Gilead Is Real: The War On Abortion And Women's Rights 2

[GreyhoundFan]

John Oliver had a great segment on this topic:

 

[Ozlsn]

This came as a response to a thread about having a miscarriage in Texas:

Spoiler

 

They stop being human and just become uteri is a chilling sentence.

[SPHASH]

Abortion is more humane than this

https://www.kare11.com/article/news/crime/murder-charges-filed-2003-death-infant-found-mississippi-river/89-2ac8361f-5fe5-464c-9ab0-3ac01643413c

RED WING, Minn. — Describing it as a mystery that has pulled at the hearts of law enforcement and community residents for decades, Goodhue County Sheriff Marty Kelly announced charges have been filed against a woman who has been linked to two children who were found dead in the Mississippi River in 1999 and 2003. 

Authorities say 50-year-old Jennifer Matter is charged with two counts of second-degree murder in the death of a baby boy pulled from the river in 2003. Goodhue County Attorney Stephen O'Keefe says additional charges are pending as prosecutors finalize the case of a newborn girl found in the Mississippi River nearly four years earlier. 

[fraurosena]

Oh, ffs, Susan! Calling the cops for a message you don't like chalked on your sidewalk is a massive waste of police resources, and you should get cited for it.

 

[Ozlsn]

It's also quite a prettily lettered and non-threatening message!! Like how would she cope if someone wrote "SUSAN GROW A SPINE YOU INCOMPETENT FOOL, GET OFF THE FENCE AND OUT OF PUBLIC LIFE!!" or worse?!

[GreyhoundFan]

This is a good and sobering read:

 

Continued under spoiler:

Spoiler

 

Her last line sums up how I'm feeling.

[Cartmann99]

Unrolled version is here.

[AlmostSavedAtTacoBell]

I can’t believe I am about to post it to total strangers and I am not seeking sympathy but I need to say it and I somehow know I can trust you all.

She was very much wanted and very much loved. She defied the predictions of so many doctors who had told me I would likely never get pregnant without serious medical intervention and even so, would probably never carry to term. There she was, our little bean with a bright beating heart on that screen.

Until at ten weeks I knew something was wrong. Everyone kept saying it was okay because I wasn’t bleeding but just as I knew long before I missed a period she was growing in me, I knew she was gone. When we went for our regular twelve week checkup, the nurse couldn’t find her heartbeat. I knew. She tried so hard while holding my hand. She finally said she would get the doctor- not my regular, wonderful, amazing doctor but the partner who I had never met but I was scheduled to meet in case she had to step in should I go into labor and my own beloved doctor be unavailable. She didn’t say a word as she picked up the Doppler and searched for my baby’s heartbeat. After a few minutes, she turned to the sweet nurse and said, “No heartbeat. Put her in Sono 2.”

To this day I am grateful for the kindness of our nurse. She tried to reassure us but I could read her face. She knew. She brought us into the sonogram room, told me what would happen, and held my hand as the doctor came in to start the process. The doctor turned the screen away and without warning thrust the sonogram wand into me. She moved it around, poking and prodding without care for my pain. The nurse held my hand and gently wiped my tears. Eventually I heard a distant voice say, “This baby is dead and died two weeks ago. Schedule a D&C.” 

The wand was removed and I started to sob. The nurse held me tight and just kept whispering some words of comfort. I cannot recall what she said but I do know whatever she said was meant to calm me. She handed me a box of Kleenex both for my face and my vulva/vagina which was coated in gel from the sonogram.  She left so I could clean up in private and get dressed.

A few minutes later the doctor returned. She pulled down some charts and discussed what she should see, what she saw, and that I was at very serious risk of hemorrhaging at any time so a D&C needed to be scheduled BUT their practice was to wait one week to be sure there was no heartbeat. I was to schedule an appointment with her in one week and … here I stopped listening because I had heard there was a chance of a heartbeat.

At the front desk, I waited behind a giddy couple who were clearly close to having their baby. I waited for my turn. The scheduling receptionist was very kind. She started to schedule me with the same doctor. I said, “She will never touch me again. Ever. Schedule me with Dr. ____” naming my regular doctor. Without missing a beat, she honored my request. Throughout the treatment of that baby as well as my Taquitos, my request was scrupulously honored. That doctor never came near me.

One week later, my trusted doctor came into the sonogram room and hugged me tightly before we began. Then the dreaded news was delivered after a gentle but thorough sonogram took care place. I was scheduled for a D&C the next day.

Right before I was to go into the O/R, I tried to refuse the surgery. In my mind and thanks to years of Catholic guilt and “pro-life” propaganda, I was killing my baby. I was having an abortion.  I was consigned to Hell. I burst into tears and said I would not go through with it. Wonderful nurses and the anesthesiologist all talked to me in the most gentle, calming manner. All of them assured me my baby had already died and if I did not go through with the procedure I could die. Nothing they said mattered. I was ready to die with her.

