Contraception and Abortion

State laws that curb women's access to legal, safe abortion wend their way to the Supreme Court, as do employers' religious rights to constrain insurance coverage of contraception. With most other threads on such matters dormant, time for a new one? Because we've heard enough of the histrionics, hopefully this thread will be fact-based, though I'm not holding my breath...

Below is book review on a new study on American women denied an abortion. The last such studies that I recall are from Romania under Communism.

---------------------------------------------------------
The Study That Debunks Most Anti-Abortion Arguments
Margaret Talbot | July 7, 2020

For five years, a team of researchers asked women about their experience after having—or not having—an abortion. What do their answers tell us?

...the Turnaway Study, which began in 2007,...Over three years, a team of researchers, led by a demographer named Diana Greene Foster, at the University of California, San Francisco, recruited 1,132 women from the waiting rooms of thirty abortion clinics in twenty-one states. Some of the women would go on to have abortions, but others would be turned away, because they had missed the fetal gestational limit set by the clinic. Foster and her colleagues decided to compare the women in the two groups—those who received the abortion they sought and those who were compelled to carry their unwanted pregnancy to term—on a variety of measures over time, interviewing them twice a year for up to five years.

...Now Foster has published a patiently expository precis of all the findings in a new book, The Turnaway Study: Ten Years, a Thousand Women, and the Consequences of Having—or Being Denied—an Abortion. The over-all impression it leaves is that abortion, far from harming most women, helps them in measurable ways. Moreover, when people assess what will happen in their lives if they have to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, they are quite often proven right. That might seem like an obvious point, but much of contemporary anti-abortion legislation is predicated on the idea that competent adults can’t really know what’s at stake in deciding whether to bear a child or not. Instead, they must be subjected to waiting periods to think it over (as though they can’t be trusted to have done so already), presented with (often misleading) information about the supposed medical risks and emotional fallout of the procedure, and obliged to look at ultrasounds of the embryo or fetus. And such scans are often framed, with breathtaking disingenuousness, as a right extended to people—what the legal scholar Carol Sanger calls “the right to be persuaded against exercising the right you came in with.”

https://www.newyorker.com/books/under-review/the-study-that-debunks-most-anti-ab...

-------------------------------------------------------

Mihai Horga et al. 2020. The remarkable story of Romanian women's struggle to manage their fertility. BMJ Sexual and Reproductive Health. Volume 39, Issue 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jfprhc-2012-100498 https://srh.bmj.com/content/39/1/2.full https://srh.bmj.com/content/39/1/2#article-bottom

...Lessons learned

Few countries in history have made such dramatic shifts in family planning policy or availability that would allow the study of causal links between access to contraception and abortion and changes in reproductive outcomes. While the fertility patterns illustrated by the Romanian example highlight the complex nature of fertility and its determinants, two points emerge clearly. First, restricting access to safe abortion in Romania caused a dramatic increase in maternal mortality driven solely by unsafe abortion-related deaths. And second, increased access to modern contraception in Romania over the last 15 years has not reduced fertility in the country, but instead has reduced the need for women to resort to abortion. Countries that increasingly seek to restrict access to abortion and contraception should look and learn from Romania's example.

"Moving on".

LOL!

Texas’s six-week abortion ban takes effect, after Supreme Court doesn’t act to block it
Robert Barnes and Ann E. Marimow | Sept 1, 2021

...(Texas) law effectively eliminates the guarantee in Roe v. Wade and subsequent Supreme Court decisions that women have a right to end their pregnancies before viability, abortion providers said, and that states may not impose undue burdens on that decision...

...the Texas law was designed to make it more difficult for abortion rights advocates to win such pre-enforcement injunctions. The statute empowers individuals, instead of state government officials, to bring legal action against those who help women seeking a prohibited abortion...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/texas-six-week-abortion-ban/2...

>3 margd:...and there you have it - the blueprint for the destruction of the country - just get some reactionary judge at the highest state level to OK whatever abomination you want - appeal to the reactionary supreme court - they will refuse to hear it and presto - theocracy replaces democracy - discrimination is legal - gerrymandering is acceptable - and whatever hate filled agenda the right wants to impose will become law.

I have still never heard a satisfactory explanation of how these people can justify the position that all women should be slaves of the state. (which is really what "anti-abortion" means - if you don't own your own body then someone else owns it, and if someone else owns your body then you are a slave)

Any supporters of female slavery want to take a crack at explaining why they think that the state has a right to decide what a woman does with her body?

>4 alco261:, >5 kiparsky: Agreed. And six weeks is extremely arbitrary - seems more political than scientific. There is no "heart" beating. It is a cluster of cells.

https://www.mediaite.com/uncategorized/supreme-court-upholds-texas-abortion-law-...
Supreme Court Upholds Texas Abortion Law That Effectively Ends Roe v. Wade in Late Night Decision

The Supremes just made pregnancy test makers very happy. The tests are going to be flying off the shelves in Texas. Women will have to adopt the habit of testing themselves every 7 to 10 days going forward in order to protect their rights.

Texans don't need permit to carry concealed weapon...busybodies beware?

Next target - birth control.

Bearing in mind that the same people who pushed this through used "keep your laws off my body" as a slogan in their campaign to ensure that their state's hospitals would be overloaded with Covid patients, because apparently that's the way they like things.

So god help you if you have a complication in your state-mandated pregnancy. The state of Texas will be able to do fuck-all for you.

Once again, I'm simply astounded by the magnificence, the wonderful scope, the awesome depth and breadth of the stupidity of every single fucking moron who self-describes as "conservative". (and if you think you're a conservative and not an idiot, I'd love to hear how you come to that conclusion. If you can do it without drooling on yourself, that is)

>8 margd: So true. If I'm remembering correctly they also have a stand-your-ground law. Under those circumstances it's not hard to imagine a situation where a vigilante wannabe tries to bring legal action against someone and they, in turn, announce they are feeling threatened and start blasting.

>11 alco261: More likely the right-wing vigilante trying to enforce Texas' female slavery laws preemptively "feels threatened" and starts shooting and claims stand-your-ground protection... and wins.

I read that the first day of TX abortion legislation, FOX used the word "abortion" once--at 5 am. They must realize the kind of wrath TX has engendered for GQP. (FL and SD wannabes are looking at similar legislation.) Perhaps TX legislation played a role in shaking CA Dem voters to come out for Gov recall election? *

Woke the young people as well as suburban women? e.g., TikTok video from Victoria Hammett outlines the ways to crash the prolifewhistlerblower.com site through fake entries--I think she's the young woman who reported Greg Abbott 742X of securing a now-illegal abortion? **

Apparently, abortions hit record lows during the Obama administration--perhaps in part because ACA covered contraception? NOBODY thinks abortion is a wonderful option, as in "oh boy, today I get to have an abortion", but there is politically expropriated piety-performance (bans, most esp unleashing of the busybodies) and there is support for women who bear the brunt of responsibility--financial equity, reproductive healthcare, paid maternity leave, etc...***
---------------------------------------------------

* David Frum @davidfrum
The (TX) governor is weirdly bashful about the triumphant success of his pro-life agenda. His party has effectively outlawed abortion in Texas, subjected Texas women to a powerful new surveillance regime, and prevailed in the courts, at least for now. Yet ... no victory lap. Odd.
9:49 AM · Sep 3, 2021·

Texas Republicans Got What They Wanted. They Might Regret It.
Until now, Republicans have had a lucrative, no-risk way to rail against abortion. But accountability is coming.
David Frum | Sept 2, 2021

...There’s already compelling evidence that Texas Republicans understand how detested their new abortion law will soon be—not only in New York City and Los Angeles, but also in Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Austin, and Fort Worth...

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/texas-republicans-abortion-ban...
-----------------------------------------------------

** #TexasTaliban Trends on Twitter Following Restrictive Abortion Laws
Eva Raggio September 3, 2021
https://www.dallasobserver.com/arts/twitter-responds-to-signing-of-restrictive-a...
------------------------------------------------------

***
Graph on US abortion rate during different presidents based on real data, but needs more information
Samantha Putterman | September 25, 2020

...stated on September 14, 2020 in a Facebook post:
A graphic on U.S. abortion rates shows larger declines during recent Democratic presidential administrations, and says its due to the party’s approach of making abortions unnecessary, rather than the Republican Party’s approach of making the procedure illegal.

...The graphic cites CDC data, but health department reporting on abortions has fluctuated so much over the years that making broad comparisons can prove challenging.

Experts said tying the abortion rate to the occupant of the White House alone is an oversimplification of a variety of factors at play, including easier access to affordable contraception and fewer women getting pregnant.

...We rate this claim Half True.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/sep/25/facebook-posts/graph-us-aborti...

The right to lifers have always been the most hypocritical shitheads out there. They’re for forcing unwanted pregnancies but also mostly for the death penalty. They have no concerns about whether the child comes from a rape or will have egregious birth defects or whether the mother and child will be stuck in hopeless situations. On the other hand they will bitch and moan to high heaven if that child or mother will need any federal, state or local support to bring up the child. Their concerns for the child stops at birth. They have no concern at all for the mother. They are self righteous fuckheads plain and simple.

>14 lriley: A-men!

SCOTUS Chooses To Let Stand TX Lawlessness Enforce Anti-Abortion Law

Don't tell me the 5 conservative justices on the SCOTUS have any regard for equal protection under the law. They're just fine with vigilantism by Texans to be used to tell on performers and needers of abortion procedures. A fine thing when the highest court in the land upholds lawlessness and turns its back on a long standing guarantee of equal access to medical care by women. The state of Texas passed a law that depends on vigilantes to enforce it. It endorsed lawlessness to control women's bodies. And the conservative majority of SCOTUS is just fine with it.

The unintended consequences of the TX anti-abortion law are far-reaching. Here's an example of one of them. Any half-way intelligent physician -- not even an OB-GYN -- will refuse to treat fertile women for fear such treatment might provoke a spontaneous abortion if they have any common sense and don't want to see their malpractice insurance escalate beyond reason. As for OB-GYNs, good luck to you, the women of Texas, having access to the full medical care you need. It's hard to believe that any such specialists will remain in TX to treat you. For anything.

But that's only half the double whammy these Republican/Trumpsters dealt. The other half is a blatant endorsement by SCOTUS against victimized women who have already suffered criminal assault by rape and incest to be victimized a second time as potential criminals themselves if they seek to end a pregnancy resulting from those encounters in Texas. Well, while you're at it TX and SCOTUS Republicans, why not turn the victims of crimes into criminals by turning lawlessness loose on them?

Lawlessness and no equal protection under the law aren't add-ons to the Republican Party. They're the main feature. And now it's the main feature of the Shadow US Supreme Court.

Unfortunately, there is nothing to disagree with here. It's a nightmare. k4k

What really pisses me off about this is, our American Taliban clearly have no interest in preventing abortions, they only want to criminalize female sexuality.

If they wanted to prevent abortions, that's simple: fund the shit out of Planned Parenthood and require that actual fact-based sex ed be taught in every school. Put a Planned Parenthood office next to every Post Office in this country and abortion would go to a statistical zero in no time. And the fucking hypocrites who claim to be against abortion know this but because they're evil, not stupid, they would rather kill women than prevent abortions.

Again: this is supposedly a "pro and con" group. I'm sure there's someone out there celebrating the re-enslavement of women. What have y'all got to say for yourselves? Surely this is your moment - go on, explain why you think women should not be considered fully human. And for an encore, maybe explain why you haven't moved to Afghanistan, where people like you now own the joint and everything you believe is now law.

>18 kiparsky: I have to admit, I get real pleasure out of donating to Planned Parenthood every year, since the government won't fund abortions, and getting a reduction in my federal tax bill. :-)

Unfortunately you won't get an argument from me. Sorry!

Fred Wellman
@FPWellman
·
Sep 2
So now that the Texas GOP is going to force the birth of thousands of babies I’m sure they will increase public spending on support, daycare, healthcare and schools, right?

I’m kidding. They don’t give a fuck about kids.

TX Republicans Didn't Think This Through -- Unintended Consequences

Lack of abortion services in the state will lead to a higher birthrate among Texans. But the Texans most impacted by an absence of safe legal abortion care are the poor and often the under-educated whose birth rates will soar in comparison to the affluent college graduates. That happens to mean the two major divisions of minority Blacks and Hispanics vs whites will reflect a higher net gain among black and brown people, that will grow and increase with time.

You don't need me to tell you what that means to the goal of turning TX blue. It just means it will happen a hell of a lot faster than Republicans will prefer. A situation they could have avoided if they had left well enough alone. Karma?

From a southern Methodist minister in 2018

From Dave Barnhart, a Christian pastor:

The "unborn" are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, the chronically poor; they don't resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don't ask you to question the patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don't bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn...You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe.

Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.

