@ Roe is officially dead

[karinothing]

Jul 2, 2022 8:00:50 GMT -5 wanderingback said:

Jul 2, 2022 7:48:11 GMT -5 karinothing said:

I thought this too re exceptions for rape or incest. How do prove rape when the vast majority if rapes are unreported? Society doesn't exactly believe women. Do you have to agree to prosecute? Seek immediate attention? What if it's spousal rape and the spouse denies it's rape.

How about incest?

What if the life of the woman is at risk because of domestic violence does that count?

Unfortunately the laws with exceptions have made it clear that you do have to provide a police report for rape and incest

In my state abortion for any reason can occur up to 28 weeks since last menstrual period. After that it can be for fetal anomalies or the life and well being of the pregnant person. Our department of health just clarified that life and well being can take in to account physical, mental, socioeconomic, psychological factors. It really sucks to have to prove a reason but at least in this "liberal" state things like domestic violence or mental illness would be considered a "good enough" reason to have an abortion after 28 weeks. I know not other places have those type of carve outs specified. So shitty to not be able to make your own decisions.

Ugh. Yeah I figured you would need a police report. How horrible.

[notsopicky]

TW: @/child abuse

Here we go. The patient is 10. 10 years old.
www.dispatch.com/story/news/2022/07/01/ohio-girl-10-among-patients-going-indiana-abortion/7788415001/

Ohio's Supreme Court rejected attempt to block the 6-wk ban: www.dispatch.com/story/news/politics/elections/2022/07/01/ohio-supreme-court-abortion-access/7776834001/

[sillygoosegirl]

Jul 2, 2022 7:48:11 GMT -5 karinothing said:

Jun 30, 2022 20:09:57 GMT -5 jeaniebueller said:

💯💯💯💯

My first concern was ‘who’ decides if or when the mothers life was in danger. The doctor? The hospital? The hospitals lawyer? The doctors lawyer? The medical system CEO? A judge? The insurance company? The pope? How many doctors will hesitate because they fear being charged with a felony?

The ‘mothers life’ exception as opposed to health and life is terrifying. Pregnancy alone can be life threatening.

I thought this too re exceptions for rape or incest. How do prove rape when the vast majority if rapes are unreported? Society doesn't exactly believe women. Do you have to agree to prosecute? Seek immediate attention? What if it's spousal rape and the spouse denies it's rape.

How about incest?

What if the life of the woman is at risk because of domestic violence does that count?

I feel like the way we are headed, spousal rape will be legal again soon. It hasn't been illegal for very long.

[sent]

Why are physicians not consulted when making these laws involving medical procedures.

It's a rhetorical question, I know. Lawmakers are all about following the constitution and laws and examining laws and exceptions and challenges and whatever. But these laws in particular are based on medical procedures and patients, something they know NOTHING about. Yet none of the info I've read says "after consulting with several OB/GYN doctors across the state/country, we, SCOTUS, learned that that the majority of doctors said our laws are very bad for American patients. So we are going to fix them to reflect modern medical care in 2022."

It's like wanting to live in a dream world where people in charge do things that make complete sense. Instead we get to watch them carry out this stupid power hungry garbage.

[NewOrleans]

Jul 2, 2022 9:19:34 GMT -5 notsopicky said:

TW: @/child abuse

Here we go. The patient is 10. 10 years old.
www.dispatch.com/story/news/2022/07/01/ohio-girl-10-among-patients-going-indiana-abortion/7788415001/

Ohio's Supreme Court rejected attempt to block the 6-wk ban: www.dispatch.com/story/news/politics/elections/2022/07/01/ohio-supreme-court-abortion-access/7776834001/

Well I’m sure the child is safe from drag shows.

[erbear]

My sister is an ob-gyn in Colorado. She has gotten four cases from Texas already, one of whom had an ectopic and almost died bc she had to wait four days to get to a place where she could get an abortion. Fuck these guys.

[wanderingback]

Jul 2, 2022 16:15:00 GMT -5 erbear said:

My sister is an ob-gyn in Colorado. She has gotten four cases from Texas already, one of whom had an ectopic and almost died bc she had to wait four days to get to a place where she could get an abortion. Fuck these guys.

I’m surprised your sister is just now seeing people from TX We’ve had them for awhile now, including for miscarriage and ectopic care.

