but no she wanted to know if the baby couldnt have been saved, and if my friend and neighbor could not have waited for months more.
Anti-choice aka pro-life people think everything is an abortion. They really do. Including IUDs and The Pill.
NotANeocon
(423 posts)The physician dealing with an tubal ectopic pregnancy may not "directly kill" the developing fetus but must indirectly cause its demise by sectioning the fallopian tube - thus halving the fertility of the woman. Bioethically they call this the "double effect" doctrine but I call it female mutilation.
Tumbulu
(6,292 posts)What the activists never do is differentiate between an elective and a medically necessary abortion. They lump them all together.
But they are all classified as abortions.
NotANeocon
(423 posts)and deadly situation then EVERY operation is elective. If it can be scheduled it is elective. It does not mean it is not needed - just not an emergency.
wnylib
(21,719 posts)ShazzieB
(16,590 posts)The surgical removal of a pregnancy that has implanted outside the uterus is a different type of procedure from removing a pregnancy from the uterus, but it's still an abortion. When a pregnancy is ended, it's an abortion, medically speaking, regardless of the specific means used.
Hekate
(90,939 posts)sinkingfeeling
(51,485 posts)"Your doctor will order the human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) blood test to confirm that you're pregnant. Levels of this hormone increase during pregnancy. This blood test may be repeated every few days until ultrasound testing can confirm or rule out an ectopic pregnancy usually about five to six weeks after conception.
Treatment
A fertilized egg can't develop normally outside the uterus. To prevent life-threatening complications, the ectopic tissue needs to be removed. Depending on your symptoms and when the ectopic pregnancy is discovered, this may be done using medication, laparoscopic surgery or abdominal surgery.
An early ectopic pregnancy without unstable bleeding is most often treated with a medication called methotrexate, which stops cell growth and dissolves existing cells. The medication is given by injection. It's very important that the diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy is certain before receiving this treatment."
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/ectopic-pregnancy/diagnosis-treatment/drc-20372093
Methotrexate is used in "chemical/medical abortions".
NotANeocon
(423 posts)and must butcher the pregnant woman for god.
BidenRocks
(827 posts)Look at the Southern border.
Lonestarblue
(10,125 posts)It is a medical impossibility to take the tiny mass of cells residing in the fallopian tube and implant them in the uterusthough some ignorant Ohio Republican legislators tried to pass a law requiring this a few years ago. The only option for an ectopic pregnancy is to remove the embryo, and I think the Texas law allows that. The real problem arises with those situations that jeopardize the womans life, but the doctor must run the risk of being second guessed and found to have committed an illegal abortion. For example, a pregnant woman who finds she has cancer faces a tough decision. Abort the pregnancy and start chemo, which usually needs to happen immediately, or be forced by the state to wait to give birth unless you die first (along with your fetus).
Pregnancy is not without risks, and Republicans seem to think that their religion should be used to make decisions instead of medical science. I truly, truly, hate these people!
NotANeocon
(423 posts)"ectopic" means outside the uterus.
There have been infants successfully delivered by c-section where the reproductive graft implanted outside the uterus but still had a blood supply {on the intestine wall eg} Very rare but medically factual. This would likely be a ruptured fallopian pregnancy that re-grafted.
Beacool
(30,253 posts)or if the mother's life is in peril?