The Manifold Threats of the Texas Abortion Law
It not only violates abortion precedents but also attempts to shield illegal statutes from the courts.
Jeannie Suk Gersen | September 5, 2021

In The Origins of Totalitarianism, Hannah Arendt observed the early tendency of a totalitarian regime to draft private citizens to conduct “voluntary espionage,” so that “a neighbor gradually becomes a more dangerous enemy than officially appointed police agents.”...

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-manifold-threats-of-the-texas-...

>22 2wonderY:

Thanks, Ruth. Can you cite a link for that? I'd like to be able to quote it to some within my own church.

Edited to add: It's OK, I've now found it. The power of google!

>24 John5918: Beat you to it! I posted it where a recently ordained deacon--or least his wife--will see it. Thanks #22.

Meanwhile, in neighbouring Mexico:

Mexico’s supreme court rules criminal penalties for abortion unconstitutional (Guardian)

Mexico’s supreme court has struck down a state abortion law, ruling that criminal penalties for terminating pregnancies are unconstitutional, in a decision which advocates say provides a path to decriminalisation across the country. In a unanimous 10-0 ruling, the top court ordered the northern state of Coahuila to remove sanctions for abortion from its criminal code – with several justices arguing the prohibitions on voluntarily interrupting a pregnancy violated women’s rights to control their own bodies. “It is not about the right to abortion,” said justice Luis María Aguilar, who wrote the court’s opinion for overturning the Coahuila law. “It’s rather the right to decide of women and persons able to gestate to make decisions”...

Mexico decriminalises abortion in landmark ruling (BBC)

Mexico's Supreme Court has ruled that criminal penalties for terminating pregnancies are unconstitutional...

Re Texas law claim that "fetal heartbeat has become a key medical predictor that an unborn child will reach live birth", my just-born grandson has a Congenital Heart Defect, happily fixable and so far he's on the best side of the continuum for his condition. However, my unwelcome introduction to CHDs taught me that many of these kids are not so lucky. Abbott and the boys are full of sh*t. AOC is correct in her assessment of their ignorance.

Even a shallow understanding of embryology leaves one in wonder and amazement that any of us are here at all.

The Texas Abortion Ban Hinges On 'Fetal Heartbeat.' Doctors Call That Misleading
Selena Simmons-Duffin | September 3, 20213:14 PM ET

..."When I use a stethoscope to listen to an adult patient's heart, the sound that I'm hearing is caused by the opening and closing of the cardiac valves," says Dr. Nisha Verma, an OB-GYN who specializes in abortion care and works at the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

The sound generated by an ultrasound in very early pregnancy is quite different, she says.

"At six weeks of gestation, those valves don't exist," she explains. "The flickering that we're seeing on the ultrasound that early in the development of the pregnancy is actually electrical activity, and the sound that you 'hear' is actually manufactured by the ultrasound machine."

That's why "the term 'fetal heartbeat' is pretty misleading," says Dr. Jennifer Kerns, an OB-GYN and associate professor at the University of California, San Francisco.

"What we're really detecting is a grouping of cells that are initiating some electrical activity," she explains. "In no way is this detecting a functional cardiovascular system or a functional heart."...

...The text of the Texas law claims that "fetal heartbeat has become a key medical predictor that an unborn child will reach live birth" and continues, "the pregnant woman has a compelling interest in knowing the likelihood of her unborn child surviving to full-term birth based on the presence of cardiac activity."...

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/09/02/1033727679/fetal-heartbeat-...

Laurence Tribe tribelaw | 3:57 PM · Sep 9, 2021
https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1436056267643101187

This clearly meritorious DOJ complaint is brilliantly crafted and should withstand the strongest defenses Texas and its agents, including the private vigilantes the State sought to deputize through SB-8, can possibly mount against it. Great job by the AG.

US v Texas (27p)
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/justice-department-lawsuit-texas-abortion...

(Summarized in Preliminary Statement pp 1-3)

So rape, incest, and the under-age may lose private abortion coverage, perhaps nationwide, because of TX?

Could Texas’ new heartbeat law lead to lawsuits against companies providing abortion insurance?
It’s a particularly thorny issue for businesses with self-funded health plans where employees are covered for abortion procedures.
Marin Wolf | Sep 12, 2021
https://www.dallasnews.com/business/health-care/2021/09/12/could-texas-new-heart...

Opinion: Our duty to challenge Catholic politicians who support abortion rights
Salvatore J. Cordileone (RC archbishop of San Francisco) | September 5, 2021

...President Biden announced a “whole-of-government effort” to find ways to overcome (Texas’s new law banning abortions after the detection of a fetal heartbeat). House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif. (San Francisco)) denounced the Supreme Court’s refusal as a “cowardly, dark-of-night decision to uphold a flagrantly unconstitutional assault on women’s rights and health,” and promised new legal action: “This ban necessitates codifying Roe v. Wade” in federal law.

...sacrament of the Eucharist...long, patient campaign of moral suasion...excommunication...new and generous options for women facing crisis pregnancies...(umm, no mention of contraception)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/09/05/our-duty-challenge-catholic-p...

>30 margd: Archbishop: Our duty to challenge Catholic politicians who support abortion rights

ABOARD THE PAPAL PLANE (AP) —
Pope: Bishops must be pastors, not politicians,
in deciding whether President Joe Biden should get Communion.

- Kyle Griffin (MSNBC) @kylegriffin1 | 11:20 AM · Sep 15, 2021

I guess one of the questions has to do with the fundamental focus of religion. Is it to regulate the people of their faith or to regulate everyone? Of course murder is wrong and should be opposed by all people whether they are religious or not. Finally, my question: where in the Bible (any bible) is there a discussion of abortion? This is something I am curious about: the pronouncement, the context etc.

TX Physician's Admits He Flouted His State's Abortion Law in WaPo Editorial

Dr. Alan Braid, who practices in Austin, TX, publicly admitted that he violated the near-total ban on abortions in Texas during the first week after the law went into effect.

In an op-ed published online by The Washington Post on Saturday, he discussed graduating from the University of Texas medical school in 1972, before the Roe v. Wade decision.

. . .on the morning of Sept. 6, I provided an abortion to a woman who, though still in her first trimester, was beyond the state's new limit. I acted because I had a duty of care to this patient, as I do for all patients, and because she has a fundamental right to receive this care.

"I fully understood that there could be legal consequences — but I wanted to make sure that Texas didn't get away with its bid to prevent this blatantly unconstitutional law from being tested."

Dr. Braid believes the US Constitution is the law of the land, not the Republican Texas legislature.

>33 Limelite: Good for him! May all the physicians in Texas protest this new law.

Law enforcement in Texas: calling all cranks and busybodies...

'Cranky’ Disbarred Lawyer Sues Texas Doc Who Broke Abortion Ban
AJ McDougall | Sep. 20, 2021

https://www.thedailybeast.com/disbarred-arkansas-lawyer-files-texas-heartbeat-bi...
-----------------------------------------------------

Laurence Tribe tribelaw | 5:47 AM · Sep 21, 2021:
Yet another bounty-hunter sues under SB-8, all but daring the defendant to plead the TX law’s unconstitutionality as a defense and to countersue using 42 USC 1983*
http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2021/images/09/20/fg.v.abriad.roev.wade.defense_7733a4f32.pdf

* Civil action for deprivation of rights
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1983
_________________________________________

Why Republicans Are Scared of Texas’ New Abortion Ban
SARAH ISGUR | 09/17/2021

For years, conservative legislators have passed increasingly restrictive abortion laws, knowing they’d be struck down by the courts. Now, Republicans are going to have to defend their views at the ballot box. And that might not go well for them...

...both sides have reason to believe this issue can motivate their base under the right circumstances. But only the Democrats have the motivator of fear...

...The second point to consider is that the abortion debate will only gain steam next year, an election year.

...Third, the Texas law is dividing the right. There are two big fault lines within the anti-abortion movement, and the Texas law is exacerbating both of them.

One dividing line is whether the goal of the anti-abortion movement should be to ban abortion or end abortion. The ban abortion crowd wants to pass laws that prohibit abortions. The end abortions folks, however, want to use whatever means are effective to reduce the number of abortions in the country. They are quick to point out that there are fewer abortions today than in 1973, when abortions were banned in large swaths of the country, proving that laws banning abortion will never end the practice by themselves. There are plenty of people in this crowd who think the Texas law’s reliance on “abortion bounty hunters,” as some people are calling them, to report abortions is a gross, counterproductive idea that will do more to turn people away from the movement than win hearts and minds to the cause...

...Another fracture within the movement is reflected in almost every political fight — the incrementalists vs. the absolutists. The Texas law mandating a 6-week abortion ban and punishing those who aid and abet anyone who gets an abortion after that period is an absolutist one. The absolutists knew it was unconstitutional under current Supreme Court precedent and will likely be overturned, but they think it will have been worth the effort as long as it can save a few lives for the few weeks it is actually in effect. The incrementalists, on the other hand, wrote the law in Mississippi — a 15-week ban on abortion that relies on the consensus in Western European countries, which almost all restrict abortions after the first trimester. Most legal scholars believe this law could be the vehicle the conservative court uses to narrow or overturn Roe and Casey...

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/09/17/why-republicans-scared-texas-a...

Pelosi's House Passes Bill Protecting Abortion Rights

Small victory for the American people who overwhelmingly (in a bipartisan manner) support Roe v. Wade on House passage today of the Women's Health Protection Act by a vote of 218-211 that protects abortion rights. However, like they have on all the people-centered legislation of President Biden's administration, it's unlikely to survive Republican opposition in a Senate vote.

But the passage in the House sends a clear message to voters on which political party supports Americans' overwhelming approval of safe legal abortion services being any woman's inalienable right as part of her access to equal medical care. It's also a clear expression of Congressional desire that law of the land be upheld for the third branch of the government, which has inappropriately become partisan due to Mitch McConnell's and Trump's deplorable maneuvering.

The Supreme Court is to hear a challenge on December 1 to a Mississippi law that bans nearly all abortions after the 15th week of pregnancy.

The court ruled on the Texas law without hearing oral arguments, and the Mississippi case will be the first abortion case argued before the court since Trump named three justices to the panel, giving conservatives a 6-3 majority.

Saw a story in the Globe this morning, taken from the AP wire, about the various marches for women's rights around the US yesterday. Overall, a reasonably good account, but I was struck by this sentence

Prominent among them were the Illinois Handmaids, wearing red robes and white bonnets reminiscent of the automatons of Margaret Atwood's classic tale...

"Automatons"? Apparently someone missed the point...

That aside, it's good to see that the real America is standing up to the Sharia enthusiasts. Here in Boston, Ed Markey made another push for a move to thirteen justices. I think he may be right - this might be the only way to preserve full humanity in law for women in this country.

No New Souters
Deion A. Kathawa | Oct 5, 2021

...Just two years after joining the court, Justice Souter was part of the 5-4 majority in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992)—specifically the three-justice plurality, all of whom were Republican appointees—which reaffirmed the “core holding” of Roe v. Wade (1973). By the end of Souter’s tenure, the rallying cry from the Right was “No More Souters!”

...If (Justice Kavanough) doesn’t vote to overturn Roe, if he flinches at the critical moment, the righteous fury of half the country will be unleashed, and a generation of young conservatives will be irrevocably radicalized. Justly aghast at a regime that doesn’t just tolerate but celebrates—in the name of “liberty”—a rolling massacre that would make King Herod green with envy, they will ensure that Justice Kavanaugh—if he rules wrongly—will be remembered far more foully than David Souter.

Do the right thing, Justice Kavanaugh. End this national nightmare. You’ll be a hero to the people who matter if you do.

https://americanmind.org/salvo/no-new-souters/
(American Mind is publication of Claremont Institute, which plans to celebrate FL Gov DeSantis later this month, a curious development for pro-life folk. https://www.claremont.org/ )

>38 margd: It's sickening to realize that we have placed the decision about whether women are fully human in US law in the hands of a rapist and a serial sexual abuser.

>39 kiparsky: It is the least he could do on a path of atonement. That is the way I have come to look at it because what can we do to get him out? So atonement is the only way.

Mary Ziegler, Supreme speed: The court puts abortion on the rocket docket, SCOTUSblog (Oct. 25, 2021, 12:39 PM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/10/supreme-speed-the-court-puts-abortion-on-the-...

...Shortly before Sept. 1, when S.B. 8 was scheduled to take effect, the providers came to the Supreme Court with an emergency application seeking to block the law. The court remained silent for more than 24 hours, thereby letting the law go into effect. Then, late at night on Sept. 1, the court issued a cryptic order denying the providers’ request for an injunction. The vote was 5-4. In dissent, Chief Justice John Roberts described S.B. 8 as “unprecedented.”