[carmenere]

Jul 2, 2022 16:15:00 GMT -5 erbear said:

My sister is an ob-gyn in Colorado. She has gotten four cases from Texas already, one of whom had an ectopic and almost died bc she had to wait four days to get to a place where she could get an abortion. Fuck these guys.

What the fuck? Are doctors in Texas seriously denying removal ectopic pregnancies now? You can’t abort a non-viable pregnancy ffs

[Bad Dingo]

I saw a tweet from a former ER doctor and they said that the patient would have to be coding for it to count as necessary to save the life of the pregnant individual.

[isabel]

Jul 2, 2022 19:16:57 GMT -5 Bad Dingo said:

I saw a tweet from a former ER doctor and they said that the patient would have to be coding for it to count as necessary to save the life of the pregnant individual.

That seems "too little, too late," no?

[Deleted]

Jul 2, 2022 10:10:01 GMT -5 sent said:

Why are physicians not consulted when making these laws involving medical procedures.

It's a rhetorical question, I know. Lawmakers are all about following the constitution and laws and examining laws and exceptions and challenges and whatever. But these laws in particular are based on medical procedures and patients, something they know NOTHING about. Yet none of the info I've read says "after consulting with several OB/GYN doctors across the state/country, we, SCOTUS, learned that that the majority of doctors said our laws are very bad for American patients. So we are going to fix them to reflect modern medical care in 2022."

It's like wanting to live in a dream world where people in charge do things that make complete sense. Instead we get to watch them carry out this stupid power hungry garbage.

Republicans don’t consider abortions to be “health care”, therefore they see no need to consult the medical community.

[gretchenindisguise]

Jul 2, 2022 18:52:12 GMT -5 carmenere said:

Jul 2, 2022 16:15:00 GMT -5 erbear said:

My sister is an ob-gyn in Colorado. She has gotten four cases from Texas already, one of whom had an ectopic and almost died bc she had to wait four days to get to a place where she could get an abortion. Fuck these guys.

What the fuck? Are doctors in Texas seriously denying removal ectopic pregnancies now? You can’t abort a non-viable pregnancy ffs

Not just TX. MO as well.

Eta: and I assume others, but I’m not as connected to them.

[wanderingback]

Jul 2, 2022 18:52:12 GMT -5 carmenere said:

Jul 2, 2022 16:15:00 GMT -5 erbear said:

My sister is an ob-gyn in Colorado. She has gotten four cases from Texas already, one of whom had an ectopic and almost died bc she had to wait four days to get to a place where she could get an abortion. Fuck these guys.

What the fuck? Are doctors in Texas seriously denying removal ectopic pregnancies now? You can’t abort a non-viable pregnancy ffs

I think we really need to blame legislators and lawyers. It’s not an easy landscape for health care providers at the moment. Things are changing daily and lawyers are giving all sorts of guidance of what is allowed. I think we would all say we would do anything for patient safety, but when it comes to surgery, which happens in a hospital there can be many things out of your hands and to do surgery you need a team (anesthesia, nursing, etc). Not everyone is willing to risk the potential of a felony when the laws are written the way they are. pharmacists have also been given directives at times to not prescribe methotrexate for ectopic pregnancies. It’s really fucked up due to legislators.

The treatment for an ectopic pregnancy is an abortion as it’s considered a pregnancy (can develop to a fetus, can have cardiac activity, etc). I don’t think we should pretend something isn’t an abortion to appease legislators.

Eta: I do think we need some civil disobedience but I do understand how many healthcare workers feel their hands are tied and the blame squarely rests on those that passed these laws.

[erbear]

Jul 2, 2022 17:15:33 GMT -5 wanderingback said:

Jul 2, 2022 16:15:00 GMT -5 erbear said:

My sister is an ob-gyn in Colorado. She has gotten four cases from Texas already, one of whom had an ectopic and almost died bc she had to wait four days to get to a place where she could get an abortion. Fuck these guys.

I’m surprised your sister is just now seeing people from TX We’ve had them for awhile now, including for miscarriage and ectopic care.

I’m not sure if these are the first or just an onslaught. She sounded overwhelmed.