My OB came out. This wonderful human took both my hands in those hands ready for surgery and with tearful eyes, said with absolute sincerity that seeing me lose my baby was heartbreaking because he knew how badly I wanted to have children whether born from me or adopted and he knew how I had spent years having doctors tell me I would likely never get pregnant only to get this glimmer of hope then have it end in heartache but that he couldn’t handle seeing me die because I refused the surgery that I needed to have and he knew Taco Grande would never get past losing me. Well damn. Taco Grande was sobbing and my doctor was crying and all I could do was revert to my smartass self. I told my doctor that he needed to get his shit together because if he screwed up my surgery I was going to sue his rich ass for everything he was worth.

Every year I quietly mark the day I was told she was gone; the day of the surgery; and her due date. She has a name and as I believe in Heaven, I know I will be with her some day. 

If you have stayed with me, you have probably figured out my point. I love her. Love as in current tense. She has a name and I not only deeply grieved her, but I mark her short time here on significant dates. But if certain states are able to pass their laws as drafted, my first and much wanted pregnancy would likely have been my last and very likely would have resulted in at best me becoming very ill and/or hemorrhaging or at worst dying. The D&C i very reluctantly accepted probably saved my life but without a doubt saved my reproductive system for the future Taquitos, who are thriving and contributing well to our world. I know I am preaching to the choir, but I am a voice among many who was inadvertently saved by Roe v. Wade. Thanks for letting me post my personal story. 

[Cartmann99]

Overturning Roe could have major repercussions for IVF treatments, fertility experts warn

Quote

(CNN)News that the Supreme Court is on the cusp of overturning Roe v. Wade is sounding alarms for an unexpected part of the population: people looking to get pregnant and the doctors who are helping them.

The conservative justices, according to a draft majority opinion disclosed last week, are preparing to give states the full power to determine abortion policies within their borders. Experts say that could open up the legal terrain for states to interfere with the fertility process known as in vitro fertilization, in which a sperm fertilizes an egg outside the body.

In interviews with CNN, doctors who work in the fertility field, and academics who study the legal landscape around it, say there is grave uncertainty -- both about how abortion laws already on the books will be interpreted and about how lawmakers and local prosecutors may seek to push the envelope, freed from the precedents that have effectively shielded the fertility process from government meddling. That lack of clarity, it is feared, will affect the treatments doctors are willing to offer IVF patients and the decisions people will have to make about how to pursue growing their families.

The anxiety was evident in an urgent bulletin from the American Society for Reproductive Medicine sent hours after the draft opinion was published, warning that "measures designed to restrict abortion could end up also curtailing access to the family building treatments upon which our infertility patients rely to build their families," society President Dr. Marcelle Cedars wrote.

There are multiple stages of the fertility process that -- without the Supreme Court's current legal protections for abortion rights, which have been in place for 49 years-- could be vulnerable to government interference, according to Seema Mohapatra, a law professor at SMU Dedman School of Law who specializes in assisted reproduction.

"It really does have these practical effects where, because of the lack of protection of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, you actually might not be able to have this wanted child that you've been paying all this money and going through this physical process in order to have," she said.

About 2 in every 100 children born in the US are conceived through IVF, according to data published by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

"We are dangling in the wind right now," one Midwestern reproductive endocrinologist told CNN about the uncertainty looming. The doctor spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of their practice and the uncertain future of procedures like IVF in their state.

A focus of the concern is how some states with anti-abortion trigger laws, like Tennessee, Arkansas and Kentucky, already define embryos as unborn children at the moment of fertilization -- a stance that may provide a starting point for legislators to interfere with the IVF process.

"States have already taken the liberty of having these expansive definitions. They just couldn't really enforce them the way they wanted to because Roe and Casey stood in the way," Rutgers Law School Dean and professor Kimberly Mutcherson said, referring to the 1973 and 1992 Supreme Court abortion precedents. But if Roe and Casey are overturned, Mutcherson said, that would effectively be the Supreme Court saying: "Do what you want to do, states!"

"And that's a pretty wild place to be in," she said.

In Louisiana, legislators are already moving in a bold direction. Lawmakers advanced a bill last week that would criminalize abortion in the state and grant constitutional rights to "all unborn children from the moment of fertilization." Notably, that bill would remove language in current Louisiana law that refers to the "implantation" of the fertilized egg before it is considered a person.

"A bill like the one that's proposed in Louisiana would prohibit IVF in that state, and that's something we're extremely worried about," Dr. Natalie Crawford of FORA Fertility in Austin, Texas, told CNN. "We don't think people understand the repercussions from some of these proposed bills."

When an individual or couple undergoes the IVF process, the work begins in a lab, where a sperm fertilizes an egg after weeks of preparation. The goal is to ultimately transfer a healthy embryo into a person's uterus. But first, the embryo must grow to blastocyst stage, which typically occurs between five and seven days after fertilization.

"It's a process of conception," the Midwestern doctor said. "Not a moment."

IVF clinics typically use two people's genetic material to create multiple embryos because they don't know which ones will grow to the right stage or which ones will result in a successful pregnancy.

"The goal is generally to make as many embryos as possible," the doctor explained. "That's because, on average, half of all embryos are chromosomally abnormal." These abnormalities can result in conditions like Down syndrome and trisomy 18 or may prevent the embryo from becoming a healthy pregnancy. Clinics and/or clients typically choose to discard them rather than implant them.