...Last week, the court took up two challenges to S.B. 8. One, brought by abortion providers, asked the justices to weigh in on “whether a state can insulate from federal-court review a law that prohibits the exercise of a constitutional right” by delegating enforcement to private citizens.

The court also granted a separate petition from the Justice Department...argued that S.B. 8 interferes with its sovereign interest in ensuring that states recognize federal constitutional rights. DOJ also argued that the law raises preemption concerns by threatening the work of federal agencies, employees, and contractors who might offer abortion services.

In addition to granting the providers’ petition, the court will address whether the United States may sue the state of Texas, “state officials,” and “private parties” to “prohibit S.B. 8 from being enforced.” And rather than sitting on its hands, the court set a breakneck pace. It ordered an accelerated briefing schedule and set a date for oral arguments in both cases just 10 days from when the court agreed to hear them — a near record reminiscent only of the court’s speed in resolving the 2000 presidential election in Bush v. Gore.

...What seems clear is that the justices are taking S.B. 8 (Texas law) seriously now...

The S.B. 8 litigation has damaged the court...

...In its first iteration at the high court, the S.B. 8 litigation suggested not only that politics influenced the outcome but that the justices treated abortion, an issue of great concern to many Americans, with a mixture of contempt and nonchalance. The court’s rocket-docket response to last week’s developments might change the narrative...

>41 margd: I don't know why this is so hard for the Supreme Court. Even putting aside the issue of abortion (which I do believe should be accessible to all women), this is "vigilante justice". Is there anything like it, any precedent, any time in this country? I think not since slavery times.

ETA: Slavery and the failure of Reconstruction

Apparently citizens are allowed to sue companies that violate the major federal environmental laws, but in those cases it can be argued that the people suing are being directly harmed.

>43 jjwilson61: Agreed.

>43 jjwilson61: More to the point, in those cases it can be argued that some harm is being done. The Texas law allows people to be attacked for seeking medical care.

>45 kiparsky: But in their point of view harm is being done... to the fetus

>46 jjwilson61: That may be their point of view, but they're wrong.

Someone's "point of view" is fine and dandy, but reality beats fantasy.

Under the Clean Water Act, "the citizen suit is meant to supplement rather than to supplant governmental action". Moreover, "a plaintiff, (must have) a stake in the suit when the complaint was filed (standing) and continues to have a stake afterwards (mootness)."

Ben McIntosh, Standing Alone: The Fight to Get Citizen Suits under the Clean Water Act into the Courts.
Ailor v. City of Maynardville, 12 Mo. Envtl. L. & Pol'y Rev. 171 (2005)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jesl/vol12/iss2/6

(on p 5 of 21, https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir...
B. Citizen Suits
In addition to NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permits, another important way that the provisions of the CWA (Clean Water Act) are enforced is through citizen suits. Under the CWA, a citizen can file a civil action in federal court against "any person ... who is alleged to be in violation of their NPDES permit,"... provided that the citizen gives sixty days notice of his or her intention to sue to the EPA Administrator, the state, and the violator.... In a sense, the citizen suit provision of the CWA makes individuals "private attorneys general" by allowing them to sue businesses and governmental agencies to enforce the act. However, citizen suits have restrictions on them as well. For
example, a citizen may not bring suit if the EPA Administrator or the state has already done so, nor may he
recover for compensatory or punitive damages... In addition, not all citizens may bring a citizen suit under the
CWA; only a citizen who has an interest that could be affected by the water pollution may bring suit.

The purpose of the citizen suit provision has been the subject of much debate. Some argue that a citizen
suit can be brought only when the EPA Administrator or the state has failed to take any action. ... Others would
like these suits to provide redress to the plaintiff for past violations regardless of what governmental action has
been taken... However, the Supreme Court answered the question in 1987 when it stated that the "bar on
citizen suits when governmental enforcement action is under way suggests that the citizen suit is meant to supplement rather than to supplant governmental action."... Therefore, the purpose of the citizen suit is to act when the government fails to...

Though the Supreme Court has reduced the citizen suit to a supplementary role, more citizen suits have been filed under the CWA than any other environmental statute... In fact, twice as many CWA suits are filed by citizens than by state governments and the national government combined.' One author stated:
"Citizens have consistently been the predominant mode of CWA enforcement in federal courts because water violations are usually very apparent. and because citizens who fish, swim, boat, or hike are the first to notice and report incidents (of water pollution)... In truth, if citizens did not play such a major role in initiating Clean Water Act enforcement actions, there would be little enforcement, if any."

Therefore, despite being supplemental, the citizen suit has proven to be vital to the success of the CWA. However, though a citizen may have a right to bring a suit under the CWA, he or she must still satisfy the constitutional doctrines of standing and mootness...

C. Standing and Moolness
...Though nothing in the Constitution speaks of standing or mootness, the Court, in an act of judicial restraint. has ruled that it cannot hear claims where the plaintiff has no stake in the litigation. The concepts of standing and mootness serve to ensure that a plaintiff, had a stake in the suit when the complaint was filed (standing). and continues to have a stake afterwards (mootness). Thus, if a plaintiff lacks standing or his claim becomes moot. a federal court may not hear his claim because there is no case or controversy within the meaning of Article III...

>48 margd: I bet they also weren't told they could get $10,000 for each suit they filed either.

What happens when people in Texas can’t get abortions: ‘Diapers save a lot more babies than ultrasounds’
Abortion ‘alternatives’ see more demand in Texas abortion law’s wake
Casey Parks | November 13, 2021

...The number of abortions had fallen by half during the ban’s first month, from 5,377 statewide in August to 2,164 in September. For most antiabortion activists, that drop was a victory, proof that the restriction had saved more than 3,000 babies.

But stopping women from having abortions was the easy part, (Tere) Haring often told people. What came next would be much harder. Those 3,000 babies were going to need diapers and formula and any number of more expensive items, too. The women Haring called “abortion-minded” tended to be in untenable situations. Many couldn’t afford a playpen, let alone a month’s rent.

“I always said abortion is the lack of an option,” Haring said. “They feel like they have nowhere to go, that there’s nobody for them. It’s about the help. It’s about being there for them.”

Haring believed it was her Catholic duty to help women who didn’t get abortions...

...Haring...learned she didn’t need to block a clinic to stop people from ending their pregnancies. All Haring had to do was raise enough money to cover their rent.

...Officially, Haring promised to help women the year after they gave birth, but many tended to stick with her long after...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/11/13/san-antonio-pregnancy-center-...

Wow. Three thousand enslaved mothers in the state of Texas in a single month.

That's evil.

>51 kiparsky: That's the number of confirmed abortions in Texas. We know from recent history that teenagers and women will attempt at-home abortions or travel out of state for medical care. What we don't know when anti-abortion legislation such as this is in effect is how many people are injured, killed, or made homeless by these desperate attempts.

Still evil. Just, more complex.

>52 aspirit: Agreed, the numbers are complex. I'm just astounded that anyone celebrates those numbers.

And further, that the same people that celebrate these numbers do everything they can think of to increase the number of unplanned pregnancies. These people really are vile.

Texas Abortion Law Complicates Care for Risky Pregnancies
Doctors in Texas say they cannot head off life-threatening medical crises in pregnant women if abortions cannot be offered or even discussed.
Roni Caryn Rabin | Nov. 26, 2021

...Many physicians say they cannot intervene in complex pregnancies that may not pose an immediate threat to the patient but can rapidly spin out of control. Some hesitate to counsel patients about the option of termination, or refer them to doctors in other states, for fear their advice could be interpreted as aiding an abortion.

Supporters of the law say their goal is to save the life of every embryo, regardless of the circumstances of conception.

“We never advocate taking a life of an unborn child unless it is necessary to protect the life of a woman,” said Joe Pojman, executive director of the Texas Alliance for Life.

Even in cases of rape or incest, “we don’t advocate for taking the life of an unborn child for the crime of the father,” he said.

The law’s supporters say that it provides sufficient leeway for physicians to act if a mother’s life or bodily functions are compromised, and they insist those cases are rare.

Dr. Ingrid Skop, an obstetrician in San Antonio who belongs to the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said that even a girl as young as 9 or 10, impregnated by a father or a brother, could carry a baby to term without health risks.

“If she is developed enough to be menstruating and become pregnant, and reached sexual maturity, she can safely give birth to a baby,” Dr. Skop said... *

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/26/health/texas-abortion-law-risky-pregnancy.htm...

---------------------------------------------------------

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_youngest_birth_mothers

>54 margd: How awful! I just can't imagine… No one like that should be a physician!

>54 margd: The Taliban is alive and well in Texas.

>50 margd: diapers, contd.
(Though my son and wife are comfortable, even they are taken aback by the cost of their newborn's formula and diapers!)

‘Am I even fit to be a mom?’ Diaper need is an invisible part of poverty in America
Chabeli Carrazana | November 23, 2021,

Parents cannot use federal aid to pay for diapers, and are often forced to come up with other solutions, using maxi pads or towels to keep their children clean and dry. In rural America where aid is even harder to access, tiny diaper banks are the only lifeline...

Nationwide, studies have found that diaper need is a greater contributor to postpartum depression than food insecurity and housing instability. A landmark 2013 study in Pediatrics, a peer-reviewed medical journal, was the first to quantify the psychological trauma diaper need has on parents, some who reported leaving their children in soiled diapers for extended periods when they couldn’t find any, leading to urinary tract infections and diaper rash. Other parents skipped meals to pay for diapers. Almost always, mothers suffer the greatest impact...

During the pandemic, the cost of diapers ballooned about 14 percent on average...

https://19thnews.org/2021/11/diaper-need-rural-missouri/

>57 margd:
Do you think the Biden's bill that the House just passed will help, if it makes it through the Senate?

>57 margd: Yes. Obama's ACA is said to have prevented more abortions (through contraception) than edicts have. If ever it gets extended, Biden's Child Tax Credit may make some of those little lives more livable.

(Growing up in Canada mid 20th c, we were comfortable compared to most, and yet I remember that early on that meals were pretty stripped down at the end of the month. Also, I remember my mom receiving her monthly "baby bonus" that they all did back then. It sticks in my memory as such a welcome boost to her budget--hers to spend on us as I recall.)

>59 margd: My first thought was that using single-use diapers is expensive, but the other option requires time, a washing machine and somewhere for a cloth line. All three might very well be in short supply for those mentioned above.

Also this is not a problem I've heard of in Denmark, but I'll ask around, since this got me curious.

ETA: The Danish version of "baby bonus" is recently changed, so mother and father get 50% each. So from now on some children will have to wear clothes chosen by their father rather than their mother :-)

ETA-2: Googling Danish media for this turns up a few stories about this being a problem in the USA. And a single Danish story from 2014 about a problem for a single mother in a particular fix (had a lot of things stolen from her flat, but insurance money hadn't been released yet).

>60 bnielsen: Cloth diapers...my recollection is that diaper rash STINGS! I remember my at-home mom swishing sibs' poopy diapers in the toilet, then stashing them in a special container. No diaper service back then(?), so I assume she washed them in wringer washer and hung them out to dry. Might have used her mother's clothesline during our blessedly short stint in a walk-up apartment--with three young kids... I'm told cloth diapers are better today. (Bottles certainly have come a long way, if one can afford them!)

>60 bnielsen: I assume feminine hygiene products are also not an issue for poor women in Denmark? I knew young girls in some developing countries have their educations interrupted by lack of such products, but was surprised / horrified to read about same issue here in North America. Tampon Tuesdays collect such items for distribution to local poor and there are efforts to end sales tax on them here in North America...

(ETA: Connection for me is that diapers and feminine hygiene products are necessities--but not for people of comfortable means (mostly men) who make prices, establish taxes, and regulate use of financial assistance... And who determine access to contraception and abortion.)
_______________________________________________

Worth a read / listen (5 min):

As the Supreme Court considers Roe v. Wade, a look at how abortion became legal
Nina Totenberg | November 29, 2021

...George Frampton clerked for Justice Harry Blackmun the year that his boss authored Roe v. Wade, and he remembers that until Roe, "those abortions had to be obtained undercover if you had a sympathetic doctor" and you were "wealthy enough." But most abortions were illegal and mainly took place "in backrooms by abortion quacks" using "crude tools" and "no hygiene."

By the early to mid-1960s, Frampton notes, thousands of women in large cities were arriving at hospitals, bleeding and often maimed.

...The result, says Frampton, was that by the mid-1960s, a reform movement had begun, aimed at decriminalizing abortion and treating it more like other medical procedures. Driving the reform movement were doctors, who were concerned about the effect that illegal abortions were having on women's health. Soon, the American Law Institute — a highly respected group of lawyers, judges and scholars — published a model abortion reform law supported by major medical groups, including the American Medical Association...

https://www.npr.org/2021/11/29/1056129045/as-the-supreme-court-considers-roe-v-w...