[erbear]

Jul 2, 2022 22:43:14 GMT -5 wanderingback said:

Jul 2, 2022 18:52:12 GMT -5 carmenere said:

What the fuck? Are doctors in Texas seriously denying removal ectopic pregnancies now? You can’t abort a non-viable pregnancy ffs

I think we really need to blame legislators and lawyers. It’s not an easy landscape for health care providers at the moment. Things are changing daily and lawyers are giving all sorts of guidance of what is allowed. I think we would all say we would do anything for patient safety, but when it comes to surgery, which happens in a hospital there can be many things out of your hands and to do surgery you need a team (anesthesia, nursing, etc). Not everyone is willing to risk the potential of a felony when the laws are written the way they are. pharmacists have also been given directives at times to not prescribe methotrexate for ectopic pregnancies. It’s really fucked up due to legislators.

The treatment for an ectopic pregnancy is an abortion as it’s considered a pregnancy (can develop to a fetus, can have cardiac activity, etc). I don’t think we should pretend something isn’t an abortion to appease legislators.

Eta: I do think we need some civil disobedience but I do understand how many healthcare workers feel their hands are tied and the blame squarely rests on those that passed these laws.

I was going to say this. Much like it’s not cool to blame teachers for following the law and not discussing race, gender, etc in the classroom because everyone isn’t privileged enough to lose their jobs, I highly doubt most docs are on board with letting patients die, and the cost of that is a felony conviction for them. It’s a shit situation that docs are a pawn in.

[sent]

Jul 2, 2022 21:26:37 GMT -5 @villainv said:

It’s a surgical procedure!

When women die due to being denied access to the proper care (because sadly this is going to happen), will there be lawyers or advocate groups that sue the state legislatures? Is that a thing?

Also since we know abortion protestors secretly have abortions themselves, any hope that they will secretly not vote for garbage Republican candidates since now their own lives are going to suffer? They can still go out and be idiots that protest. But if they’re not wealthy Rs that can travel to get an abortion, then they’ve just shot themselves in the foot by voting in candidates that allowed this to happen.

[sakoro]

Jul 3, 2022 6:53:54 GMT -5 sent said:

Also since we know abortion protestors secretly have abortions themselves, any hope that they will secretly not vote for garbage Republican candidates since now their own lives are going to suffer? They can still go out and be idiots that protest. But if they’re not wealthy Rs that can still travel to get an abortion, then they’ve just show themselves in the foot by voting in candidates that allowed this to happen.

Well, these are the same states where poor people vote against candidates who want to implement Medicaid expansion and WIC, so most likely no. They’ve done a great job of getting people to vote against their own self-interest.

[sent]

Jul 3, 2022 7:07:18 GMT -5 sakoro said:

Jul 3, 2022 6:53:54 GMT -5 sent said:

Also since we know abortion protestors secretly have abortions themselves, any hope that they will secretly not vote for garbage Republican candidates since now their own lives are going to suffer? They can still go out and be idiots that protest. But if they’re not wealthy Rs that can still travel to get an abortion, then they’ve just show themselves in the foot by voting in candidates that allowed this to happen.

Well, these are the same states where poor people vote against candidates who want to implement Medicaid expansion and WIC, so most likely no. They’ve done a great job of getting people to vote against their own self-interest.

True. One would think women would be smart enough to not vote against their own interests.

But I guess churches can provide. 

[wanderingback]

Jul 3, 2022 7:22:35 GMT -5 sent said:

Jul 3, 2022 7:07:18 GMT -5 sakoro said:

Well, these are the same states where poor people vote against candidates who want to implement Medicaid expansion and WIC, so most likely no. They’ve done a great job of getting people to vote against their own self-interest.

True. One would think women would be smart enough to not vote against their own interests.

But I guess churches can provide. 

The answer is white supremacy. White women have been doing it since the beginning of time.

[NewOrleans]

Jul 2, 2022 10:10:01 GMT -5 sent said:

Why are physicians not consulted when making these laws involving medical procedures.

It's a rhetorical question, I know. Lawmakers are all about following the constitution and laws and examining laws and exceptions and challenges and whatever. But these laws in particular are based on medical procedures and patients, something they know NOTHING about. Yet none of the info I've read says "after consulting with several OB/GYN doctors across the state/country, we, SCOTUS, learned that that the majority of doctors said our laws are very bad for American patients. So we are going to fix them to reflect modern medical care in 2022."

Doctors were at the heart of the court's first landmark ruling on abortion, Roe v. Wade.

"The original Roe decision – it was very, very doctor-centered – extremely so," says Ziegler, who has written extensively on the legal history of abortion. "At its inception, this was a right that was very much about health care and about the doctor-patient relationship."