That creation of multiple embryos is where IVF clinics see potential legal trouble on the horizon. If a state defines an unborn child as existing at the moment of fertilization, clinics could violate the law by discarding chromosomally abnormal embryos or by terminating a pregnancy where multiple embryos have been implanted.

"The chances of a successful IVF cycle aren't that high, so doctors will often implant multiple embryos to maximize the odds at least one pregnancy comes to term," said Mary Ziegler, a visiting Harvard Law professor who writes extensively on abortion issues. "Sometimes, to maximize the chances a pregnancy comes to term, some of those pregnancies are terminated. A lot of people in the anti-abortion movement look at that and say that's abortion."

Individuals who undergo IVF may also choose to freeze unused embryos for later use, or for backup if a pregnancy is ultimately unsuccessful.

"There's always extra embryos," Mohapatra said. "You don't know if it's going to take on the first cycle."

Crawford posted a lengthy thread on Twitter highlighting how restrictive abortion laws in several states could be detrimental to IVF, explaining that the process to "fertilize eggs, freeze embryos, test embryos, and transfer/discard embryos ... is essential for safe, accessible and effective IVF care." Crawford continued, "The fear is that when Roe is overturned states will then individually decide their stance on this matter ... if life begins legally at fertilization -- then we are limited in the above technology."

'What do I tell these patients?'

There's no clear indication at this point if individual state legislatures will extend their abortion bans to explicitly apply to the IVF process. But ambiguity in how future abortion bans might be interpreted -- particularly in a legal landscape where enforcement decisions could be made by individual prosecutors -- is forcing those in the field to scrutinize what is possible.

"If I were at an IVF clinic, we would be wasting a lot of hours debating, 'What does this mean? What do we have to do? How do we protect our patients?' " asked Katie Watson, a bioethicist and lawyer who is an associate professor at Northwestern University's Feinberg School of Medicine. "So the chilling effect and the limitations on the smart practice of medicine will be significant even if it's not what legislators intended."

The Midwestern doctor who regularly sees patients battling infertility says the office phone has been ringing off the hook with people concerned about what a post-Roe world would mean for their reproductive journeys.

"Receptionists have asked me, 'What do I tell these patients?' " the doctor said, adding that it's been hard to give a definitive answer.

Part of the unknown is fueled by the discretion that individual prosecutors will have in enforcing abortion law.

"All it takes in any event is a rogue prosecutor who wants to be aggressive in his or her interpretation of the law, and that could certainly create issues for those seeking IVF," Kim Clark, senior attorney for Reproductive Rights, Health and Justice at the progressive advocacy organization Legal Voice.

Another complicating factor is what role civil enforcement measures -- like the Texas six-week ban, allowing individual citizens to file lawsuits against anyone who facilitates a procedure prohibited by the ban -- will play in the post-Roe world.

"When you have these citizen enforcement statutes, suddenly any random neighbor who says a blastocyst is a [person] can sue that clinic, and that's where the chilling is phenomenal," Watson said.

One thing is clear, however. If Roe is erased, an array of measures targeting IVF could "much more easily move forward," according to Judith Daar, the dean at Northern Kentucky University-Salmon P. Chase College of Law, who formerly chaired the ethics committee for the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

"The reversal of Roe could motivate and certainly pave the way for new legislation that could specifically target IVF," she said, while suggesting that states could, for instance, eventually ban the genetic testing that is now regularly performed on embryos to spot abnormalities before they're implanted.

Mutcherson said fertility patients may seek to take proactive action, like move their embryos out of states expected to be hostile to abortion.

"The question really now is are there things that people should be doing to protect themselves before laws start to change?" Mutcherson said.

 

[Audrey2]

This is actually an argument I've made with my  anti-abortion friend. He doesn't seem to have a good answer for it.

[Cartmann99]

In Texas, abortion laws inhibit care for miscarriages

Quote

As the Supreme Court appears poised to return abortion regulation to the states, recent experience in Texas illustrates that medical care for miscarriages and dangerous ectopic pregnancies would also be threatened if restrictions become more widespread.

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.

"The challenge is that the treatment for an abortion and the treatment for a miscarriage are exactly the same," said Dr. Sarah Prager, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Washington in Seattle and an expert in early pregnancy loss.

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.

"The pharmacy has said, 'We don't know whether or not you might be using this medication for the purposes of abortion,'" she said.

Thaxton, who supervises the obstetrics-gynecology residents who have seen these patients, said 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?

Sometimes patients don't realize that they have lost the pregnancy until they come in for a checkup and no cardiac activity can be detected, said Dr. Emily Briggs, a family physician who delivers babies in New Braunfels, Texas. At that point, the patient can opt to wait until the bleeding starts and the pregnancy tissue is naturally released, Briggs said.

For some, that's too difficult, given the emotions surrounding the pregnancy loss, she said. Instead, the patient may choose medication or a surgical evacuation procedure, which Briggs said may prove necessary anyway to avoid a patient becoming septic if some of the tissue remains in the uterus.