>61 margd: Yes, I was talking about cloth diapers. We used it for our first child and switched to single-use diapers for the second. Both worked fine, so convenience and choice of day-care swung the balance. I remember thinking about the amount of money and trash saved, while hanging cloth diapers out to dry :-) And also the smell of used diapers as they went from the container to the washing machine :-)

https://apnews.com/article/abortion-donald-trump-us-supreme-court-health-amy-con...
Justices signal they’ll OK new abortion limits, may toss Roe

The question is not whether the cells growing in a woman's womb is a person. The question is whether the woman herself is a person or is she just a sperm receptacle and 9-month oven.

Can a ban on morning-after pills and IUDs be far behind?

Texas law restricting access to abortion pills goes into effect: What to know
Wellness | December 2, 2021

Starting Thursday, people in Texas will have a narrower window in which they can receive abortion-inducing medication, including the two most commonly used medications, mifepristone and misoprostol:...Senate Bill 4...cuts the window in which physicians are allowed to give the medication from 10 weeks of pregnancy to seven weeks.

...also prohibits mailing abortion-inducing drugs, a restriction that contrasts with a federal regulation enacted in April by the Biden administration that temporarily allows the medication to be mailed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

...also adds new requirements around medication abortions, including an in-person examination by a physician, a mandatory follow-up visit within 14 days and new reporting requirements for providers.

...also creates a state jail felony offense for "a person who intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly violates provisions relating to abortion-inducing drugs," but exempts pregnant people...

https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/wellness/story/texas-law-restricting-access-a...

They just can't do this. They can't. It's just too irrational. Too autocratic.

I’m sorry, but Amy Coney Barrett made the argument yesterday that
because women can drop newborns off without immediately being arrested, we don’t need reproductive health care
and that was taken as a serious thought?
- Reyhan Harmanci @harmancipants | 8:10 AM · Dec 2, 2021
_______________________________________________

Barrett's argument might fly in religious circles, but it is not that of an objective, disciplined Supreme Court Justice.

Barrett is an adoptive mom, as am I, but there are not enough homes for surrendered babies today, never mind additional ones. As for those being "dropped off", that's only better than dumpster/washroom abandonment of newborns for which it's intended as an alternative. There may be more recent studies, but one that followed Romanian children born/kept as a result of Nicolae Ceaușescu's abortion ban found that their lives were significantly worse than that of wanted babies.

USA Today published a piece about how abortion is anti-science. Jesus fucking Christ, this is the state of our country.

The acceptance of Trump's Justices (and, wow, is that an awkward phrase) and the arguments that are made to take away both family rights to the freedom of choice and female reproductive rights at a time when the wealth gap is widening, environmental devastation is adding to migration of huge numbers of unhoused Americans, healthcare is collapsing around the most vulnerable populations, and we're in a pandemic worsened by the very politicians and religious extremists who are pushing the arguments is all baffling to me.

I want to get my child out of the USA before she's old enough to have pregnancy tests and the outrageous bills to confirm her status as a non-incubator forced on her for every medical service. Will that be thirteen years old? She had a marriage proposal from an elderly stranger in a heavily conservative area when she was six years old, so it's difficult to guess when conservatives expect these things.

>66 margd: adoption contd. "Pregnancy is probably one of the most dangerous things a woman does in her life"

Amy Coney Barrett raises adoption in abortion case hearing that poses challenge to Roe v. Wade
Katie Kindelanvia | December 3, 2021

..."'I'm unfortunately not surprised that adoption was brought up so much, because I think people feel that pregnancy is this non-issue medical condition," said Dr. Leilah Zahedi, a Tennessee-based maternal fetal medicine specialist and fellow with Physicians for Reproductive Health. "It's very infuriating to be honest, because it shows their ignorance in the fact that pregnancy is not an uncomplicated condition for the majority of the United States...Pregnancy is probably one of the most dangerous things a woman does in her life, bar none"...

The U.S. is also a particularly dangerous place to give birth. It has the highest maternal mortality rate among developed countries...

Black women are three to four times more likely to die during childbirth or in the months after than white, Asian or Latina women, while Indigenous women are two to three times more likely...

Physicians like Dr. Nisha Verma, a board-certified OBGYN (a fellow with the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) who provides abortion care, point out that abortion, on the other hand, is "incredibly safe...The risk of childbirth is as high as 10 times higher than the risk of abortion...That's a lot of risk to ask someone to take on."

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists was among 25 medical organizations who together filed an amicus brief in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health case that is now before the Supreme Court, arguing the Mississippi law is "fundamentally at odds with the provision of safe and essential health care, with scientific evidence, and with medical ethics."

...restrictions on abortion impact people who are the most vulnerable to complications from pregnancy and childbirth. Around 75% of abortion patients are low-income residents, and nearly 60% of U.S. women of reproductive age live in states where access to abortion is restricted

In her response to Barrett, (Julie Rikelman, a Center for Reproductive Rights attorney) cited the maternal mortality statistics in Mississippi alone, saying, "It's 75 times more dangerous to give birth in Mississippi than it is to have a pre-viability abortion, and those risks are disproportionately threatening the lives of women of color."

In addition to the physical risks...The U.S. does not have universal health care and does not provide universal child care...

"Abortion is not an isolated political issue," said Verma, weighing in on Justice Barrett's specific comments on adoption. "I think the way that adoption was presented as just this easy alternative to abortion completely disregards the real experiences that people are having. It's a decision that's happening in the context of people's lives...The decision-making process is different for every person, but it is a decision that people are making carefully and intentionally with all of the information and in the context of their own lives," she said. "It's not something that we can impose on people...I see patients all the time making decisions to have an abortion from a place of love and compassion."

There were over 620,00 legal induced abortions in the U.S. in 2019...At the end of the same year, 2019, there were around 122,000 children waiting to be adopted out of the U.S. foster care system...Overall, just over 110,000 adoptions took place in the U.S. in 2014...

Ryan Hanlon, acting CEO and president of the National Council for Adoption, said..."Safe haven laws can be a really wonderful thing, but by the time we've gotten to that point, we've already experienced a crisis...What I would hope for any woman who's experiencing an unplanned pregnancy is that she's getting information and support well before then, and for those women who do choose to place their child for adoption, that they are getting support before, during and after the birth."

https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Wellness/amy-coney-barrett-raises-adoption-abortion-c...

>66 margd: That argument had me wondering whether it's possible to impeach a justice for incompetence.

The Pro-Life Movement Plans for a Future Without Roe
Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of the Susan B. Anthony List, is preparing for new abortion laws to pass in at least thirty states.
Isaac Chotiner | December 7, 2021

...I spoke by phone with Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of the Susan B. Anthony List, a nonprofit supporting pro-life politicians...(excerpts)

Q: What if we’re talking about a woman procuring abortion pills?
Well, then the people who are trafficking those pills and getting them to her house are mighty guilty. They’ve obviously planned ahead to break the law...

Q: If a woman goes through with what you believe is ending a human life, do you think she should not be punished because that is politically untenable, or do you think that she doesn’t deserve punishment?
I understand your question. I think she’s in a very difficult place. She’s miserable, staying up all night, doesn’t know the way out, and she needs mercy, and there needs to be justice also. My view is (that) all the mercy that we can give her, we should, and the guy who is profiting from her misery should receive the sharp end of justice...

Q: If the Court overturns Roe, do you think there’s a chance that the Democratic Party becomes less consistently pro-choice?

Q: There has been a debate about how much the pro-life movement should focus on a stronger social safety net and child tax credits—policies that are generally more associated with the Democratic Party. If the G.O.P. and the pro-life movement emerge victorious on Roe, how important is it that the Republican Party adopts policies that are seen as pro-family, especially because the pro-life movement, as I think you’ve made clear in this conversation, has thrown in its lot with the G.O.P.?

Speaking for the pro-life movement, which is obviously attempting to lead Republicans, we absolutely, without question, have a responsibility to serve the needs of women and children as we pass ambitious laws. There’s no question about it. How that looks in each state is going to be very different. We’re going about the work of doing massive inventories in every state that will be the most ambitious in passing laws. That inventory has seven points of need for women and children—triggers for why they have abortions.* Where we find gaps, we’ll make sure that those gaps are filled. We raise the money. We make sure there’s child care in the first few years of that child’s life that’s cheap or free. That’s going to look very different in Minnesota than it does in Georgia. In Minnesota, there very well may be a political appetite for passing more state-supported aid for any one of those seven areas.

I think you know this already, but one thing this is not is neat. There is not a one-size-fits-all when it comes to the law in any state or how the needs of women will be met. That is vital work for the pro-life movement, and the Republican Party.

Q: Do you think that that could be complicated, though, because the pro-life movement and the Republican Party are so tied together?

Q: The pro-life movement’s embrace of President Trump is often talked about very cynically. I know you initially were not a supporter of the former President, and then you came around. The phrase people like to use is “devil’s bargain.” Was this done for utilitarian reasons, and it turned out to work in your favor, or was this done because you have some sincere belief in him and his vision for the Republican Party?

...Then and now, I have no idea. I don’t know what’s in anybody’s heart. I don’t know what’s in his. I know exactly what he has done. I know the fruits of it today, and for that I am very, very grateful...

Q: You said earlier that the people who dispense abortion pills should face the “sharp end of justice.” Should the government be treating people who play a role in abortion the same way that they treat people who play a role in ending other human lives? Is there a difference there in your mind?

I don’t know. We have to look at the context each time. It depends upon exactly the facts, but when you are trafficking in pills or you’re trafficking in abortion you are making a decision. “I will circumvent the law, and I will put the instrument inside her, and I will kill the baby.” The pill-maker is the one that is making it possible for her to be alone and have an abortion alone, with no help and no medical support and no follow-up and no friends, and then she’s supposed to move on, like nothing happened.

In answer to your question, I guess I would just say that, because of the need for mercy and justice moving into a new era, I don’t think that there’s any comparison with any other type of law. Because of the delicacy of wanting to take care of women and children, and then wanting to stop the people who circumvent the law, I think it’s going to be really important for each state to balance all of those interests. I will tell you this: I am absolutely committed to shutting down those companies and making sure that their C.E.O.s go to jail when they circumvent the law and continue to send pills into lonely bathrooms with desperate women.

Q: “Mercy and justice” refers to what?

The mercy for women, and the justice for those who are feeding on her misery.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/the-pro-life-movement-plans-for-a-future-...
__________________________________________________

* ...pregnancy centers, adoption agencies, maternity homes, free counseling, parenting classes, diapers, formula, job skills training and more (?) https://www.lifenews.com/2021/04/30/texas-will-spend-100-million-on-program-to-h...

>70 margd: A movement devoted to the murder of women and doctors should never be referred to as "pro-life". It's the big lie that underlies everything they do. "Pro-life" does not enter into their minds, and we should never give them that honorable title, even in quotation.

we absolutely, without question, have a responsibility to serve the needs of women and children as we pass ambitious laws
Such a load of bullshit. These people consistently oppose every effort to bring health care to all Americans, provide support for people with children, family leave - and obviously they're dead set against anything that even resembles equity for women in the workplace (or anywhere else).

The mercy for women, and the justice for those who are feeding on her misery.

How sickening to hear this evil woman nakedly plotting to destroy lives and then speaking about "justice". More proof, I suppose that there is nothing like a god. If there were, she would be a smoking pile of ash and a brief news headline about a "freak lightning event".

F.D.A. Will Permanently Allow Abortion Pills by Mail
Pam Belluck | Dec. 16, 2021

The decision will broaden access to medication abortion, an increasingly common method, but many conservative states are already mobilizing against it.

...In data released last month by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 42 percent of all abortions — and 54 percent of abortions before 10 weeks — occurred with medication in 2019, the most recent year for which C.D.C. data is available...

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/16/health/abortion-pills-fda.html

GOP legislators discover ectopic pregnancies, demonstrating once again that politics have no place in women's healthcare decisions.
Missouri HB 2810 would criminalize ending an ectopic pregnancy!
OH bill would bar insurance coverage for ending such pregnancies--and require coverage for re-implantation, a procedure that does not exist! (And never will for humans, if my years-ago lab exposure to placentas is any guide!)

Kate Smith (frmr CBS News) @byKateSmith | 3:17 PM · Mar 10, 2022
NEW: A bill in Missouri makes illegal to get an abortion if the patient has an ectopic pregnancy.
Facts about ectopic pregnancies:
- They’re are not viable. Full stop.
- They’re the 1 cause of death for 1st trimester patients.
Here’s the proposed law: https://house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills221/hlrbillspdf/5798H.01I.pdf
------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mina (MD, frmr Harvard Med) @michaelmina_lab | 10:07 PM · Mar 10, 2022:
Cruel is a better word than insane here. Cruel and inhumane.
I don’t care what leverage these lawmakers are trying to get by positioning such an extreme bill on the table -
putting a bill out like this should be considered some sort of intent to murder women.