Yet doctors and patients are all but absent from the latest Supreme Court majority opinion on abortion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. In fact, in the opinion, Justice Samuel Alito uses the derogatory term "abortionist" instead of physician or doctor or obstetrician-gynecologist.

www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/07/03/1109483662/doctors-werent-considered-in-dobbs-but-now-theyre-on-abortions-legal-front-lines

[NewOrleans]

Kentucky becomes at least the fifth state where a judge has temporarily blocked a state law banning or strictly limiting abortion under a strategy abortion rights advocates are using to challenge such laws based on *state* constitutional claims.

www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/ky-legislature/2022/06/30/judge-grants-restraining-order-restore-abortion-access-kentucky/7770227001/?fbclid=IwAR3_b9pPxTa0Sikiu6blJF3ggcUrksXf0Qzky7TgbZ-RqOO3nPmg47WBCO0#l54uopvkdaz3i4i9ttl

[bronxgirl]

Jul 3, 2022 7:30:25 GMT -5 wanderingback said:

Jul 3, 2022 7:22:35 GMT -5 sent said:

True. One would think women would be smart enough to not vote against their own interests.

But I guess churches can provide. 

The answer is white supremacy. White women have been doing it since the beginning of time.

Absolutely.  We need to reframe the idea of people "voting against their interests."  people vote for what's important to them and for many people white supremacy and "sticking it to the poors', Black and Brown people, and any group they dislike is their primary interest.

[sent]

Jul 3, 2022 11:16:44 GMT -5 bronxgirl said:

Jul 3, 2022 7:30:25 GMT -5 wanderingback said:

The answer is white supremacy. White women have been doing it since the beginning of time.

Absolutely.  We need to reframe the idea of people "voting against their interests."  people vote for what's important to them and for many people white supremacy and "sticking it to the poors', Black and Brown people, and any group they dislike is their primary interest.

This makes sense. Thank you. 

[sent]

Jul 3, 2022 10:58:41 GMT -5 NewOrleans said:

Jul 2, 2022 10:10:01 GMT -5 sent said:

Why are physicians not consulted when making these laws involving medical procedures.

It's a rhetorical question, I know. Lawmakers are all about following the constitution and laws and examining laws and exceptions and challenges and whatever. But these laws in particular are based on medical procedures and patients, something they know NOTHING about. Yet none of the info I've read says "after consulting with several OB/GYN doctors across the state/country, we, SCOTUS, learned that that the majority of doctors said our laws are very bad for American patients. So we are going to fix them to reflect modern medical care in 2022."

Doctors were at the heart of the court's first landmark ruling on abortion, Roe v. Wade.

"The original Roe decision – it was very, very doctor-centered – extremely so," says Ziegler, who has written extensively on the legal history of abortion. "At its inception, this was a right that was very much about health care and about the doctor-patient relationship."

Yet doctors and patients are all but absent from the latest Supreme Court majority opinion on abortion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. In fact, in the opinion, Justice Samuel Alito uses the derogatory term "abortionist" instead of physician or doctor or obstetrician-gynecologist.

www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/07/03/1109483662/doctors-werent-considered-in-dobbs-but-now-theyre-on-abortions-legal-front-lines

Very informative, thank you. I'm going to try and follow more news on how the medical community is reacting. 

[carmenere]

Jul 2, 2022 22:43:14 GMT -5 wanderingback said:

Jul 2, 2022 18:52:12 GMT -5 carmenere said:

What the fuck? Are doctors in Texas seriously denying removal ectopic pregnancies now? You can’t abort a non-viable pregnancy ffs

I think we really need to blame legislators and lawyers. It’s not an easy landscape for health care providers at the moment. Things are changing daily and lawyers are giving all sorts of guidance of what is allowed. I think we would all say we would do anything for patient safety, but when it comes to surgery, which happens in a hospital there can be many things out of your hands and to do surgery you need a team (anesthesia, nursing, etc). Not everyone is willing to risk the potential of a felony when the laws are written the way they are. pharmacists have also been given directives at times to not prescribe methotrexate for ectopic pregnancies. It’s really fucked up due to legislators.

The treatment for an ectopic pregnancy is an abortion as it’s considered a pregnancy (can develop to a fetus, can have cardiac activity, etc). I don’t think we should pretend something isn’t an abortion to appease legislators.

Eta: I do think we need some civil disobedience but I do understand how many healthcare workers feel their hands are tied and the blame squarely rests on those that passed these laws.