But now in Texas, the new laws are creating uncertainties that may deter some doctors and other providers from offering optimal miscarriage treatment.

These situations can create significant moral distress for patients and providers, said Bryn Esplin, a bioethicist and assistant professor of medical education at the University of North Texas Health Science Center in Fort Worth. "Any law that creates a hesitancy for physicians to uphold the standard of care for a patient has a cascade of harmful effects both for the patient but also for everyone else," said Esplin.

It's an emotional and legal dilemma that potentially faces not just obstetricians and midwives, but also family physicians, emergency physicians, pharmacists, and anyone else who might become involved with pregnancy care. And Ogburn, who noted that he was speaking personally and not for the medical school, worries that fears about the Texas laws have already delayed care.

"I wouldn't say this is true for our practice," he 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."

John Seago, legislative director for Texas Right to Life, described this type of hesitation as "an awful misunderstanding of the law." Even before the passage of the two bills, 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," he 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.

"It is a pro-life position to allow physicians to make those life-and-death decisions," Seago said. "And that may mean in certain circumstances protecting the mother in this situation and the child passing away."

But interpretation of the laws is still causing challenges to care. At least several OB-GYNs in the Austin area received a letter from a pharmacy in late 2021 saying it would no longer fill the drug methotrexate in the case of ectopic pregnancy, citing the recent Texas laws, said Dr. Charlie Brown, an Austin-based obstetrician-gynecologist who provided a copy to KHN. Methotrexate also is listed in the Texas law passed last year.

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.

"Ectopic pregnancies can kill people," said Brown, a district chair for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, representing Texas.

Tom Mayo, a professor of law at Southern Methodist University's Dedman School of Law in Dallas, understands why some in Texas' pharmacy community might be nervous. "The penalties are quite draconian," he said, noting that someone could be convicted of a felony.

However, Mayo said that his reading of the law allows for the use of methotrexate to treat an ectopic pregnancy. In addition, he said, other Texas laws and the Roe v. Wade decision provide an exception to permit abortion if a pregnant person's life is in danger.

Since the Texas laws include a stipulation that there must be intent to induce an abortion, Mayo said that he'd advise physicians and other clinicians to closely document the rationale for medical care, whether it's to treat a miscarriage or an ectopic pregnancy.

But Prager believes that the laws in Texas — and perhaps elsewhere soon — could boost physicians' vulnerability to medical malpractice lawsuits. Consider the patient whose miscarriage care is delayed and develops a serious infection and other complications, Prager said. "And they decide to sue for malpractice," she said. "They can absolutely do that."

Texas providers are still adjusting to other ripple effects that affect patient care. Dr. Jennifer Liedtke, a family physician in Sweetwater, Texas, who delivers about 175 babies annually, no longer sends misoprostol prescriptions to the local Walmart. Since the new laws took effect, Liedtke said, the pharmacist a handful of times declined to provide the medication, citing the new law — despite Liedtke writing the prescription to treat a miscarriage. Walmart officials did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Since pharmacists rotate through that Walmart, Liedtke decided to send those prescriptions to other pharmacies rather than attempt to sort out the misunderstanding anew each time.

"It's hard to form a relationship to say, 'Hey look, I'm not using this for an elective abortion,'" she said. "'I'm just using this because this is not a viable pregnancy.'"

 

[SPHASH]

And Goddamn you to hell Joe Manchin you fucking DINO!

19 hours ago, AlmostSavedAtTacoBell said:

I can’t believe I am about to post it to total strangers and I am not seeking sympathy but I need to say it and I somehow know I can trust you all.

She was very much wanted and very much loved. She defied the predictions of so many doctors who had told me I would likely never get pregnant without serious medical intervention and even so, would probably never carry to term. There she was, our little bean with a bright beating heart on that screen.

Until at ten weeks I knew something was wrong. Everyone kept saying it was okay because I wasn’t bleeding but just as I knew long before I missed a period she was growing in me, I knew she was gone. When we went for our regular twelve week checkup, the nurse couldn’t find her heartbeat. I knew. She tried so hard while holding my hand. She finally said she would get the doctor- not my regular, wonderful, amazing doctor but the partner who I had never met but I was scheduled to meet in case she had to step in should I go into labor and my own beloved doctor be unavailable. She didn’t say a word as she picked up the Doppler and searched for my baby’s heartbeat. After a few minutes, she turned to the sweet nurse and said, “No heartbeat. Put her in Sono 2.”

To this day I am grateful for the kindness of our nurse. She tried to reassure us but I could read her face. She knew. She brought us into the sonogram room, told me what would happen, and held my hand as the doctor came in to start the process. The doctor turned the screen away and without warning thrust the sonogram wand into me. She moved it around, poking and prodding without care for my pain. The nurse held my hand and gently wiped my tears. Eventually I heard a distant voice say, “This baby is dead and died two weeks ago. Schedule a D&C.” 

The wand was removed and I started to sob. The nurse held me tight and just kept whispering some words of comfort. I cannot recall what she said but I do know whatever she said was meant to calm me. She handed me a box of Kleenex both for my face and my vulva/vagina which was coated in gel from the sonogram.  She left so I could clean up in private and get dressed.