I don’t care what angle these lawmakers are trying for
Even an attempt to pass a bill that kills women should itself be considered a federal crime
Untreated ectopic pregnancy kills women
Imagine if it passes! The deaths should be on this lawmaker.

Highlighted excerpt of Missouri HB 2810 ( https://twitter.com/michaelmina_lab/status/1502121209286344708/photo/1 )
HB 2810 ( https://house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills221/hlrbillspdf/5798H.01I.pdf )
__________________________________________

A sponsor of an Ohio abortion bill thinks you can reimplant ectopic pregnancies. You can’t.
Kayla Epstein | May 10, 2019

The House bill, which was first introduced in April by Ohio state Rep. John Becker (R), seeks to limit insurance coverage for abortion procedures where the mother’s life is not endangered. It would also bar coverage for drugs or devices that prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg, which experts say could affect certain kinds of IUDs.

One provision especially worried doctors.

The latest available version of HB 182 has an exception that would allow insurance to cover a treatment that does not exist.
“A procedure for an ectopic pregnancy, that is intended to reimplant the fertilized ovum into the pregnant woman’s uterus."

An ectopic pregnancy occurs when a fertilized egg implants outside the uterus, or in the wrong part of the uterus, and usually presents in the first trimester. With the exception of some very rare cases of abdominal pregnancies, ectopic pregnancies do not result in the birth of a child and can cause potentially fatal ruptures and hemorrhages...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2019/05/10/sponsor-an-ohio-abortion-bill-t...

>73 margd: No matter how hard we try to provide reliable information, these people can't get it right. So frustrating that all these people, who know nothing about medicine, won't listen to women or doctors!

Lately I have been thinking about the phrase "life begins at conception," which negatively influences many people's perspective on abortion. From either a religious or a scientific view, it is very difficult to define "life". Cells can be alive but not conscious. No one says removing a live skin cell is a sin. Why a "live" embryo?

I try not to comment on these issues but can't help it right now.

In advancing HB2779, a bill modeled after the Texas abortion law, Tennessee Rep. Rebecca Alexander (R) says that it would be permissible for any family member of a rapist to sue the victim of rape for proceeding with an abortion.

The bill is moving forward to full committee.
2:17 ( https://twitter.com/HeartlandSignal/status/1503823346701590535 )

Heartland Signal @HeartlandSignal | 4:00 PM · Mar 15, 2022:
Covering politics and policy from the Midwest. Newsroom for @WCPT820

>75 margd: Insanity has reached levels never anticipated.

Oklahoma legislature passes near-total ban on abortion
Veronica Stracqualursi | April 5, 2022

The Oklahoma legislature on Tuesday gave final approval to a bill that would make performing an abortion illegal in the state, making exceptions only in the case of medical emergencies.

The bill, Senate Bill 612, would make performing an abortion or attempting to perform the procedure a felony punishable by a maximum fine of $100,000 or maximum 10 years in state prison, or both.

The legislation, which first passed the state Senate last year, passed the state Republican-led House on Tuesday by 70-14, without debate or questions on the floor. The legislation now heads to Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt, who previously promised to sign every bill limiting abortion that came across his desk...

https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/05/politics/oklahoma-abortion-ban-bill/index.html
----------------------------------------------------

JUST IN: Oklahoma just passed the most restrictive abortion ban in America, punishing people as felons with 10 years in prison. There was NO notice this was going to happen and it was passed with NO debate. The ban starts at conception.

- No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen @NoLieWithBTC | 3:50 PM · Apr 5, 2022

>77 margd: Horrible! Simply horrible! How can this happen?? And what can we do? I give to Planned Parenthood every year. What else?

Vote? Don't schedule conferences in states with no exceptions for rape or incest. Children having children. Only exception is when mother is at death's door--some MDs, fearing fines and imprisonment, will leave rescues TO death's door...

>78 krazy4katz: This can happen because the "red" states have discovered that they have no policies that actually appeal to people, so they instead push this toxic agenda of murdering and enslaving women, which appeals to their base. Unfortunately, those of us in the donor states can't do a lot to influence the state legislatures of the nutcase states short of moving to places like Oklahoma. is correct, the first thing is to vote. Vote for pro-choice candidates where you live, and make sure all of your friends and relatives do the same, wherever they are. If you have time to write an email or make a phone call, make sure your elected representatives know that you are a pro-choice voter, and ask them what concrete action they're taking to make sure women have full access to health care in your state, county, and city. If you have time to do so, get on your local NARAL chapter's action list. If and when pro- or anti-choice legislation comes up, they'll ask people to turn out to agitate for women's rights. This can sometimes be in the form of a rally, sometimes it's packing a legislative hearing or turning up for a politician's public appearances, or sometimes they need help doing outreach. There's lots of stuff to be done, if you've got the time.

And of course if you've got spare funds to put towards the cause, consider donating to preserve the democratic majority in the House and the Senate. There are a couple of ways to approach this. I prefer to donate to individual campaigns rather than to PACs or the DNC, but there's a case to be made for a diversity of tactics here. In addition, organizations like Fair Fight are working to preserve the right to vote nationally against Republican attacks, and they can certainly use any help they can get.

And basically, be vocal. The so-called "pro-life" people are trying very hard to present themselves as a majority position. They don't even have a majority of Republicans, and they never have, but they are good at PR, and they've intimidated some people into thinking that they're somehow alone in thinking that women are fully human beings - that pro-choice is a "liberal" position that they should be ashamed of, or that there's some religious basis for enslaving women (there isn't, at least none of the Big Three have anything against abortion), or that there's some moral position that requires the enslavement of women. The more we talk about this stuff, the more people will realize that what they think is actually correct, and it's the people who want death in childbirth to be routine, who try to normalize the murder of doctors, who think that a woman's body belongs, in this order, to the state, then to the church, and then to her husband, and finally to her, these are the crazy ones.

That's a start, anyway. I'm sure you'll come up with more that you can do once you've got going.

Woman arrested in Starr County (Texas) on murder for ‘illegal abortion’
Francisco E. Jimenez | April 8, 2022

...According to the Starr County Sheriff’s Office, ("Jane Woe"), 26, was arrested and served with an indictment “on the charge of Murder after ("Woe") did then and there intentionally and knowingly cause the death of an individual by self-induced abortion.”

("Woe") is currently in custody at the Starr County Detention Center. She faces a surety bond of $500,000...

https://myrgv.com/local-news/2022/04/08/woman-arrested-in-starr-county-for-illeg...

US women are being jailed for having miscarriages
Robin Levinson-King | 12 November 2021

When a 21-year-old Native American woman from Oklahoma was convicted of manslaughter after having a miscarriage, people were outraged. But she was not alone.

("Jane Woe") was just about four months pregnant when she lost her baby in the hospital in January 2020.

This October, she was convicted and sentenced to four years in prison for the first-degree manslaughter of her unborn son.

When she arrived at hospital seeking treatment, ("Woe") admitted to using illicit drugs while pregnant.

Later, the medical examiner's report, obtained by the BBC, found traces of methamphetamine in her unborn son's liver and brain.

The examiner did not determine a cause of death for the foetus, noting genetic anomaly, placenta abruption or maternal methamphetamine use could have been contributing factors... (margd: One in four pregnancies end in miscarriage. Bet precious few are autopsied... Unless...)

...National Advocates of Pregnant Women (NAPW), a pro-choice advocacy group...is helping with Poolaw's appeal, and has been tracking arrests and cases of "forcible intervention" against pregnant women in the US.

From 1973-2020, NAPW has recorded 1,600 such cases, with about 1,200 occurring in the last 15 years alone.

Although some involved women who were arrested for things such as falling down, or giving birth at home, the vast majority involved drugs, and women of colour were overrepresented...

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59214544

This is just so terrible. Thank you >79 margd: and >80 kiparsky: I do vote. I happen to live in a progressive bubble inside my state so except for the Senate seats, I usually "win". I occasionally give money to candidates outside my state if I think it will matter — usually after the primaries (example: Georgia runoff in 2020). I have also participated in Postcards to Voters in the last few years and will continue to do that. However, I think you are correct: I need to come up with involvement that is more targeted to this issue.

sorry: already listed by Margd ~ Texas ‘illegal abortion’ arrest case

https://www.mediaite.com/news/it-is-not-a-criminal-matter-texas-d-a-drops-murder...
‘It Is Not a Criminal Matter’: Texas D.A. Drops Murder Charge Against Woman Charged in Connection to ‘Self-Induced Abortion’

***
AMEN

>85 Molly3028: Meanwhile, HIPAA medical privacy laws be damned, the woman's name and image was splashed across media. So the next desperate woman who resorts to a hanger or other DIY abortion because of the TX law could understandably hesitate to seek medical care for bleeding, infection. (I'll edit my earlier posts to not contribute to invasion of medical privacy of the two women in TX and OK...)

Here is Louisiana’s new fetal personhood bill—which House Republicans just voted out of committee 7–2—making abortion a crime of homicide “from the moment of fertilization” and allowing prosectors to charge patients with murder.

https://legiscan.com/LA/text/HB813/id/2549012/Louisiana-2022-HB813-Introduced.pd...

- Mark Joseph Stern (Slate) @mjs_DC | 10:45 PM · May 4, 2022
____________________________________________

'We can't wait on the Supreme Court': In Louisiana, abortion could become a crime of murder
Greg Hilburn | 4 May 2022
https://www.theadvertiser.com/story/news/2022/05/04/louisiana-lawmakers-advance-...

This is just horrible. Are there any alternatives for women in these ultra anti-abortion states? To call a fetus an "unborn child" from the time of conception seems to goes against any and all science, although fetal development is not my specialty. However there is no heart and no brain. Even at 6 weeks, the "heartbeat" that people are talking about is just random contraction of cells that will eventually be part of the heart. You can put them in a petri dish and with enough nutrients they will do the same thing. On the other hand, I don't think those people know anything about science. I wonder what the breakdown of pro- vs. anti-abortion opinions are if you compare men vs. women in the United States.

I have a lot more I could say, but I don't think it really adds to the conversation. We need solutions!

>88 krazy4katz: Mail-order abortion pills, until those are outlawed. But how many people who need to know those exist will know? Medical information is suppressed in these states.

The pills also are not meant for people without any other access to healthcare, as there are of course serious risks.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-americans-can-expect-if-abortion-pills...

The underlying problem is that the anti-abortion extremists are actively against all healthcare for possible womb-havers that's not focused on babymaking.

>89 aspirit: Will those pills be legal or will they have to be sold "under the counter"?

>91 2wonderY: I think they're actually reversed: from a dog embryo, at roughly five weeks, on the left and an elephant embryo, over three months into development, on the right.

The image and similar responses comes up frequently. Every time I see images like it, I think it's too bad so many of the anti-abortion voters are comfortable with the killing of mammals after their births. The overlap between "pro-life" and poachers in rural areas seems to be highly significant in this country.

But it's a bigger deal they don't care about the lives of the people who are pregnant just because an embryo two months into development vaguely has (rarely visible) animal features.

fixed typos and tried to improve clarity while calmer

>90 krazy4katz: Depends on the area. The processes for acquiring "controlled" medication already varies widely based on location, sometimes even from one part of a city to another.

"serious risks"

There are always risks with meds. Dunno about the abortion pills, but at one point FDA was considering making morning after pills available OTC, or maybe behind the counter. I think they are just a few birth control pills, but taken in a certain sequence?

Certainly childbirth is more dangerous for a woman than medical abortion (or pills). There's a reason for all the stepmothers in fairy tales... My own sister had a healthy infant, but retained part of the placenta. She bled so bad that she was white as a sheet by the time they got her to hospital.

>93 aspirit: How is this country so crazy and disorganized about something so important? I just don't know what to think. And future supreme court justices lying about what they said about abortion in interviews with REPUBLICAN senators? Can they be impeached? I guess they were not under oath? How far back in time are we gonna go...

>95 krazy4katz: They can certainly be impeached. But it's not going to happen without a lot more democratic senators or getting rid of the filibuster

>94 margd: contd.
Re safety, "Abortion pills are actually safer than Tylenol" (Carrie Baker, Prof of Women and Gender Studies, Smith College), which is my understanding, but one can see that state bans could drive desperate people to order online from overseas "doctors", so one can see how there could be risk.

NowThis @nowthisnews | 1:03 PM · May 12, 2022:
'The only reason that it's even a prescription medication at this point is because of politics' — This is how medication abortion works, and how easy it is to access online

How Medication Abortion Works
'The only reason that it's even a prescription medication at this point is because of politics' — This is how medication abortion works, and how easy it is to access online

4:08 ( https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/1524797300282777614 )

>94 margd: Certainly childbirth is more dangerous for a woman than medical abortion (or pills)

And the risks of illegal abortion (the radical misogynists' preferred approach) are massively greater than either.
Not to mention the differential risk experienced by women of color. Per a 2021 article from Forbes,

Women in majority-Black communities have the highest rate of Severe Maternal Morbidity (SMM), a set of pregnancy-related complications that may adversely impact a woman’s health. Women in majority-Black communities have a 63% higher rate of SMM compared with women in majority-white communities.

