photo #7388253

ANN KENEVAN on October 1, 2024

29 views

In Album: ANN KENEVAN's Timeline Photos

Dimension: 640 x 884

File Size: 136.96 Kb

View More View Less

ANN KENEVAN

Are Pro-Life Laws Leading to Preventable Deaths? No law denies care to women, so why the deception post-Roe? 10/1/24 John Stonestreet Jared Hayden... View MoreAre Pro-Life Laws Leading to Preventable Deaths? No law denies care to women, so why the deception post-Roe? 10/1/24 John Stonestreet Jared Hayden Last month, the tragic story of Amber Thurman went viral. An online article recounted the details of how the 28-year-old Georgian died unexpectedly from “acute severe sepsis” after a taking the abortion pill while she was nine weeks pregnant with twins. The piece, though skewed, is right in noting that Thurman’s death was preventable—but not for the reasons it outlines. As the reporter presents it, Thurman’s death was the inevitable result of a Georgia state law that protects unborn life after the sixth week of pregnancy. But nothing could be further from the truth. As written, the law does not deny any care to pregnant women who are facing a medical emergency, a “spontaneous abortion” (a miscarriage), or a stillbirth. As defined in the law, a medical emergency refers to . . . a condition in which an abortion is necessary in order to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or the substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function of a pregnant woman. The Georgia state law also permits the removal of an unborn child who has died from a “spontaneous abortion,” miscarriage, or still birth. In such cases, medical professionals will not be penalized for removing the deceased child from its mother’s womb. Contrary to the reporter’s presentation of the facts, there’s nothing in Georgia’s pro-life law that would have prohibited Thurman from receiving the health care she needed. Thurman’s condition clearly constituted a medical emergency. Had the doctors performed a dilation and curettage (D&C) procedure, or even an abortion to save her life, they would have been acting within the bounds of the law. In fact, there are no states whose laws deny health care to pregnant women or criminally charge them for abortion. In a recent Congressional hearing, Senator James Lankford interviewed lawyer Heather G. Hacker to clear up any confusion about states’ laws on abortion. Here’s a clip from the hearing: Lankford: Ms. Hacker, just to clarify on this, are there any states where women face prosecution for having an abortion? Hacker: No. Lankford: Are there any states that criminalize miscarriage? Hacker: No. Lankford: Or the care for any for a miscarriage? Hacker: No. Lankford: Are there any states that criminalize removing an ectopic pregnancy? Hacker: No. Lankford: Are there any states that prohibit lifesaving care for the mother? Hacker: No. Lankford: Are there any states where women have to be actively dying for a doctor to be able to act for her care? Hacker: No. The problem isn’t pro-life laws. The problem is poor medical care and misinformation. According to the Georgia state committee that reviewed Thurman’s case, the hospital responsible for Thurman’s care had a “lack of policies/procedures in place to evacuate the uterus immediately.” The author even admits that, based on the medical documents, it was not clear why doctors delayed providing care. A recent AP News piece found that even in states where abortion is permitted, pregnant women have experienced otherwise preventable loss. Hospitals scrutinized here were understaffed, ill-equipped and often operating with undertrained support teams. A bigger part of the problem is simply the intrinsic dangers of chemical abortion. Contrary to what the Thurman piece claims, the abortion pill is far from safe. Research has found that “one in five women experienced an adverse event following a chemical abortion, and rates of complication were four times higher in chemical abortions compared to surgical abortions.” In fact, the FDA’s own label warns that one in 25 women who take abortion drugs will end up in the emergency room.  This is why pro-life OBGYNs and doctors have long advocated for better care for pregnant women and their pre-born children. As pro-life OBGYN Christina Francis has noted: In the rare but tragic situations where a pregnancy puts the mother’s life at risk, there are medical procedures for compassionately separating the mother and her baby and working to save both lives. The only intent of an abortion is to produce a dead baby.  Women deserve to be empowered by medically-accurate information. Thurman’s preventable death was a tragedy. But the poor care of pregnant women is not a reason to get rid of pro-life laws and return to a system ruled by Roe. The legalization of abortion kills babies, and that’s certainly not a safer world. https://breakpoint.org/are-pro-life-laws-leading-to-preventable-deaths/

View Less

Are Pro-Life Laws Leading to Preventable Deaths? - Breakpoint breakpoint.org

October 1, 2024