A few minutes later the doctor returned. She pulled down some charts and discussed what she should see, what she saw, and that I was at very serious risk of hemorrhaging at any time so a D&C needed to be scheduled BUT their practice was to wait one week to be sure there was no heartbeat. I was to schedule an appointment with her in one week and … here I stopped listening because I had heard there was a chance of a heartbeat.

At the front desk, I waited behind a giddy couple who were clearly close to having their baby. I waited for my turn. The scheduling receptionist was very kind. She started to schedule me with the same doctor. I said, “She will never touch me again. Ever. Schedule me with Dr. ____” naming my regular doctor. Without missing a beat, she honored my request. Throughout the treatment of that baby as well as my Taquitos, my request was scrupulously honored. That doctor never came near me.

One week later, my trusted doctor came into the sonogram room and hugged me tightly before we began. Then the dreaded news was delivered after a gentle but thorough sonogram took care place. I was scheduled for a D&C the next day.

Right before I was to go into the O/R, I tried to refuse the surgery. In my mind and thanks to years of Catholic guilt and “pro-life” propaganda, I was killing my baby. I was having an abortion.  I was consigned to Hell. I burst into tears and said I would not go through with it. Wonderful nurses and the anesthesiologist all talked to me in the most gentle, calming manner. All of them assured me my baby had already died and if I did not go through with the procedure I could die. Nothing they said mattered. I was ready to die with her.

My OB came out. This wonderful human took both my hands in those hands ready for surgery and with tearful eyes, said with absolute sincerity that seeing me lose my baby was heartbreaking because he knew how badly I wanted to have children whether born from me or adopted and he knew how I had spent years having doctors tell me I would likely never get pregnant only to get this glimmer of hope then have it end in heartache but that he couldn’t handle seeing me die because I refused the surgery that I needed to have and he knew Taco Grande would never get past losing me. Well damn. Taco Grande was sobbing and my doctor was crying and all I could do was revert to my smartass self. I told my doctor that he needed to get his shit together because if he screwed up my surgery I was going to sue his rich ass for everything he was worth.

Every year I quietly mark the day I was told she was gone; the day of the surgery; and her due date. She has a name and as I believe in Heaven, I know I will be with her some day. 

If you have stayed with me, you have probably figured out my point. I love her. Love as in current tense. She has a name and I not only deeply grieved her, but I mark her short time here on significant dates. But if certain states are able to pass their laws as drafted, my first and much wanted pregnancy would likely have been my last and very likely would have resulted in at best me becoming very ill and/or hemorrhaging or at worst dying. The D&C i very reluctantly accepted probably saved my life but without a doubt saved my reproductive system for the future Taquitos, who are thriving and contributing well to our world. I know I am preaching to the choir, but I am a voice among many who was inadvertently saved by Roe v. Wade. Thanks for letting me post my personal story. 

My sympathy to you @AlmostSavedAtTacoBell

Forgive me for my ignorance, if the baby isn't living why should the D&C procedure be called an abortion.

Edited May 12, 2022 by SPHASH

[Cartmann99]

GOP leader: Republicans will 'move day one' to enact federal abortion law after Supreme Court ruling

Quote

Republican House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (LA) confirmed on Wednesday that Republicans will "move day one" to enact a federal abortion law if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade.

After Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) suggested that a federal abortion ban was possible, a reporter asked Scalise if he supported stripping women's rights nationwide.

"I hope that the ruling comes out soon and I hope it's the ruling that was leaked," Scalise replied. "But if you think about where we are, we're a party who defends life and we would celebrate a ruling that allows elected leaders to defend life and debate in open public what those laws should be in every state and in Washington."

"Clearly, we will move day one if we get the majority on the Born-Alive Act so states like New York can't murder a baby born outside the womb and call it abortion," he added.

While Scalise did not rule out a complete federal abortion ban, the Born-Alive Act would prevent physicians from terminating babies that survived abortions. According to FactCheck.org, the measure is unnecessary because it is already illegal to kill babies after birth in every state.

Former President George W. Bush signed a similarly redundant "born-alive" bill in 2003.

 

[AlmostSavedAtTacoBell]

3 hours ago, SPHASH said:

And Goddamn you to hell Joe Manchin you fucking DINO!

My sympathy to you @AlmostSavedAtTacoBell

Forgive me for my ignorance, if the baby isn't living why should the D&C procedure be called an abortion.