I know this has been said, but it seems like it's important enough to be repeated.

>94 margd: margd: Certainly childbirth is more dangerous for a woman than medical abortion (or pills)

Certainly.

I think I badly phrased the point I was trying to make about how healthcare access should be comprehensive but tends to be broken apart to smash all the parts.

I'm on a controlled medication through a subscription program that's also being outlawed across the country. If I lost access, it would be to the doctors, nurses, and support groups as well as to the medication.

We should just pass the Murkowski/Collins bill, which will save us from absolute disaster. That way we gain 2 Republican votes and probably still lose 1 Democrat, but it will pass. And women will be safe again.

>100 krazy4katz: Any time you're relying on Collins and think you're "safe" you've made at least one grievous error in your calculations.

In Texas, abortion laws inhibit care for miscarriages
Charlotte Huff | May 10, 2022

...One Texas law passed last year lists several medications as abortion-inducing drugs and largely bars their use for abortion after the seventh week of pregnancy. But two of those drugs, misoprostol and mifepristone, are the only drugs recommended in the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists guidelines for treating a patient after an early pregnancy loss.

The other miscarriage treatment is a procedure described as surgical uterine evacuation to remove the pregnancy tissue — the same approach as for an abortion.

...Miscarriages occur in roughly 1 out of 10 pregnancies. Some people experience loss of pregnancy at home and don't require additional care, other than emotional support, said Dr. Tony Ogburn, who chairs the OB-GYN department at the University of Texas-Rio Grande Valley School of Medicine. But in other situations, he said, providers may need to intervene to stop bleeding and make sure no pregnancy tissue remains, as a guard against infection...

Dr. Lauren Thaxton, an OB-GYN and assistant professor at the Dell Medical School at the University of Texas-Austin, has already heard about local patients who have been miscarrying, and couldn't get a pharmacy to fill their misoprostol prescription...sometimes the prescribing clinic will intervene, but it takes the patient longer to get the medication. Other times patients don't report the problem and miscarry on their own, she said, but without medication they risk additional bleeding.

Under another new Texas abortion law, someone who "aids or abets" an abortion after cardiac activity can be detected — typically around six weeks — can be subject to at least a $10,000 fine per occurrence. Anyone can bring that civil action, posing a quandary for physicians and other providers. How do they follow the latest guidelines when numerous other people — from other medical professionals to friends and family members — can question their intent: Are they helping care for a miscarriage or facilitating an abortion?

...(Ogburn) said. "But I have certainly heard discussion among physicians that they're very hesitant to do any kind of intervention until they're absolutely certain that this is not possibly a viable pregnancy — even though the amount of bleeding would warrant intervening because it's a threat to the mother's life."

...existing Texas law stated that the act is not an abortion if it involves the treatment of an ectopic pregnancy — which most commonly occurs when the pregnancy grows in the fallopian tube — or to "remove a dead, unborn child whose death was caused by spontaneous abortion," (John Seago, legislative director for Texas Right to Life) said, pointing to the statute. Another area of Texas law that Seago cited provides an exception to the state's abortion restrictions if the mother's life is in danger or she's at "serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function" unless an abortion is performed...But interpretation of the laws is still causing challenges to care.

...Ectopic pregnancy develops in an estimated 2% of reported pregnancies. Methotrexate or surgery are the only two options listed in the medical guidelines to prevent the fallopian tubes from rupturing and causing dangerous bleeding.

...But (Dr. Sarah Prager, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Washington in Seattle and an expert in early pregnancy loss) believes that the laws in Texas — and perhaps elsewhere soon — could boost physicians' vulnerability to medical malpractice lawsuits...

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/05/10/1097734167/in-texas-abortio...

"denying women the right to abortion means we have less bodily autonomy than a corpse"

Text ( https://twitter.com/heartsonycgr/status/1524208521675526144/photo/1 )

>89 aspirit:

Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signs law adding criminal penalties to abortion pill distribution via mail
Adam Friedman | May 6, 2022
https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2022/05/06/tennessee-gov-bill-lee...

>101 kiparsky: I read the proposed legislation and it seemed ok to me, especially since this is a true emergency.

>105 krazy4katz: I agree that the Collins/Murkowski proposal looks okay, but I'm not convinced that it would actually be a big help. For example, consider the case of states which required abortion providers to have admitting privileges at local hospitals. Considering the "construction clause", which allows hospitals that don't want to provide health care to refrain from doing so, this would effectively ban abortion in states where health care has been captured by the femicidal church. I don't see that this bill would be any help at all in these cases.

Collins has repeatedly shown herself to be no friend of women's reproductive rights. She has to pretend to care about them in order to get elected in Maine, but I know I don't trust her for a second on this.

>106 kiparsky: I guess part of this is my not knowing how seriously this construction clause would affect access to care. How many hospitals would block abortions? I live in an area of the country with a state-supported hospital as well as several others that are not connected to religious institutions, so I had not thought about that being a big deal. Is there some way to figure out how damaging it would be? For example, a 10% decrease in access might not be so bad. Of course a 50% decrease would be a disaster. I understand this would be different in different parts of the country. I am just desperate for a quick solution.

>107 krazy4katz: This is old information, as the distribution and affiliations of hospitals across the country have undoubtedly changed in the past five years. However, this is what I can find to suggest a range of possibility.

"Percentage of Hospital Beds in Catholic Hospitals, 2016" (ACLU)
https://www.aclu.org/issues/reproductive-freedom/religion-and-reproductive-right...

The first several states in the list:

ALASKA
More than 30%
Beds in Catholic Hospitals: 391
Percentage of all Hospital Beds: 49.2%
Catholic Hospitals: 1
Percentage of All Hospitals: 16.7%

ARIZONA
10-20%
Beds in Catholic Hospitals: 1,912
Percentage of all Hospital Beds: 15.5%
Catholic Hospitals: 9
Percentage of all Hospitals: 14.8%

ARKANSAS
20-30%
Beds in Catholic Hospitals: 1,589
Percentage of all Hospital Beds: 22.6%
Catholic Hospitals: 7
Percentage of all Hospitals: 14.6%

CALIFORNIA
10-20%
Beds in Catholic Hospitals: 10,275
Percentage of all Hospital Beds: 15.9%
Catholic Hospitals: 46
Percentage of all Hospitals: 14.2%

CONNECTICUT
10-20%
Beds in Catholic Hospitals: 1,090
Percentage of all Hospital Beds: 17.7%
Catholic Hospitals: 5
Percentage of all Hospitals: 13.9%

Those numbers were only for Catholic hospitals. A 2020 whitepaper titled "Does Hospital Religious Affiliation Impact Patient Access to Care?" provides an overview of religious affiliations.
https://patientengagementhit.com/news/does-hospital-religious-affiliation-impact...

18.5 percent of hospitals were religiously affiliated in 2016, the researchers added, with 9.4 percent being owned by a Catholic organization, 5.1 percent affiliated with a Catholic group, and 4 percent with another non-Catholic religious group.

Looking back at the first link, you might want to also note that the areas where hospitals tend to have fewer hospitals overall tend to have a higher percentage of religious affiliation. That means that to avoid a hospital with religious affiliation, patients in those areas would have further to go, possibly to the other side of a large state.

>107 krazy4katz: Also, it's important to note that a 10% decrease in hospital access could affect over a million patients in one state alone.

>109 aspirit: Thank you for your perspective and information. I didn't realize Catholic hospitals were so widespread. This is shocking to me! It saddens me that there seems to be no compromise that could save the rights of women to have an abortion and other life-saving procedures.

>110 krazy4katz: Add to the list of sadnesses: that Catholic hospitals would be so very devoid of compassion that they would refuse to provide needed care based on a recently-adopted aesthetic preference about certain medical procedures. Just about all of the Catholics that I've met have been profoundly decent people. I wish that their church would follow their example.

>108 aspirit: My thanks as well for the research.

Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services (Sixth Edition)
UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS | 1/2/2020
30 p

Contents
Preamble
General Introduction
PART ONE
The Social Responsibility of Catholic Health Care Services
PART TWO
The Pastoral and Spiritual Responsibility of Catholic Health Care
PART THREE
The Professional-Patient Relationship
PART FOUR
Issues in Care for the Beginning of Life
PART FIVE
Issues in Care for the Seriously Ill and Dying
PART SIX
Collaborative Arrangements with Other Health Care Organizations and Providers
Conclusion

https://www.usccb.org/about/doctrine/ethical-and-religious-directives/upload/eth...
________________________________________________

My experience with Catholic hospitals has been positive. Several concerns, however, based on my fuzzy understanding:

1. policies, e.g., abortion and contraception, end of life care, technology (stem cells, vaxx, various treatments). Policies may be informed by the Vatican and national bishops association, but the local bishop decides on available services. IMHO, bishop capabilities and instincts vary greatly, as with all humans. Each bishop (all men) is advised by MDs at the hospital, largely RC themselves, who execute approved care, but the local bishop signs off. So, depending on the diocese, an emergency abortion in case of a miscarriage may or may not occur while a fetal heartbeat can be detected. Rarely, but it has happened--women have died as a result of waiting. Contraception is (rarely/never) available, e.g., "tying (fallopian) tubes", following childbirth. End-of-life care does not include medically assisted suicide, but it at least prioritizes comfort in terminal cases and does not insist on extraordinary measures. Perhaps the most discretion exercised by local bishops lies in new treatments and technologies which may have been developed or tested on cell lines from long ago abortions.

2. emergency care. In an emergency one is taken to the nearest hospital, which may be RC. In some areas there is no choice.

3. With amalgamation, Catholic influence tends to persist, though it is no where as obvious as in simpler times when nursing sisters in habits ran the show. To be accredited, hospitals should not be constrained by religious considerations in medical, scientific matters, IMHO.

4. lack of transparency. In the US at least*, one may not know treatment alternatives that are being withheld, or how they can be accessed by transfer to another hospital. My preference is to be fully informed of all medical alternatives recommended by professional MD associations, and to make my choice based on my own ethics (informed by spiritual advisors of my choice). All such service should be available in hospital, either directly or by transfer--assuming transfer is even possible. Decision is mine, not the bishop's. (Not so long ago, bishops were even more involved in decisions on healthcare and research, e.g., Meredith Wadman's The Vaccine Race: Science, Politics, and the Human Costs of Defeating Disease.)

* US hospital not upfront--"Saint Joseph Mercy Health System will honor the intent of your Advance Directive to the extent permitted by law and Saint Joseph Mercy Health System policies." https://www.stjoeshealth.org/for-patients/patient-rights | Couldn't find info on this website re withheld services. Found one on permitted research: Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Healthcare (DOC, 58KB) https://www.stjoeshealth.org/about-us/institutional-review-board/st-joseph-mercy...

* More transparency on services in Canada? "Providence Care (longterm care, mental health hospital, etc.), guided by our Mission and Values, as a Catholic sponsored health care organization, does not provide the act of medical assistance in dying (MAID) (physician assisted death/assisted suicide/voluntary euthanasia), but will assure that a patient’s request for MAID is acknowledged and appropriately addressed." https://www.stjoeshealth.org/for-patients/patient-rights

Abortion, In 5 Charts
Jean Yi and Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux | May 6, 2022

...the vast majority of respondents — somewhere between 85 and 90 percent, according to most polls — think abortion should be legal in at least some circumstances.

...One of the most significant ways in which support for abortion varies depends on when in the pregnancy the abortion is perfomed. Polls have found that a large majority of Americans support abortion in the first trimester, but that support tends to drop in the second trimester.

...A Kaiser Family Foundation poll conducted in late 2019 found that only 38 percent of people who lived in states where abortion would become illegal if Roe were overturned were aware of their state’s laws on the subject. Similarly, only 35 percent of people who lived in states where abortion would remain legal knew that was the case.

According to the Center for Reproductive Rights, a group that advocates for abortion rights, abortion would become illegal in about half the country if Roe were overturned. Its metric indicates that 24 states would likely ban abortion outright if Roe is weakened or overturned. In the other 26 states and the District of Columbia, abortion would likely remain legal — although some states have done more than others to ensconce abortion rights in state law or even proactively expand access.

...who gets an abortion has changed a lot since the Roe ruling came down in 1973. Abortion patients are now much likelier to be nonwhite and low-income than they were 50 years ago.

...After the Supreme Court allowed a highly restrictive abortion law to go into effect in Texas last fall, the share of Biden voters who said abortion is a “very important” issue for them jumped, while the share of Trump voters who said the same thing fell.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-americans-stand-on-abortion-in-5-char...

