[–] CheshireBat 🦇 30 points

Shame on these legislators. They have no idea how complex pregnancy is. And that it doesn't have a 100% success rate. This is why we say that abortion IS health care. But in their minds, sperm goes in, and a baby comes out 9 months later, what could go wrong?

I feel so bad for Amanda that she was subjected to law-enforced midievil medicine. They looked so happy in that photo when they found out they were pregnant. But now that may never happen again given what she was subjected to. Hands off our bodies!

This is why, regardless of the gender woo from the Democrats, I will never vote Republican. Voting Republican is asking for laws like this to be implemented nationwide.

👆 My options are “erasure of what you are and struggling to afford feeding your family” and “you can die for all we care you harlot,” I cannot vote for my own death sentence.

But we should totally vote for Republicans, right? Fucking unbelievable. I do wonder what all of the people on here who are "uncomfortable" with late term abortions and are ok with them being banned have to say about this.

A woman's life shouldn't be an "unintended consequence" of a law.

It isn't unintended. This is exactly what the law was intended to do. It's about controlling women and punishing them for having sex.

Absolutely barbaric. There is nothing pro-life about refusing to treat this complication until the woman was on her deathbed.

Not sure which is scarier: living in Texas or living in Australia.

[–] Kevina 8 points Edited

First off, this law is obviously idiotic. But...

Texas law allows for abortion if the mother “has a life-threatening physical condition aggravated, caused by, or arising from a pregnancy that places the female at risk of death or poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function.”


When a woman’s water breaks, she’s at high risk for a life-threatening infection

This situation seems like a textbook case of a medically necessary abortion. And who would have even known except for those directly involved? Why not just say that no heartbeat was detected? Why not just perform the abortion and record it in the charts that she miscarried? I'm just thinking of all the different ways I'd try to work around this daf "law" so I could help my patient.

the first abortion restriction to rely solely on enforcement by private individuals through civil lawsuits, rather than having state officials enforce the law with criminal or civil penalties. The act authorizes members of the public to sue anyone who performs or facilitates an illegal abortion for a minimum of $10,000 in statutory damages per abortion, plus court costs and attorneys' fees.

So again, how could anyone sue if no one knew what actually occurred, since that would all be privately protected medical information? And even if I had performed this medically necessary procedure, I'd just call it something else in the charts. So who would there be to sue me? The patient herself? And as far as I can tell, there is no risk of jail, just risk of annoying lawsuits.

I guess they'd have to be worried that the patient herself would talk about it to others?

Edit: I looked and the only lawsuits I could find appear to have been filed deliberately in an effort to test the asinine law.

I'm just thinking of all the different ways I'd try to work around this daf "law" so I could help my patient.

The medical staff could also record what happened accurately and then let the case be litigated to make it clear that a failing pregnancy is a threat to the mother's health and life. Republican legislators obviously bear the most blame, but the cowardly-as-fuck doctors and nurses are also guilty of putting her at risk.

but the cowardly-as-fuck doctors and nurses are also guilty of putting her at risk.

This, thank you. It's not like they'd be at risk of going to prison or anything. This just seems like unnecessary idiocy played out to the nth degree.

"It won't affect medically necessary ones that are for the life/health of the mother."

Load more (2 comments)