@SPHASH, thank you for your kind words and thank you to all who reacted so sweetly to my comment. As I mentioned, I was not looking for sympathy but I have been so broken since the leak of the SCOTUS opinion. I was scared - no, terrified, to put my experience out in the world but I am living proof that if Roe v Wade is overturned, the so-called “innocent” women (oh how I loathe that idea) would also be in the crosshairs. In my younger, far more judgmental and far less wise days, I drank the KoolAid (or Catholic Communion Wine) and while I can honestly say I never felt anything other than true sympathy for any woman who was in a position to have to make the choice to abort (and yes, I now realize that view came from a certain perspective and that some women would find my sympathy offensive and condescending) I was at the time of my miscarriage still so steeped in the rhetoric that for me, a D&C meant “abortion”.  If you actually access my medical records it will be listed as an abortion even though she was already gone before the surgery. If I ever ran for public office, I have no doubt that mark on my records would be highlighted and I would be painted as a horrid woman who carelessly and callously terminated her pregnancy without a care in the world. In reality, setting aside all the emotional trauma, the physical pain and hormonal aftermath were awful. I was already a Plan B advocate but my experience put me on the chemical abortion support train immediately. When I had my children, I didn’t mind the pain and blood because I had a beautiful human to love and who was my focus. But a womb scraped clean, my momentary dreams crashed and smashed, and being expected to show up to work and the rest of my life as though everything was the same while bleeding and broken and hormones screaming and depressed and trying moment by moment to breathe and stay alive while nobody seemed to understand that you are dying inside because you never got to hold your baby or touch her or see her or smell her sweet head or even know the color of her eyes or hair or even if she is that little curly-Q you dreamt so many nights when you were young and you have to apply the third maxi pad in an hour and should I call the doctor and what is that clump and my follow up blood tests are not normal and so I have cancer and what if this was my only baby ever and why did she die and why do I keep having these violent nightmares and ……

and I was able to justify it. She was dead. She had died. And @SPHASH, I wish I knew the answer but miscarriages are noted as “spontaneous abortions” if they are “normal” (bled out) but incomplete miscarriages like mine that require surgical intervention are medically termed “abortion” in the medical records. Women like me who decide to run for office have to rip open deep wounds in order to somehow justify what should be accepted as a personal choice whereas men can impregnate a multitude of women who abort the pregnancies and never have to answer. Taco Grande could run for office and not one question would come up about our first child. He would escape all the questions I could never avoid. Yes, I am angry and sad and furious and so much more. She was already gone, but for the rest of my life if I may have to explain why I had to undergo a procedure that I tried to reject and only accepted when wonderful, kind medical personnel rallied around me and made sure I knew they ALL understood why I was fighting the very needed surgery and why they were personally emotionally invested. It deeply disgusts and angers me that so many women will not receive the kindness I did but may get the complete opposite. I am just so furious. 

[SPHASH]

@AlmostSavedAtTacoBell that's what is troublesome to me, miscarriages are considered spontaneous abortions. They should not be.  And we are sliding down a slippery slope.  If Roe v Wade is gutted are all miscarriages and stillbirths going to be criminally investigated.  Will the woman, doctors and nurses go to jail for the miscarriage or not being able to stop it.

[Alisamer]

1 hour ago, SPHASH said:

@AlmostSavedAtTacoBell that's what is troublesome to me, miscarriages are considered spontaneous abortions. They should not be.  And we are sliding down a slippery slope.  If Roe v Wade is gutted are all miscarriages and stillbirths going to be criminally investigated.  Will the woman, doctors and nurses go to jail for the miscarriage or not being able to stop it.

But WHY shouldn't they be called what they are? The body spontaneously aborted the pregnancy, usually for an unknown reason. I think they should be called that largely to normalize the term.

So many pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion, probably a higher percentage than we even know, taking into account ones that happen so early that they are indistinguishable from a period. Abortion is medical care. Sometimes it's needed as treatment for a miscarriage. Sometimes it's needed as a treatment for an ectopic pregnancy. Sometimes it's needed to save the life of the mother. Sometimes it's needed for the mental health of the mother. Sometimes it's needed because the mother needs it, and it's nobody's business why they need it. In rare occasions it's needed because the fetus is incompatible with life, and will suffer horrifically during what little life it has. 

It's simply a medical procedure, either through medication or surgery, that many, many people need for various reasons. I can see why calling it "miscarriage" in cases where it is spontaneous is a good idea for people in Texas and other areas right now, where they might risk prison if someone mistakes it for an "elective" abortion instead... but generally? That's the kind of splitting hairs that allows people to be "anti-abortion" for other people while still wanting that medical care for themselves, when they need it.

I have a co-worker who had an ectopic pregnancy. The treatment for that is abortion. Michelle Duggar had miscarriages. The treatment for at least one of those was, technically, abortion. My aunt had 11 miscarriages before she had her son, and hemorhhaged with several of them, requiring treatment. Technically, abortion. Thank goodness it was in the mid-late 80's, or who knows what sort of scrutiny she might have had to endure. Jill Rodrigues. Joy-Anna Duggar whatever (Forsyth?). Jill Dillard. Lauren Duggar. Many, if not most, fundies have had miscarriages - spontaneous abortions - and many of them would have gone for medical treatment. Using what drugs? The ones that cause abortion. Having what surgery? The same as an abortion. 

I understand that emotionally, miscarriage is a much easier term. Spontaneous abortions can be heart-wrenching, and that term is so politically charged that it can make things more frightening or hurtful than they might otherwise be. I appreciate @AlmostSavedAtTacoBell sharing her story (hugs to you)! Losing a wanted child is hard, hurtful, and sad.