IVF treatment faces ‘clear and present danger’ from US anti-abortion effort
Warning from reproductive rights advocate comes as US states pass or debate legislation that would give full rights to embryos
Stephanie Kirchgaessner | 12 May 2022

...the passage of so-called “personhood” laws, which give rights to fertilized eggs, could dramatically curtail the availability and practice of IVF in some states, and could in effect make it illegal for IVF facilities to freeze or discard embryos created in the process.

(Sean Tipton, the chief advocacy and policy officer of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine) said he believed that proposed laws – which could be passed if Roe v Wade is overturned by the supreme court in coming weeks – could have “unintended consequences” on issues ranging from ectopic pregnancies to IVF. If, for example, Tipton said, laws are not written to give doctors the right to perform abortions for women who have an ectopic pregnancy, it would represent a “death sentence for the mother”.

While most Republican legislators have not explicitly criticized IVF, some of the most extreme anti-abortion activists – especially those affiliated with the Catholic church – have long been critical of the practice...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/may/12/ivf-treatment-us-anti-abortion-l...

Louisiana abortion bill allowing homicide charges against patients stopped for now
Oriana Gonzalez | May 13, 2022

A Republican lawmaker in Louisiana on Thursday pulled a bill that would have allowed prosecutors to charge a person with homicide if they get an abortion — effectively ending the chance it would become law this legislative session.

...The bill explicitly stated that a fertilized egg should be recognized as a person whose right to life should be protected, thus banning abortions at all stages of the pregnancy without exceptions.

Laws that consider the fetus or a fertilized egg to be a person or declare them to be "unborn human beings," could potentially criminalize IVF and some forms of contraceptives...

The bill said that Louisiana could "disregard" any federal court order looking to "enjoin or void" any section of the law. Additionally, if a judge in the state attempted to declare the law as unconstitutional or block it, they would be "subject to impeachment or removal."

..."This is a thorny political question, but we all know that it is actually very simple. Abortion is murder," said state Rep. Danny McCormick (R) when he opened debate. Pregnant people who decide to get an abortion should be considered murderers, he added...

https://www.axios.com/2022/05/13/louisiana-abortion-bill-homicide-patient-roe

The role of the Catholic Church in this issue is infuriating. I am just so frustrated by all the unproven “facts”, e.g. personhood for a fertilized egg. Where is our common sense? Even the heartbeat is often not the beating of an actual heart - just the contractions of a cluster of cells.

I think pregnancy has two sides: the miracle of new life, and bloody reality, with all its tradeoffs. One doesn't need to be religious to be awed by the process--a little reading on embryology will do it. It's a miracle any one of us is here! Embryology also gives insight on how many things can go wrong... On both sides I think, the error is in looking at one aspect of pregnancy without the other, which can drive one to extreme, simplistic positions: that's one reason I think that the mother is the person who should be making decisions for herself and for her fetus. Society can and should make sure that economic and cultural supports are there for a mother who would otherwise abort. I think that's our role.

Left, Right, and Center on NPR had a segment where the host talked to a pair of Gen Z about political issues. The Republican said that as a black man he was disturbed by the disproportional number of black babies being aborted but I was struck that he wasn't interested in talking with the black women who he wanted to dictate what they did with their bodies.

He suggested that there was some sort of conspiracy among liberals that was persuading these women to get abortions but a much more natural explanation is that because of institutional racism black women are much more likely to be living paycheck to paycheck and unable to afford to have a child

>118 jjwilson61: Black women are disproportionately affected by HIV, too. I would have liked to have heard the Republican in the NPR segment asked if he uses protection during sex.

On the topic of pregnancy with HIV, the risks are majorly decreased now with drug treatment. Access to HIV medication in the USA has been improving, but what are the chances someone newly infected and newly pregnant wants to deal with simultaneously figure out how to survive both conditions in the current political climate?

I don't remember if it's been mentioned in this thread already, but American Black women also die from pregnancy-related causes at much higher rates, with evidence from hospitals suggesting racism as a contributing factor.

"U.S. Maternal Mortality Rate Among Black Women Is Nearly Triple That of White, Hispanic Peers"
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-02-23/u-s-black-maternal-mortality-...

Maternity floor workers might politically lean liberal as a whole. However, I doubt it's the more liberal areas were Black women are more likely to die or more likely to feel as if they could die from maternal causes.

>118 jjwilson61: Your "more natural explanation" seems like at least a good start. Let's also remember that Black women experience complications, including fatal ones, from pregnancy at a much higher rate than white women. It's hard to imagine that this factor does not come into their decision about whether to terminate an unplanned pregnancy.

The "liberals aborting Black babies" trope has been rattling around for a while. It's usually rattled by people who have no standing to speak on the matter, since they're not the Black women making the choice.

>117 margd: I'm afraid it's really up to Catholics to solve that one. At the end of the day, the church is a human organization that only has the power that individuals give to it.

>117 margd: As a biologist, I agree with you. It is a miracle and the only person who can morally make the decision is the mother, although hopefully with input from her partner. I understand that is not always possible. Religious organizations should not have any control over health care in my opinion. They can advise but not inflict their views. However, is that what the 1st Amendment actually says?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Maybe it should be the "equal protection" clause in the 14th Amendment (section 1)?

https://constitutioncenter.org/media/files/constitution.pdf

Anti-abortion groups target women with misleading ads (BBC)

When Hana found out she was pregnant, she searched Google for "abortion clinics near me". The first result - a neutral-looking website offering a free consultation - looked like her best bet. It wasn't until the 19-year-old was walking down corridors of the north-eastern US clinic, lined with posters comparing the procedure to murder, that she realised this was not an abortion provider - its purpose was to talk her out of her decision. In many US states, BBC News has seen misleading websites advertising these clinics appearing high up in Google search results - and Facebook adverts with inaccurate medical advice - while genuine abortion providers are having their ads rejected and accounts restricted...

Amanda Terkel (Huff Post) @aterkel | 11:59 AM · May 20, 2022:
A Trump-endorsed candidate in Michigan says she would vote to ban all birth control if it comes up for a vote, bc “sex ought to be between one man and one woman in the confines of marriage”

Trump-Endorsed Candidate Backs Banning Birth Control
Jacky Eubanks, who is running for Michigan state Senate, said “sex ought to be between one man and one woman in the confines of marriage.”
Amanda Terkel and Igor Bobic | May. 20, 2022
https://huffpost.com/entry/birth-control-ban-abortion_n_6287a89ae4b01a50ab579e39
--------------------------------------------------------------

Left of Center MI @leftofcentermi | 4:47 PM · May 19, 2022:
Trump-endorsed state rep. candidate Jacky Eubanks says that if it came to a vote in the MI legislature, she would vote to make birth control illegal. “Sex ought to be between one man and one woman in the confines of marriage…and open to life. Absolutely.”
1:59 ( https://twitter.com/leftofcentermi/status/1527390618984402944 )

Murshed Zaheed 🇺🇦 @murshedz | 10:41 AM · May 20, 2022:
founder @PCFCAStrategies | alum @CREDOMobile
@senatorreid @louiseslaughter @commoncause

👀LA’s Republican Senator (Bill Cassidy) explaining its terrible maternal mortality rates ➡️ “So, if you correct our population for race, we’re not as much of an outlier as it’d otherwise appear.”

Just when I think I have seen it all re Republican racism 😳
Text-highlighted ( https://twitter.com/murshedz/status/1527660704957800450/photo/1 )

Why Louisiana’s maternal mortality rates are so high
Experts point to the many reasons behind the state's crisis.

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La. a PHYSICIAN) said Louisiana’s maternal mortality rate — one of the worst in the nation — does not tell the whole story of maternal health in the state because of its large Black population and the uncommonly broad definition Louisiana uses.

“About a third of our population is African American; African Americans have a higher incidence of maternal mortality. So, if you correct our population for race, we’re not as much of an outlier as it’d otherwise appear...Now, I say that not to minimize the issue but to focus the issue as to where it would be. For whatever reason, people of color have a higher incidence of maternal mortality.”

The United States has the worst maternal mortality rate among developed nations. Each year, approximately 17 mothers die for every 100,000 pregnancies in the country, with rates much more common among Black women than other racial groups, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention figures. Against that backdrop, Louisiana’s health department says it outpaces other states: Four Black mothers die for every white mother, compared to a three-to-one ratio nationally. The state ranks 47th out of 48 states officials assessed...

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/19/why-louisianas-maternal-mortality-rates...

>124 margd: Well, hopefully young people will come out to vote in the general election and these crazy people will lose. Personal ethics are not a legal matter. That is between that person and him/herself and/or God.

And those ethics don't account for married people who want/need an abortion, especially when you take away their birth control! Don't any of them understand cause and effect?! Unbelievably insane...

Archbishop says Pelosi will be denied Communion because she supports abortion rights
AP | May 21, 2022
https://www.npr.org/2022/05/21/1100536547/nancy-pelosi-communion-abortion-rights
___________________________________________

Mayo 🇺🇦🌻 @MayoIsSpicyy | 4:54 PM · May 20, 2022:
When Holy Communion is used as a political tool it’s time to tax the church.

Where to get abortion pills and how to use them
New US restrictions could turn abortion into do-it-yourself medicine, but there might be legal risks.
Antonio Regalado | June 15, 2022
https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/06/15/1054013/where-get-abortion-pills-how...

Explainer: Can abortion pills overcome U.S. state bans?
Brendan Pierson and Nate Raymond | 24 June 2022
...The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved mifepristone in 2000, but until very recently, the FDA mandated that patients get it at a doctor's office, clinic or hospital. After easing those restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic, the agency in December permanently did away with the requirement that it had to be dispensed in person, allowing patients to consult with healthcare providers via telemedicine appointments and receive the pills by mail. That increased access to abortion for patients living in remote areas without providers nearby and women unable to take time off from work or not able to get to clinics for other reasons. The drugs are approved for use through the 10th week of pregnancy..."The laws around telemedicine generally say that the location of the patient controls," said Amanda Allen, senior counsel at the Lawyering Project, an organization that represents abortion providers.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/can-abortion-pills-overcome-us-state-bans-2022-...

George Conway🌻 @gtconway3d | 5:37 PM · Jun 24, 2022
The records of the Constitutional Convention reflect that Art. IV's reference to "Privileges and Immunities" of US citizens were understood to encompass the right to travel among the states that was recognized under the Articles of Confederation.
Quote Tweet
Mark Joseph Stern @mjs_DC · 20h
Kavanaugh preemptively declares that states can't prohibit their residents from traveling elsewhere for an abortion due to the "constitutional right to interstate travel"—which, like abortion, is not mentioned explicitly in the text of the Constitution. https://supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf
Text excerpt ( https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/1540344171789275136/photo/1 )

NowThis @nowthisnews | 5:35 PM · Jun 24, 2022
But (AG Merrick) Garland says, ‘States may not ban mifepristone based on disagreement with the FDA’s expert judgment about its safety and efficacy.’
The pill is used to terminate pregnancy in the first 10 weeks and now accounts for more than half of all abortions in the U.S., according to the Guttmacher Institute.

Maternal mortality in US outstrips that of other industrialized nations.
Bar Graph ( https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1540511082938343430/photo/1 )

Eric Feigl-Ding @DrEricDing | 2:55 AM · Jun 25, 2022:
So just how bad is maternal mortality in Whites vs Blacks mothers?
Non-Hispanic White mothers - 19 per 100,000 births.
Black women— over 55!!!

CDC data: https://cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/maternal-mortality/2020/E-stat-Maternal-Mortali...

Bar Graph ( https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1540589571473276933/photo/1 )

Abortion bans after six weeks...

Meghan Waters @MeghanJMJW | 6:50 PM · Jun 24, 2022
Winnipeg, Manitoba
https://twitter.com/MeghanJMJW/status/1540467539368607745

Some abortion thoughts: I teach sex ed and when I explain the menstrual cycle, I emphasize that if you are expecting your period, it’s one day late, and you take a pregnancy test, if it comes back positive, you are considered 4 weeks + 1 day into your pregnancy.

Students look confused. How could you be 4 weeks pregnant? What if you only had sex two weeks ago? Well, a pregnancy is calculated from the first day of your last menstrual cycle.

I repeat that 4 or 5 times. It bears repeating. Eventually it dawns on them: people who are one week late are 5 weeks pregnant. By the time you notice your period is late, get an appointment with a doctor, figure out your next steps,

You might easily be at 6, 7 or 8 weeks along. Especially if you got jerked around by a fake clinic. If you mistake implantation bleeding for a period, you would miss your next period and take a test. One week late, your pregnancy is at 9 weeks.