You’re right and I should have worded my post better. Doctors shouldn’t be at the mercy of legislators and lawyers, or risk losing their jobs or liberty to care for a patient. It’s just terrifying that in all the chaos this has caused, doctors have to be afraid to perform a procedure that saves a patient from a dangerous non-viable pregnancy.

[pooh8402]

Jul 2, 2022 18:52:12 GMT -5 carmenere said:

Jul 2, 2022 16:15:00 GMT -5 erbear said:

My sister is an ob-gyn in Colorado. She has gotten four cases from Texas already, one of whom had an ectopic and almost died bc she had to wait four days to get to a place where she could get an abortion. Fuck these guys.

What the fuck? Are doctors in Texas seriously denying removal ectopic pregnancies now? You can’t abort a non-viable pregnancy ffs

No, we are not denying this. The laws in Texas do specifically exempt ectopics.

[lilac05]

Jul 4, 2022 20:59:37 GMT -5 pooh8402 said:

Jul 2, 2022 18:52:12 GMT -5 carmenere said:

What the fuck? Are doctors in Texas seriously denying removal ectopic pregnancies now? You can’t abort a non-viable pregnancy ffs

No, we are not denying this. The laws in Texas do specifically exempt ectopics.

Do you think that there is possibly confusion amongst at least a few practitioners right now about what is/isn't legal? And perhaps some are erring WAY on the side of caution at the moment? Everyone wants to think that their doctor is 100% up on current issues, but there are shitty people in every profession.

I think that confusion is going to be a huge issue for awhile. Hopefully not much for practitioners, but for sure for patients. It could be that some of the stories that we're hearing are due to patients not even wanting to ask for a procedure because they *think* it's not allowed...but in actuality, it is allowed in their state. (And of course, not everything you read on the internet is true/the whole truth, too.)

[NewOrleans]

Jul 4, 2022 20:59:37 GMT -5 pooh8402 said:

Jul 2, 2022 18:52:12 GMT -5 carmenere said:

What the fuck? Are doctors in Texas seriously denying removal ectopic pregnancies now? You can’t abort a non-viable pregnancy ffs

No, we are not denying this. The laws in Texas do specifically exempt ectopics.

Well, pharmacies in TX haven’t gotten that particular memo, and nor have all the physicians. 

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.

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.

www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/05/10/1097734167/in-texas-abortion-laws-inhibit-care-for-miscarriages

[wanderingback]

Jul 5, 2022 0:26:37 GMT -5 lilac05 said:

Jul 4, 2022 20:59:37 GMT -5 pooh8402 said:

No, we are not denying this. The laws in Texas do specifically exempt ectopics.

Do you think that there is possibly confusion amongst at least a few practitioners right now about what is/isn't legal? And perhaps some are erring WAY on the side of caution at the moment? Everyone wants to think that their doctor is 100% up on current issues, but there are shitty people in every profession.

I think that confusion is going to be a huge issue for awhile. Hopefully not much for practitioners, but for sure for patients. It could be that some of the stories that we're hearing are due to patients not even wanting to ask for a procedure because they *think* it's not allowed...but in actuality, it is allowed in their state. (And of course, not everything you read on the internet is true/the whole truth, too.)

Yes there is a lot of confusion. Between patients and also how lawyers are interpreting laws because some are vague and also some are changing from hour to hour.

[wanderingback]

Jul 5, 2022 1:52:39 GMT -5 NewOrleans said:

Jul 4, 2022 20:59:37 GMT -5 pooh8402 said:

No, we are not denying this. The laws in Texas do specifically exempt ectopics.

Well, pharmacies in TX haven’t gotten that particular memo, and nor have all the physicians. 

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.

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.

www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/05/10/1097734167/in-texas-abortion-laws-inhibit-care-for-miscarriages

It’s not that pharmacies haven’t gotten the memo. It’s that they’re erring on the side of caution, which is what these laws are meant to do, cause confusion and halt care. Lawyers are the ones who are interpreting these things and telling health care workers what to do based on the vagueness and confusion of the laws. So since methotrexate can be used for an abortion (before mifepristone it was used regularly with misoprostol for induced abortions, not just ectopic and I occasionally see some "old school" docs still use methotrexate for induced abortion or pregnancy of unknown location in abortion care) some pharmacies have decided they don’t want to take the risk of being sued (there were only civil penalties in TX when the article was written before roe vs Wade fell which was a whole new territory and no one knew if people were going to be running around suing everyone) .