Yawn.

Quote:

---

It took three days at home until I became sick 'enough' that the ethics board at our hospital agreed we could begin medical treatment; three days until my life was considered at risk 'enough' for the inevitable premature delivery of my daughter to be performed; three days until the doctors, nurses, and other healthcare professionals were allowed to do their jobs," she writes in a first-person essay for The Meteor, a media company committed to storytelling around issues of gender equity.

---

Calling it now: it's not as simple as OP suggests.

Sounds like incompetence or BS to me. Keep on advocating for baby murder, though. I'm sure these fringe cases will one day prove the point that we should allow the systemic murder of unborn babies.

Meh. Thousands of babies saved since Summer.

Also, if the baby was dead, it wouldn't have been an abortion and doctors failed her. Her beef is with her leftist doctors and not with the law.

That is a flat out lie.

Quote:

---

Sec.A171.205.AAEXCEPTION FOR MEDICAL EMERGENCY; RECORDS. (a)AASections 171.203 and 171.204 do not apply if a physician believes a medical emergency exists that prevents compliance with this subchapter

---

The law has a medical emergency exception.

If it just saves one life! That's the mantra we heard all through Covid. I count many thousands of babies that have already been saved be reversing Roe.

The Texas law allows for abortion if the health of the mother is threatened so I call BS.

DevilD77 said:

---

The Texas law allows for abortion if the health of the mother is threatened so I call BS.

---

OP does not read the law... OP arguments are based on hearsay and emotion.

Tanya 93 said:

---

DevilD77 said:

---

The Texas law allows for abortion if the hwalth of the mother is threatened so I call BS.

---

I think much of the argument is about when is she considered in enough danger to allow it.

---

And if she is in a situation where it is a known fact that the baby will not make it and the risk of life threatening complications is known to be high, the law is not prohibitive. The law doesn't say "you must have sepsis first." There's either political nonsense going on here that's skewing the narrative or it's just incompetence. Either way, mishandling this situation is not evidence that we should go back to murdering babies at will.

Sorry you don't care about the millions of lives saved by this law.

Manhattan said:

---

The only argument against abortion is emotional.

---

The only argument against murder is emotional.

Mensa.

Manhattan said:

---

The only argument against abortion is emotional.

---

Dude..... you bombed in your OP.

Just take the L and move on.

Manhattan said:

---

The only fringe cases are abortions after viability, which was <1% of abortions.

Women are being punished for 1% of abortions that were already illegal.

---

This is just made up bull***** Sorry, but over 99% of abortions are elective and have nothing to do with healthcare. Nobody is being punished.

Expectant miscarriage is the normal plan for pregnancy complications before 20 weeks gestation. Inconvenient to the story is that it has been that way long before Roe v Wade was overturned. I've delivered 2 different 19 week precipitous fetuses due to miscarriage in my EM career. It sucks. So hard when there is nothing you can do. Anyone who doesn't acknowledge that as a human life has no soul

Manhattan said:

---

People have a right to life, 18 week fetuses aren't people.

---

You're not a person. See, just saying it didn't make that true either.

Manhattan said:

---

People have a right to life, 18 week fetuses aren't people.

---

You will be judged harshly on judgement day for opting to feed children to moloch.

Manhattan said:

---

The only argument against abortion is emotional.

---

LOL. You cannot be serious.

Abortion is the literal killing of a human being. That's a principled point.

I'll get emotional if you want to call a 46 chromosome cell NOT a human, but that's purely because you're blinded by the same dehumanization slave owners had in the 1800s.

Manhattan said:

---

People have a right to life, 18 week fetuses aren't people.

---

Then WTF is it, you evil [censored], a chicken?

Manhattan said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

Manhattan said:

---

The only fringe cases are abortions after viability, which was <1% of abortions.

Women are being punished for 1% of abortions that were already illegal.

---

This is just made up bull***** Sorry, but over 99% of abortions are elective and have nothing to do with healthcare. Nobody is being punished.

---

You can't just say something is bull**** and then refute it by stating something that has nothing to do with the previous argument.

---

Sure I can. Viability is a made up line, so your assertion is completely meaningless. A baby is viable from the moment of conception as long as there are no complications and they're not murdered. We live in time and we happen to know very precisely how human beings develop.

Manhattan said:

---

People have a right to life, 18 week fetuses aren't people.

---

When does "personhood" begin?

Manhattan said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

Manhattan said:

---

The only fringe cases are abortions after viability, which was <1% of abortions.

Women are being punished for 1% of abortions that were already illegal.

---

This is just made up bull***** Sorry, but over 99% of abortions are elective and have nothing to do with healthcare. Nobody is being punished.

---

You can't just say something is bull**** and then refute it by stating something that has nothing to do with the previous argument.

---

You're COMPLETELY missing the point. When 98%+ of abortions are for "convenience", those of us supporting removal of the "abortion killing tool" from the medical playbook goes directly against your "1% of abortions that were already legal". If anything, our view only affects the 1-2% of abortions and I'm willing to engage in dialogue around that 1-2% "potential exceptions" if you'll grant me the 98-99% "abortion on demand" convenience.

"Oh no! A tragic but fringe case has arisen! Surely the only solution is to allow the wholesale slaughter of children."

Shut up. We're banning abortion.

Trolls

This thread is an abortion.

Manhattan said:

---

https://people.com/health/texas-woman-nearly-loses-her-life-after-doctors-cannot-legally-perform-abortion/

This is why you don't put an arbitrary date on abortion like 0 or 15 weeks. This lady was 18 weeks pregnant and could not get an abortion even though she was not going to have a living baby.

Now she may not be able to have kids, because Republicans and probably hospital lawyers dictated that she could not get her the treatment she needed.

---

You and the story is very disingenuous... SURPRISE...

From the article:

Quote:

---

It was devastating for Amanda, 35, and her husband Josh, 35, who had been through 18 months of fertility treatments before they were able to conceive their baby girl.

---

Whether the Abortion Law was changed or not... it'd have had nothing to do with her ability to have children. At 35, she is a high risk for Downs. If it took her 18 months of fertility... it could very well take 12 months for her body to recover... and another 18 months of fertility to conceive. She'd be VERY high risk.

The Law change and her medical situation likely has no bearing on her ability to have children. Certainly not more than her age.