But in order for people to understand and really grok that abortion is simply a necessary medical procedure, they need to understand better what it is in reality. It's something many, many, many people have and need. It's life-saving. And banning a certain type of it is going to make getting care for the "right" kind of abortion much more fraught and difficult. People will be charged with crimes. Pregnant people will die. Probably some fetuses who might have been saved might die, also, if people are afraid to seek the health care they need. 

So I say call it what it is. Use the term abortion everywhere it applies. It's gonna hurt to do that, probably, but it also might in the long run save some lives. 

[Xan]

I am very sympathetic to those who have trouble getting pregnant.  My younger sister and a daughter both went through extensive fertility treatments to have their much-wanted children.  I can't imagine the hoops people will have to go though now if those fertilized eggs are counted as people.

My older sister and I, on the other hand, were very fertile.  Sometimes, I look at Jill Rod and Michelle Duggar and realize that could have been me if I had different beliefs (and if I had no common sense at all).  Older sister got pregnant using an IUD.  I became accidentally pregnant using birth control pills.  Yes, I took them every day but there is a failure rate.  We already had two small children.  Since we were struggling financially, I had recently gone back to work when we discovered that our birth control failed.  That's when Mr. Xan informed me that he, in order to save money, hadn't taken the health insurance coverage for maternity care.  We might have still managed but I developed hyperemesis gravidarum and starting throwing up everything that I tried to eat or drink.  The doctor wanted to hospitalize me.

Mr. Xan and I sat and talked.  As much as I would have liked to continue the pregnancy (since we weren't sure our family was yet complete) we understood our options.  If I continued, I'd be hospitalized and we couldn't pay the bill.  We might lose our home.  And we didn't know if there might be something going on in the pregnancy causing the hyperemesis.  I had an abortion.

I'm sort of anonymous here so I'm telling this but few people in real life know about it.  My family would have condemned me.  I wasn't sure that my friends would even understand.  We told people that I miscarried.  This is the reality of abortions.  Sometimes it's the life or health of the mother.  Sometimes it's the well-being of the family.  Sometimes it is for your own private reasons.  Everyone is entitled to make their own decisions about how many children they have.  But if that happened today and Roe had already been overturned, I'd have been hospitalized and probably lost my job.  I doubt we would have been able to keep our house and I don't know how long we would have been in debt.  And I'm annoyed as hell that anyone would think they have a right to decide what someone else does with their uterus.

Edited May 12, 2022 by Xan

[AlmostSavedAtTacoBell]

@SPHASH, @Alisamer, and @Xan (oh my dear, many hugs and thank you for trusting us)- all of your comments are so on point.  Every woman deserves privacy and when a pregnancy does not end in a live birth (whether by choice or not) it is strictly up to the woman to decide who should know and what information is given.  It's no secret that I have no love for Sarah Palin, but I was thoroughly disgusted when someone went through her medical records and released information regarding an abortion.  She said it was a miscarriage and, has already been noted that may well have been the case but frankly, even though if it was a chosen termination it would make her a raging hypocrite, it is absolutely horrible that her very private information was released.  I loathe that woman but I will go to the mat when it comes to her right to privacy on that issue and whomever was responsible for releasing that information in an attempt to dirty up her anti-abortion stance showed himself or herself to be a raging hypocrite as well because that person did to her exactly what we are all fighting so hard against.  It angers and deeply upsets me that @Xan would be condemned by her family for making a decision that was very difficult but was right for her family.  I told my story because I had been raised with a very anti-abortion family and as I said, in my younger days I too had narrow views.  As a result I nearly put my own health and even life at serious risk even though I knew there was no way she was going to be born because "abortion" was such an ugly, horrible word in my mind.  But in the end, I made the right choice.  And you know what?  It's really not at all right that because people knew she was already gone before my D&C I got a "pass" and no condemnation but @Xan, whose termination was also because of health issues, felt she had to tell people it was a spontaneous abortion.  I mentioned earlier that if I ever ran for office and someone did to me what was done to Sarah Palin, I would, unlike a man, have to explain but I would be able to explain and I know people (except maybe the really far right extremists but I think even they would understand) would accept it and probably even sympathize.  But @Xan and other women have to fear others finding out about their decisions and while I absolutely stand by my belief that it is nobody's damn business, women also shouldn't have to live in fear that a decision made for whatever reason to end a pregnancy doesn't stay a secret.  Enough with the fucking shaming and blaming.  

[Cartmann99]

 

[Howl]

Jim Rigby on "Actually, anti-choice arguments owe almost nothing to Jesus and almost everything to Aristotle and Aquinas."

Spoiler

As a Christian minister, the hardest thing for me about talking to anti-choice Christians is that they usually think their arguments are coming from Jesus.

Actually, anti-choice arguments owe almost nothing to Jesus and almost everything to Aristotle and Aquinas. It was Thomas Aquinas, not Jesus, who thought calling a fertilized egg a baby makes it so.

One can almost say the modern mind was born over and against the common assumption in Greek philosophy that reality perfectly resembles human language. The idea that nature can be neatly divided into nouns and verbs should have died with the birth of science, but simplistic superstition still grows like a toadstool wherever critical thought is disallowed.