If you mistake implantation bleeding for a light period and only figure it out when you miss your next period, the window to get a medical abortion is rapidly closing. If you live in certain states, you will have to make arrangements to travel to get one.

One mistake will irrevocably change the trajectory of your life if you cannot make arrangements to get out of your state.

For sex ed, I get a lot of questions about abortion. One that often come up is « till when is an abortion legal in Canada?

I explain that an abortion is legal at any point in the pregnancy due to then fact that personhood is granted only once you are born.

Some students look shocked by this. I explain: you will be hard pressed to find a doctor in Canada able and willing to perform an elective abortion after some 21-23ish weeks on a viable pregnancy.

That said, if you are pregnant and present to the hospital hemorrhaging from your vagina, that is a medical matter. No doctor in Canada will have to get on the phone to talk to a judge in order to save your life.

That is an unfortunate call that some doctors have had to make in the middle of the night to desperately try to reach a judge as a woman lay bleeding to death. When you put it that way, they understand.

Only a willfully ignorant person would refuse to understand. And those people are the ones calling the shots in so many states. Those are the people calling the shots in the Conservative Party of Canada. They must be stopped...

https://twitter.com/MeghanJMJW/status/1540467539368607745

-------------------------------------------------------
ETA

Andrew Baback Boozary MD @drandrewb | 12:45 PM · Jun 24, 2022:
executive director @uhn (U Health Network, Ont)

...as a canadian (there is no) room to be smug when over 80 members of parliament voted to restrict rights to abortion and 90% of women in New Brunswick cannot access abortion services today.

>129 margd: contd.

Homicide is a top cause of maternal death in the United States
Evaluation of death certificates from national database paints grim picture for pregnant women.
Nidhi Subbaraman | 12 November 2021

...The researchers found that US women who are pregnant or were pregnant in the past 42 days (the post-partum period) die by homicide at more than twice the rate that they die of bleeding or placental disorders — the leading causes of what are usually classified as pregnancy-related deaths. Also, becoming pregnant increases the risk of death by homicide: between the ages of 10 and 44 years, women who are pregnant or had their pregnancy end in the past year are killed at a rate 16% higher than are women who are not pregnant...

...Black women in the United States who are pregnant or were recently pregnant have up to nearly three-fold higher risk of dying by homicide than those who are not pregnant — the highest increase reported among any racial or ethnic group...

...Black women who are pregnant or were recently pregnant die of pregnancy-related causes 2.5 times as often as non-Hispanic white women...

...young women between the ages of 10 and 24 are at higher risk of homicide while pregnant than are those who are older...

References
Wallace, M., Gillispie-Bell, V., Cruz, K., Davis, K. & Vilda, D. Obstet. Gynecol. 138, 762–769 (2021).

Kivisto, A. J., Mills, S. & Eastwood, L. S. J. Interpers. Violence https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260521990831 (2021).

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03392-8

Thank you very much for this information. I will have to think about how to disseminate it. Sadly, other than the abortion pills, is there any way to do something — right now — help women in need of care.

Vote in midterms! Let your state and fed reps know how complex this issue is for real people in the real world...

>132 krazy4katz: I posted this in another group

https://www.librarything.com/topic/341655#7869517

>133 margd: Definitely voting!

>134 2wonderY: Thank you! k4k

Fall of Roe will have immediate economic ramifications, experts say
Shawna Chen | 24 June 2022

...The landmark Turnaway Study found that women who have to carry an unwanted pregnancy were four times as likely to struggle with poverty years later.

...In an amicus brief submitted to the Supreme Court last year, 154 economists wrote that there is "a substantial body of well developed and credible research that shows that abortion legalization and access in the United States has had — and continues to have — a significant effect on birth rates as well as broad downstream social and economic effects, including on women’s educational attainment and job opportunities."...

https://www.axios.com/2022/06/25/roe-abortion-economy-impact

I have multiple health issues and would most likely have postpartum depression or health issues during pregnancy if I make it that far. Abortion saves lives of people like me who are at high risk for miscarriage or other health risks from pregnancy

Abortion can be medically necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman

CLAIM “Abortion is never medically necessary”
VERDICT Inaccurate
SOURCE: Kendra Kolb, Live Action, 27 Jun. 2022

DETAILS
Factually inaccurate: Abortion can be medically necessary to save a pregnant woman’s life. The video cited preterm delivery as an alternative to abortion, but didn’t explain to viewers that this is only an option if the gestational age of the fetus is advanced enough for it to survive outside of the mother’s body.

Cherry-picking: While the treatment for an ectopic pregnancy and cancer treatment aren’t considered abortions, the video didn’t mention other life-threatening conditions—such as bleeding due to placenta previa or ruptured membranes with infection—in which terminating the pregnancy via an abortion can be required to save the mother’s life.

KEY TAKE AWAY
Women, like Savita Halappanavar, have died when they weren’t able to obtain an abortion after developing pregnancy-related complications. Therefore, abortion can be medically necessary to save a pregnant woman’s life. A preterm delivery can be performed if the gestational age of the fetus is advanced enough for it to survive outside of the mother’s body (past 20 weeks). However, life-threatening conditions can develop before 20 weeks as well. In cases where terminating a pregnancy is required to save a woman’s life and the fetus isn’t viable, an abortion can become necessary to save the woman’s life...

https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/abortion-can-be-medically-necessary-to-sa...

I am confused about the ectopic pregnancy issue. I thought those were always removed because the fetus can’t survive anyway. I didn’t think there was any way to save those.

>139 krazy4katz: It's extremely rare to save an ectopic pregancy. In at least one case (ever!), a mother and (one of her multiple?) fetus(es) survived the surgeries that were necessary. But typically, the fetal growth cannot become viable and endangers the life of the pregnant person. Deliberate termination-- that is, abortion-- is almost always recommended upon diagnosis.

https://www.verywellfamily.com/can-an-ectopic-pregnancy-be-saved-2371464

While it's good to point out that the so-called "pro-lifers" who kill women and doctors for sport and don't give a damn about the literally millions of fetuses and former fetuses whose lives will end prematurely due to the ongoing global climate catastrophe are a bunch of lying liars who lie, I don't see a lot of point in zooming in on the medical-necessity situation. Yes, the so-called pro-lifers who are liars have passed laws which would require the murder of women who are unlucky enough to experience a serious complication in their pregnancy, but if we spend our time on that case, we lose sight of the real issue, which is that no person, no matter how fetal, has the right to occupy your body. It doesn't matter if they're a famous violinist or just some random clump of cells, you as a human being have the right to bodily autonomy, period, end of discussion.

We need to keep that front and center, we can't allow the Misogynists And Gynophobes of America to make this a discussion about ectopic edge cases. Yes, a woman whose life is threatened by a pregnancy has a right to terminate that pregnancy, because every woman who is pregnant has a right to terminate that pregnancy, period.

My concern here is simple: rhetorically speaking, if we allow the MAGAs to push this discussion into the "threatened mother" corner, then we have conceded their central claim, which is that women are not human beings with rights to determine their own fate. It seems to me a mistake to retreat from the simple premise that all women are human beings, and that all human beings have the right to their own bodies.

>140 aspirit: Thank you. That is what I thought. It is extremely distressing to think that standard medical procedures would be changed for ectopic pregnancies.

>141 kiparsky: end of discussion

That's all well and good, but as soon as you say "end of discussion", you are significantly reducing your avenues to resolve the problem. It's like all the governments across the world who have vowed, "we'll never negotiate with terrorists" before eventually, er, negotiating with terrorists. It's always worth leaving the door open to discussion with your opponents.

>143 John5918: I appreciate your point, but I'm not sure what sort of leeway there is for disagreement on this. I mean, either people are human beings and that means something, or they're not and that doesn't.

And in reality, there is nobody who does not believe in the inherent right to bodily autonomy, at least for themselves and people near them. If I suggest that because some random person needs a kidney, and since you've got one spare I'm going to take it off you and give it to them, you'd find that a horrible suggestion. If I suggested that instead you could pick any of your friends (assuming transplant compatibility etc), you'd still be horrified - and I'm going to claim that this is true for anyone, even the (so-called) "pro-lifer".

Why is this horrifying? Because we believe that you, as a human being, have a right to make decisions about the body you live in, and that other people do not have the right to impose those decisions on you, regardless of the implications for society.

So, I'll compromise this far: anyone who's willing to put their body where their mouth is and sign up for a compulsory organ draft, I'll agree that the discussion is open. But if there is nobody willing to give up their own claims to bodily autonomy, then clearly we all agree that we all, as human beings, have a right to bodily autonomy, and that's the end of discussion.

>141 kiparsky: I understand what you are saying and I do agree that the right to abortion is not about edge cases, but about every woman's autonomy over her body under all circumstances. But since everyone who has responded to this thread seems to agree with that, I asked about the ectopic pregnancy because I was curious and it seemed a particularly egregious intellectual abuse of medical knowledge and practice. Just one detail in the midst of many.

Best wishes,

k4k

>146 krazy4katz: Let me be clear, I don't think we should avoid talking about the concrete cases where the so-called "pro-life" policy sentences women to death for the crime of a pregnancy with complications. That's critically important, if only because it blows holes below the waterline in the claim that the misogynistic Dobbs decision is somehow "pro-life".

I just worry that I see a lot of talk about those edge cases, and I want to make sure that we're always standing up for the woman who gets an abortion just because she doesn't want to be pregnant.

Abortion rights are healthcare rights are civil rights. The more than abortive services are restricted, the more a variety of other services are restricted. This was already well understood by pro-choice activists. I just wish the "pro-lifers" against forced abortion (and sometimes even natural abortions, as if people have control over that) understood the consequences of these laws criminalizing healthcare.

A sexual assault survivor chooses sterilization so that if she is ever attacked again, she won’t be forced to give birth to a rapist’s baby. An obstetrician delays inducing a miscarriage until a woman with severe pregnancy complications seems “sick enough.” A lupus patient must stop taking medication that controls her illness because it can also cause miscarriages.

Abortion restrictions in a number of states and the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade are having profound repercussions in reproductive medicine as well as in other areas of medical care.

“For physicians and patients alike, this is a frightening and fraught time, with new, unprecedented concerns about data privacy, access to contraception, and even when to begin lifesaving care,” said Dr. Jack Resneck, president of the American Medical Association.

https://apnews.com/article/abortion-science-health-medication-lupus-e4042947e4cc...

In a study published this month in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, doctors at two Texas hospitals cited the cases of 28 women less than 23 weeks pregnant who were treated for dangerous pregnancies. The doctors noted that all of the women had recommended abortions delayed by nine days because fetal heart activity was detected. Of those, nearly 60% developed severe complications — nearly double the number of complications experienced by patients in other states who had immediate therapeutic abortions. Of eight live births among the Texas cases, seven died within hours. The eighth, born at 24 weeks, had severe complications including brain bleeding, a heart defect, lung disease and intestinal and liver problems.

The study wasn't linked in the AP article. Someone with a medical background might find it within https://www.ajog.org/.

>148 aspirit: The crazy thing is: what is meant by fetal heart beat? The cells begin to beat before a heart is formed. You can take those individual cells, put them in a petri dish with enough fluid, salt and nutrients and they will still contract like that!

I do not know enough about reproductive biology to know when there is an actual heart, but you can pick up the random contractions of those cells at 6 weeks I think, WAY before there is a heart. So it is not necessarily a heart beating. People do not understand...

So here's a thought: if a woman's life is threatened by a mugger, the right-wingers say she's got the right to kill that mugger. They call it "stand your ground": if you think they're threatening your life, you have no duty to retreat, you can just drop them where they stand.

Okay, so if they believe that a woman has the right to kill a person who is - or even may be threatening their life, and they believe that abortion is killing a fetus, and they believe that a fetus is a person, then surely we've got the problem settled, don't we? Women, stand your ground!

>149 krazy4katz:

Rs: what's a Petri dish?

>151 margd: (May I answer?)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petri_dish

The experiments with heart cells look like this when magnified...
https://youtube.com/watch?v=SfxCJji_RHo

The pulsing cells in the video were originally human skin cells. Just like what our bodies regularly make through the day!

Popular Mechanics isn't clear about what tools were used in that specific "body-on-a-chip" project. A Petri dish is not the only option when cultivating cells in the lab, but as biologists are very familiar with it, that is what's likely holding the medium that makes up the cells' "environment".

Simply, a Petri dish a small plastic dish with a matching lid used for growing and storing (tiny) stuff such as viruses, bacteria, yeasts... and cells for disease studies.

Thank you, >152 aspirit:. Interesting videos.

>152 aspirit: Great explanation! And video! I actually am familiar with Petri dishes, but suspect the Rs writing legislation and the yingyangs cheering them on are not... Nor embryology, in particular development of the heart. Lack of knowledge doesn't stop them from legislating, though..

>154 margd: You are right about that. Ignorance does not make these people shy.