It would be so much easier if biology DID break down into the nouns and verbs of Aristotelian logic. Unfortunately, since Darwin, we have known that life is a continuum. The ambiguity of nature can put pregnant people in very difficult places. Simple religious beliefs in no way resemble the complicated choices some people face.

A modern mind also realizes that our animal bodies can trump even our most sincere efforts at objectivity. It is important to note that churches opposing abortion almost always oppose women’s ordination as well. Patriarchal culture, in and out of scripture, is the cradle of the anti-abortion movement. It was Aquinas who believed personhood is established at conception, not Jesus or Moses. And we should never forget that Aquinas ALSO believed women are misbegotten men. Such misogyny has no place in a question of reproductive justice.

Since Galileo, only the most fanatical of Christians get their astronomy from the bible. It isn’t any less fanatical to get our ideas of reproductive science from the bible, and it is probably even more harmful.

It is time for churches who do not wish to undermine democracy to publicly renounce Christian Nationalism. And, it is time for churches who do not view women as breeding stock for the patriarchy to shout it from the rooftops.

 

[Cartmann99]

Oklahoma's new abortion law could be undermined, governor admits

Quote

Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt on Sunday acknowledged concerns that his state’s strict new law on abortion could be circumvented on tribal lands within the state.

“That’s something that a lot of Oklahomans, we’ve heard the rumblings as well,” Stitt, a Republican, told host Shannon Bream on “Fox News Sunday.” Earlier this month, Stitt signed one of the nation’s strictest laws on abortion.

Stitt was discussing that new law in the context of a 2020 Supreme Court ruling, McGirt v. Oklahoma, that held that crimes committed on tribal lands cannot be prosecuted by state or local law enforcement, only in tribal courts or federal courts, if a Native American is involved. A significant portion of Oklahoma is tribal land.

“You know, the tribes in Oklahoma are super liberal,” he said. “They go to Washington, D.C. They talk to President [Joe] Biden at the White House; they kind of adopt those strategies. So yeah, we think that there’s a possibility that some tribes may try to set up abortion on demand. They think that you can be 1/1,000th tribal member and not have to follow the state law. And so that’s something that we’re watching.”

Debate nationally has ratcheted up on the subject of abortion since POLITICO reported on a draft U.S. Supreme Court opinion that would overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationally. State legislatures and state courts are seen as the next battleground for many abortion battles, with some states racing to outlaw abortion and others rushing to preserve legal access to it.

Stitt insisted that nothing justified abortion.

“We believe that God has a special plan for every single life,” he said in assailing the “socialist Democrat left” on the issue.

Speaking later on the same program, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat, took the opposite viewpoint on abortion from Stitt in just about every instance.

“People face gut-wrenching decisions every day whether it’s rape or incest, they’re often having to choose between the life of the mother or child. For the government to insert itself in that conversation between a doctor and a woman, a faith leader and a woman, is simply wrong. I think we need to approach this a different way,” Polis said.

Polis in April signed into law the Reproductive Health Equity Act, designed to guarantee that abortion remained legal in Colorado.

“I think there’s a lot of common ground around reducing unwanted pregnancies, empowering women and men with birth control. And really generating a culture of responsibility about what it means to be a parent,” he said Sunday.

Since the revelation of the draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito, protesters have increasingly taken to the streets, in some case picketing at the homes of Supreme Court justices. Polis said that he doubted that protests at the homes of the justices would accomplish much.

“I certainly don’t think they’re effective in persuading judges,” he told Bream. “In fact, it might further alienate them from a particular cause.”

More from Stitt:

 

[BensAllergies]

I don’t understand how politicians signing legislature into law can speak of God at the same time. If you have personal convictions fine but how is it legal to justify your legislative actions in the public sphere by using religious beliefs?

How is this not a First Amendment issue?

[front hugs > duggs]

9 hours ago, BensAllergies said:

I don’t understand how politicians signing legislature into law can speak of God at the same time. If you have personal convictions fine but how is it legal to justify your legislative actions in the public sphere by using religious beliefs?

How is this not a First Amendment issue?

They believe it's the First Amendment that ENCOURAGES them to do this! As a Jew, I recognize that people have different beliefs in their lives and that's okay! They believe that everyone who doesn't believe what they believe is WRONG, therefore no other religion can be protected.

[WiseGirl]

John Legend speaks his mind.

https://people.com/health/john-legend-compares-overturning-roe-to-implementing-the-handmaids-tale-into-law/

Unfortunately I think he's correct about this (his quote) "'We're teetering on the brink of not being a full democracy," John Legend told The Guardian in an interview published Monday"

[fraurosena]

19 hours ago, WiseGirl said:

We're teetering on the brink of not being a full democracy," John Legend told The Guardian in an interview published Monday"

John, I've got news for you. 

You're not teetering on the edge. You've already toppeled over and are hurtling towards the dark abyss. You just haven't realized it yet.

Hopefully the US comes to this realization sooner rather than later, before it's too late to catch yourselves before you hit rock bottom.

Edited May 17, 2022 by fraurosena
I do know how to spell